Pretty big story ... A white police officer is being charged with murder of a black teenager. Teenager was armed with a knife and had reportedly punctured the tire of a cop car and refused officers orders to drop the knife.
However the entire incident was caught on a dash cam which is set to be released tomorrow. Apparently the teenager was shot 16 times, 13 of which when he was already on the ground.
The cop seems like a POS and had 18 previous complaints on his record. But I fear that once the video is released it'll have serious backlash and make Ferguson look like child's play.
Link - (
New Window )
You don't think it's at all excessive? There's no reason why the kid couldn't just be taken to jail.
Quote:
street with a knife in his hand? He is also part of the reason why he's dead now.
He's likely a bad guy but he didnt deserve a death sentence without a trial
Autopsy report showed PCP which can explain his behavior.
Quote:
street with a knife in his hand? He is also part of the reason why he's dead now.
You don't think it's at all excessive? There's no reason why the kid couldn't just be taken to jail.
I don't know. I think the last shot was excessive, I couldn't make out most shots. I think there are questions that arise from the video tape.
When you have a weapon in your hand, a movement the wrong way can justify deadly force. You don't get any wiggle room. You don't arrest someone with a weapon in their hand.
At 5:32 it looks like he might be turning towards the police. What he said could also be important as well as the information that the police have on him.
I'm not saying it was a good shoot, just waiting a few more days on the details. Look at that watch thing and how the media was initially wrong on that.
+1
Where is the indication that this is a growing problem? It is purely anecdotal. This has always happened, only now it is being spotlighted. Whether that recognition is good (because it is being brought to light) or bad (because you realize that this was probably much worse before YouTube) is an open question.
Wrong thread?
The focus is all fucking wrong
9 year old murdered in cold blood - ( New Window )
In comment 12643254 bronxgiant said:
I don't think a 14 year old is equipped to handle what comes with celebrity. You don't think he has a target on his back at all from other students? Let's not act like everything would have been smooth if he remained in the states, that's being purposefully naive.
The city here was trying to cover it up.
They gave the family $5 million before a lawsuit was ever filed. It's almost unheard of. It was a way to keep quiet and avoid anything coming out.
It wasn't until a lawsuit was filed by a journalist who is a freelancer that this all started. The city and police kept denying requests to release the video for months when the major local media outlets asked.
It wasn't until the judge ordered the video to be released to the public that the officer was then relieved of his desk duty, but charged with murder and was taken in. Until then, the Mayor/CPD wanted to keep this out of sight.
The focus is all fucking wrong 9 year old murdered in cold blood - ( New Window )
I wouldn't say the focus is 'all wrong' - but very close
The Tyshawn Lee story is so tragic its hard for me to believe. Sick people in this world
Given what we know so far...bingo !
Plea bargain, 30 years.
The focus is all fucking wrong 9 year old murdered in cold blood - ( New Window )
This is definitely a fucked up story, but we should hold our police to a higher standard than gang bangers.
Quote:
I wanna know why the focus isn't on Tyshawn Lee..
The focus is all fucking wrong 9 year old murdered in cold blood - ( New Window )
I wouldn't say the focus is 'all wrong' - but very close
The Tyshawn Lee story is so tragic its hard for me to believe. Sick people in this world
Yea, I mean, obviously I hope the cop gets everything thrown at him and anyone else that covered this up for so long.
But for fuck's sake, we continue to ignore the real underlying problem.
Fix the gang/territorial violence first and foremost and maybe we'll actually see these cop shooting incidents significantly lessen.
Nothing is going to change until the former is fixed.
Quote:
I wanna know why the focus isn't on Tyshawn Lee..
The focus is all fucking wrong 9 year old murdered in cold blood - ( New Window )
This is definitely a fucked up story, but we should hold our police to a higher standard than gang bangers.
See my last post.
Quote:
-it's outrageous
The city here was trying to cover it up.
They gave the family $5 million before a lawsuit was ever filed. It's almost unheard of. It was a way to keep quiet and avoid anything coming out.
