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 ...
An analogy to me would be, a salesman pulls in my driveway, reaches back into his car for brochures or a product and I draw down and shoot him because I thought he might have a weapon.
I'd be put under the jail.
Maybe Trooper Groubert thought the dude driving turned in to Lassie or a Black Lab..., a morphling or some such thing, Men in Black might be real..... and then it would be expected for a State Trooper to shoot the dog while addressing a seat belt issue... only way I can make sense of it...
All jokes aside, sad day for both of them..
I’d read that the guy was at a convenience store/gas station, not a traffic stop, and was getting out of his car to go into the store.
That is an interesting observation, but I think you are right.
When I am on a long drive,I tend to always take my billfold out of my back pocket. And how many women keep their ID in their purse?
No, and that's a tough call. The guy should have moved slowly and told the cop what he was going for; the cop should have waited long enough to see if a weapon was in hand. But I wasn't there; it's possible I might have done the same based on my perception of expected black male behavior. Unfair, yes, but it's the real world.
Failure to grovel
Failure to beg
Failure to properly recognize a superior
Exhibition of compliance
Disregard of oppression
Evasion of aim
The list goes on, he's lucky he got off so easily.
But it’s a seat belt violation. None of it made any rational sense except that he was trolling for a better charge.
Actually yes - he should have at least seen a firearm or knife before opening fire. Everything else is just murder.
Bookmark
I am going to disagree with most of you Ferguson rioters.
Once the motorist’s hands were hidden in the truck, the cop’s escalation to action was predictable.
Some of the follow-up shots are the problem, even though in those situations the shots are adrenaline driven.
Never let a cop lose sight of your hands. If you have to retrieve your license from inside the car, as in this case, you tell the cop so, and ask how he wants to proceed.
People make the serious mistake of assuming the cop is a mind reader and knows that you are a Nobel Peace Prize recipient and up for sainthood.
THere should be an actual threat. He can't just shoot first and then ask questions later. I would be up for an attempted murder charge, and justifyably so for making an error like that. He took the job. If he's that much of a ninny he's in the wrong line of work. Of course, we know he'll be absolved of all responsibly for this because he "feared for his safety", even though his fear was completely unjustifiable by anyone but a cop.
Saw it - the driver was a moron and the cop was jumpy - WTF - I would be on edge if I were the cop. Why did the driver act like that and the cop could have used more judgement after the first shot.
I think a lot of this stems from when ‘they’ decided 4 years of Military life as a big plus for going into Law Enforcement was trumped by a 20 yo with 2 years Junior College under his belt.
Also when the quals were tailored to fit a 5’5 120lb person and then expect a 6’4 220 to ‘work’ alongside of them.
When I got out in ‘64 I was looking into joining the Virginia State Police. I was 6’0 148 lbs and had 8 yrs in the Navy behind me.
They acknowledged they liked the fact I had Military attitude and bearing, had some real life experience, looked squared away etc BUT told me to go put some ‘meat on my bones’ - he then threw in - Proportionately, not ‘fatten up’ to get to a ‘desired weight’.
Granted a ‘recruiter’ probably wouldn’t have talked like that but I was dealing with a ‘working’ Sgt and in that era we weren’t in the habit of suing just because someone may have hurt your feelings. (By telling the truth).
I think you are wrong. They apparently do, if a few days worth of reading FR is any indication.
Here’ a longer video.........
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBUUO_VFYMs
This cop is an absolute moron to the nth degree. I can’t believe this, he actually walked up to someone on private property and shot him.
Did the LEO not ask to see his drivers license? Did the victim not comply?
Is it OK to shoot unarmed motorist? Did the victim have any weapon in his hand?
And if the LEO did not see weapon prior to firing at the victim, why did the LEO shoot the victim?
This was not even a felony stop. No crime was even committed by the victim.
Why would the LEO respond like this was some known extremely violent wanted person? Why would the LEO respond like this was an enemy combatant?
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.
Thanks, I’m sure you will be the only one
There wasn’t anything to sue over, and before affirmative action, police used to require large men for their forces, men who could pass intelligence testing.
Both standards were removed for affirmative action.
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.