True that it shows after the shots. So it isn’t conclusive by itself. If I had to judge what happened by it though it doesn’t look good for the cops to me. Unclear if he has been cuffed or his hands are behind back in seatbelt but his hands are behind his back as if subdued and cuffed. He has been eh it in the abdomen. So you see him bleeding to death. They were saying that he had a gun cause he wanted to give it up. What sounds believable is the officer asked for I D and he reached for his wallet then the officer thinks he is reaching for a gun and shoots him. The officer seemed upset like he had done the wrong thing. Realize The reach for wallet part doesn’t give with the possibly handcuffed part. So it isn’t clear what happened. Doesn’t sound like the guy was resisting arrest though. Wanted to be able to take the side that the police had done things properly here but it just doesn’t look good for that side to me. Trayvon Martin was guilty and Michael Brown was guilty to me. This looks like it may be different though.
Should say shot in abdomen there and doesn’t jive.
Well, thank you for your reply.
So to try to rephrase, what you find compelling is the immediacy and emotional impact of the video?
I think that a lot of people who see the video may be reacting as you did, and then filling in some gaps as to what sounds “reasonable”. And for what it’s worth, Mr. Castille is not handcuffed in the video. It’s a bit confusing because the video is “flipped”, and makes it appear that he was on the passenger side of the car, when in fact he was driving.
My immediate reaction was different: the passenger wasn’t acting like she was afraid that the cop was “trigger happy”, since her immediate reaction was to grab an object and start pointing it at the officer. She trusted him to realize it was a cell phone and not a weapon, so that part didn’t really add up for me.
but thanks for your take on this. Much appreciated.