 |
As I understand it, the blacked out areas on the video are associated with the drone and information that might be used by those seeking to jam or defeat the drone.
FYI.
BTTT Good work Jeff...
A good, well reasoned and balanced approach given the information available. A key point will be why the victim was reaching down to his waist. If he had been shot or tased, then the use of deadly force will be difficult to justify. If he had not, then clearly the story changes.
|
i’ve reviewed the film. there is a question mark in my mind as to if the second ‘reach’ with the right hand was an involuntary response to being shot. what is necessary is audio to link the timing of the shots fired to his arm actions.
Was Lavoy carrying? If he was, was the weapon in his waistband? In a holster?
[[They Bundy’s vehicles were stopped. Lavoy, for whatever reason, chose to drive away from law enforcement who had stopped him.]]
According to the witness who was in the vehicle, the reason was that the vehicle was fired on while stopped and while the driver’s hands were outside the vehicle if I recall right- anyone would have ‘chosen’ to drive away at that point- according ot the witness, no shots were ever fired by those In the vehicle- but plenty were shot at them- miraculously missing everyone In the vehicle-
I'm on the ranchers' side in the land fight.
It unfortunately looks like Lavoy got himself killed by driving at the roadblock instead of stopping, jumping out and acting erratically and reaching toward his coat rather than being still and keeping his hands up or just staying in the car.
Lavoy tried to bust through the roadblock by leaving the road. He was driving fast right at the vehicles until the last second. That's when the shooting began as Lavoy was driving right at them. It's terrible that he was killed but if you look at the progression (tried to elude, tried to bust by roadblock, jumped from car and probably ignored orders, reached for coat) Lavoy blew it.
Full detailed statement:
http://www.mycentraloregon.com/2016/01/28/fbi-addresses-fatal-shooting-of-lavoy-finicum/
“He did have a loaded 9 mm semi-automatic handgun in that pocket.”
I will study this.
Prayers up for the Finicum family.
Was Lavoy left or right handed?
Thank you for all the work in enlarging the individual frames.
If you would like more information about what's happening in Oregon, please FReepmail me.
I lost my Oregon list when my computer crashed last year, so please send me your name by FReepmail if you want to be on this list.
There's been more than one occasion where officers have been caught giving conflicting orders, and it wouldn't surprise me if it were the case.
The fact the first stories were saying he charged toward them has been proven untrue, so anything else they say is automatically suspect.
BTW - Thanks for analyzing this, Jeff. Your work is greatly appreciated.
have you analyzed the first stop to see if the vehicle was fired at while stopped?
Why is Occupy treated differently?
Jeff, thank you for this. Once again you bring clarity to a very tense and emotional situation. I appreciate your hard work (again and again you don’t let us down). Here in OR the news is heated and emotional and facts seem buried under mountains of opinion.
My very best to you and yours,
They were lulled into complacency by their previous free comings and goings.
“This time we will be waiting for them.”
You said yourself that he reached towards his waist on two occasions. Police in Cleveland shot a 12 year old boy for less justification than that and that was ruled a justified shooting. This would appear to be the same kind if situation, and probably result in the same type of ruling.
And one more thought after reading the Feds statement: The LEO’s had been briefed that the group was probably armed. According to their statement he attempted to reach inside his jacket twice and then after he was dead they did find a 9mm in that jacket pocket. At no point apparently, did the firing officer(s) see a gun.
Assuming that is all true, here’s my question. Why do domestic LEO’s have lesser rules of engagement against U.S. citizens than our troops do when dealing with jihadis?