Posted on 07/29/2015 9:26:25 AM PDT by barmag25
Fair enough. Watching the video, the guy was uncooperative, which was pretty stupid of him (certainly in retrospect). But, even given his stupidity, the cop’s actions in shooting him were outrageous, and criminal.
Is there audio with the video?
Outrageous, and criminal is an understatement.
Like the prosecutor said, this guy had no business being a cop.
Badge worshipers quoting Chris Rock in 4 ... 3 ... 2 ...
Worth repeating...
That's what it looked like to me. Both his hands went somewhere, then his left comes back into the frame after the shot and then it all dissolves.
I believe the cop will state that he became suspicious that the suspect had stolen the car or was transporting contraband when the suspect refused several requests for license and registration. The cop requested the driver to get out and the driver made a sudden move, possibly to start the car but possibly to grab a gun or to smash the door open into the cop. That doesn't mean the cop is not guilty, just that the video doesn't seem very clear on anything other than the events spiraled out of control within the space of three seconds.
The racist view is that blacks simply lack maturity and self control. They react like children and throw a tantrum because they are genetically predisposed to violence. Racists "Prove" this by showing that whites, asians, even hispanics, do not react like this to similar provocation)
The bottle hadn't been opened!
I take it back. The YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxeURRTriYo) is way more clear. The cop will still have to claim some kind of provocation as a defense, but there is nothing in the video that I can see that would justify the shooting.
That’s what I wanted thanks...
OK, saw the video. With sufficient sound, it makes more sense.
Cop & driver converse at length over whether the driver has a driver’s license. Apparently he didn’t, because they spent time discussing the matter instead of just handing it over as any driver with one would.
Cop tells driver to take off his seat belt.
Driver instead starts the car.
Now why would a driver, pulled over for a traffic violation, start his vehicle when the cop begins telling him to get out of the car (starting with “take off your seat belt”)? If you can imagine a good reason, tell me; I can’t.
Oh, and don’t forget the bottle of gin.
So driver’s actions are starting to add up:
- pulled over for an actionable (albeit trivial) vehicle violation (no front plate)
- aforementioned violation is the kind of thing a cop acts on to investigate suspicious activity (we’ll have to wait for the cop to elaborate on his reasoning for the stop)
- a bottle of gin is revealed in the front seat area and handed over. Could have merely been a purchased bottle taking it home, quite possible open container violation and/or DWI (cop has to get driver out of car to evaluate) which would explain the aforementioned investigation of suspicious driving
- fight-or-flight instincts kicking in, driver starts vehicle - presumably to escape - when told to “take off your seat belt” implying next command of “get out of the vehicle”
So a very reasonable (but not complete/guaranteed) scenario is the friendly “Terry stop” (or some such) was about to turn into probable jail time for the driver.
I am NOT _justifying_ what the cop did next, but examining the objective evidence and concluding this was NOT a case of “blew him away for absolutely no reason”.
Driver, after showing an escalating list of probable crimes unto felonies, performed a furtive movement - and the cop instinctively [over-]reacted.
Tensions for both were obviously rising very high, and the fear of being dragged was a distinct possibility.
Shooting the driver was likely not warranted. If it was, the evidence occurred between a very few frames of video, and may not have been visible/audible.
Thing is, given the objective evidence we see so far, it’s quite clear that it’s not just “cop just up and shot the guy for no reason”.
The cop will, AFAIK at this point, be easily convicted of manslaughter.
So far I don’t see justification of using deadly force.
But the situation came d@mn close to it, close enough I can understand (but not approve of) it.
Btw, the booze bottle he handed the cop was full, appeared unopened.
“He started the car.”
After being told to take off his seat belt, to wit get out of the car.
After not presenting a driver’s license and being uncooperative about it.
After handing over a bottle of gin (hugely visible in the extended cut).
After being pulled over for a vehicular violation.
After somehow getting the cop’s attention whereby a mere missing front plate provided reason to stop him.
The linked video does not show all of what was shown at the briefing. The longer lead-up video may help understand why the driver was stopped in the first place.
The driver wasn’t an angel. He’s guilty of 4 violations/crimes in that video alone, and the next step (get out for a DUI check) could have revealed a felony.
Driver tried to escape, cop understandably (but not excusably) over-reacted.
You’re right on that one, wasn’t clear the first time I saw it (long wide shot of a projected screen in a briefing room).
Check out the vehicle after the cop shot him to death.
The vehicle at point of rest is still be gunned or accelerated by the dead driver....
Ohhhhhh...
Yup, no front plate is a violation for Ohio-licensed drivers, and was grounds for pulling him over. That led to revealing at least 2, maybe 3, could have been 4 other violations & crimes.
Btw, the booze bottle he handed the cop was full, appeared unopened.
(you can lead a horde to knowledge but you can’t make them think).
I may steal that as a new tagline. With your permission of course.
That is an incredibly profound statement of our times.
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.
