Posted on 09/25/2014 10:42:36 AM PDT by redreno
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — An unarmed man shot by a South Carolina trooper during a traffic stop repeated one question through his anguished cries as he lay wounded, waiting for an ambulance: "Why did you shoot me?"
Levar Jones' painful groans and then-Trooper Sean Groubert's reply — "Well you dove head first back into your car" — were captured by a dashboard camera in the trooper's car.
Groubert had stopped Jones on a seatbelt violation at a Columbia gas station and fired the shots moments after asking Jones for his license
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
My assumption is that this cop shot an innocent man, and can’t justify the shooting.
Your assumption seems to be kill us and then check to see whether we were getting our license as instructed.
Nothing happened here, except that a cop went crazy and started shooting a guy.
JONES: Why did you . . . why did you shoot me?GROUBERT: Well, you dove back head first into your car . . .
JONES: I'm sorry.
GROUBERT: . . . and jumped back out, I'm telling you to get out of your car.
Ummm. Trooper Groubert? Do you think he might have 'jumped' back out of his car because you were telling (actually commanding) him to get out of his car?
“What did cops do 50 years ago?”
Probably beat the guy to a bloody pulp, that better and more acceptable??
“Any frightened little Fem can do as this guy did....piss her panties and blaze away.”
Sexist much??
of course, that is the absolute correct interpretation of my comment. Congrats, you get the Nobel in Philosophy
There wasn’t anything to sue over,
= = = = = = = = = = =
Right.... and suing was the last thing in my mind.
Hell, it probably NEVER entered my mind...I still believe a law suit shouldn’t even go forward unless the law firm is ONLY willing to take it on its merits, not just an opportunity to bully someone into a settlement and run up the hours.
If the law firm won’t take it for nothing but a percentage of the final decision, then it shouldn’t be worthy of going to court.
I was trying to infer that TODAY, if the Trooper had the ‘nerve’ to tell a recruit the truth, it would be grounds for some kind of lawsuit...
Congrats, you didn't swallow the hook
LOL, that is your standard we reach for out license as instructed, get gunned down and the cop walks away pointing out that no ever really knows what someone is reaching for inside their car?
Do you realize what you are creating with this kind of thinking?
It is as though by unionizing, the object of police work became to live without risk, no matter how many citizen lives it wastes annually.
Well, you’ve had it for so long, don’t you think you should let someone else have it for a day at least???
No, 50 years ago, while there was no seat belt ticket law, a traffic stop was just a traffic stop.
can’t say that I blame the cops really, considering the comments I’ve seen here.
Of course not. But when you direct someone to get their ID there is a reasonable chance that it could be in the vehicle. Thus reaching into the vehicle should not have been unexpected.
The officers first mistake was not asking the driver if he had his ID on him. When he replied "No" then the officer should have had him stand in front of the vehicle while the officer recovered the ID.
At the point that the driver reached inside the vehicle (due to the officers poor handling of the situation up to that point) the officer was justified in pulling his weapon and taking cover, however he was not justified in using deadly force against someone holding a wallet that the officer requested he get.
This hot-rod was way to fast on the trigger and failed to properly identify the threat.
Thank you! You have given the most sane of all the replies.
Lots of things went wrong here, bad choices all around. But I see lots of people piling on the cops here and other boards, so I find the exchange on this particular subject interesting...
Trooper Groubert says "Can I see your license please?." Jones was already out of his vehicle. He turns and sticks his head and upper body into the car. Groubert then yells "Get out of the car! Get out of the car!"
Jones turns quickly out of the car with his license after the first "get out of the car." He moves quickly, but I believe I would too with a trooper screaming at me. Jones is shot at the exclamation point of the second "get out of the car!" when Jones is . . . already out of the car.
So, what were the directions Jones didn't comply with?
Is it OK to shoot unarmed motorist? Did the victim have any weapon in his hand?
That's where the mind reader statement comes from, did the cop know he was going for his wallet and not a weapon?
And if the LEO did not see weapon prior to firing at the victim, why did the LEO shoot the victim?
Could it be that he was afraid that the man was going for a weapon?
This was not even a felony stop. No crime was even committed by the victim.
How many cops have been killed by someone they are pulling over for a minor traffic infraction?
Why would the LEO respond like this was some known extremely violent wanted person?
How would the cop know if the person was an extremely violent wanted person, or a future saint? That's why they ask for ID, so the dispatcher can tell the cop with whom they are dealing
Why would the LEO respond like this was an enemy combatant?
See previous answer because you asked the same question twice.
This was not justified by any stretch of the imagination and I hope anyone alleging it is justified, are not involved in law enforcement at any level.
I think someone like you should become a cop. Perhaps then we can chastise you, like Monday morning quarterbacks do, when you make a split-second decision as to what the person you know nothing about makes a sudden unexpected move.
P.S. No need to worry I am not involved in law enforcement in any manner. However, my wife is. She's a dispatcher. Just for your information a larger percentage than you would imagine who are pulled over for minor traffic violations have some form of serious criminal background.
We will see what the process of investigation yields. If the cop is found to be in the wrong, then he gets the results of his poor choice. and it was a very poor choice he made
“even though his fear was completely unjustifiable by anyone but a cop. “
There’s the rub big chief....
Ha! good point, touché!
I totally agree with you. Lots of bad choices all piled up at the same time and the situation went to $h!t real quick.
Then I would say shot - yes, stabbed - probably, assaulted - no.
Would you shoot them too?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.