It wasn't until a lawsuit was filed by a journalist who is a freelancer that this all started. The city and police kept denying requests to release the video for months when the major local media outlets asked.
It wasn't until the judge ordered the video to be released to the public that the officer was then relieved of his desk duty, but charged with murder and was taken in. Until then, the Mayor/CPD wanted to keep this out of sight.
Ahem, there was an election in between this happening and the charging and release of this tape.
Bigger issue.
You have bought into the media frenzy. Most of what you say isn't true at all.
Police arrest millions of people every year and normally around 1,000 or less are killed in the process. Very few of the ones killed are done so unjustly.
I'm not trying to be contrarian because I find this despicable too, but do you think if people got as angry about every preteen caught in the crossfire as they do about every police shooting progress might be made? The distrust of police goes way beyond officer shootings, to be sure, but a kid is at much greater risk of death from other young men than he is from the police. If black lives really matter, shouldn't a good deal more focus be placed on the much greater risk to black lives, which is gang and drug violence?
The focus is all fucking wrong 9 year old murdered in cold blood - ( New Window )
That's an awful incident, but it doesn't involve the police. I get that there should be more coverage of this sort of violence, and I have to imagine that shining a light on it would shock and horrify many people who have no idea this sort of thing is a way of life in some sectors of society.
The light is needed, but it all comes down to what sells.
White guys in Texas open carry with AK-47s. We should shoot them too, right?
What a horrifying post. You cant honestly believe that there is a police manual that says you should finish the job, so to speak? What you're saying is, effectively, that if the manual say ok, then you have no problem with summary executions.
Quote:
street with a knife in his hand? He is also part of the reason why he's dead now.
White guys in Texas open carry with AK-47s. We should shoot them too, right?
Please provide additional context? Are they being pursued by police for breaking the law?
Quote:
I wanna know why the focus isn't on Tyshawn Lee..
The focus is all fucking wrong 9 year old murdered in cold blood - ( New Window )
That's an awful incident, but it doesn't involve the police. I get that there should be more coverage of this sort of violence, and I have to imagine that shining a light on it would shock and horrify many people who have no idea this sort of thing is a way of life in some sectors of society.
The light is needed, but it all comes down to what sells.
I was going to mention the media coverage in my next post, piggybacking off of duned's. I understand that reality but I just don't see why the murder of a 9 year old shouldn't sell as much as a cop shooting. Never did understand it.
These shootings to get coverage but they quickly get swept under the rug as it doesn't seem to draw nearly the fervor that these cop shootings draw.
And that, to me, is a national disgrace.
9 years old. Cold blood. Because of a gang retaliation. What the actual fuck.
I need to run to visit some properties out in queens but I'll be very interested to see where this discussion trends to when I log back in.
Quote:
is a justified response by the cop, then he should fire as many shots as he thinks are needed to get that done. If shoot to kill was not justified, he should be charged. But I don't think murder 1 is appropriate.
What a horrifying post. You cant honestly believe that there is a police manual that says you should finish the job, so to speak? What you're saying is, effectively, that if the manual say ok, then you have no problem with summary executions.
I'm not disagreeing with your point and I could be wrong but I believe it is often common for many police departments procedure to instruct that if deemed necessary to fire that they should shoot to kill including emptying weapon.
This certainly didn't look like it was necessary, the only remote reason at all would be if they thought he was going about to throw the knife at them. However since he is charged with first degree murder I doubt that was the case.
Quote:
street with a knife in his hand? He is also part of the reason why he's dead now.
White guys in Texas open carry with AK-47s. We should shoot them too, right?
If serious, this post is pretty dumb. For it to be comparable this guy would have had to be walking ( or standing on) down the street doing nothing other than have been wearing a legal weapon on his person prior to be shot.
That's not to say the police have a duty to only try to wound. It's probably appropriate for police to shoot center mass because shooting at a limb is lower probability. If you must use deadly force then you need to make sure you effectively neutralize the suspect even if that means taking a likely kill shot. So normally you dont need to consider the distinction. But shooting with the specific purpose of killing the suspect? Grossly inappropriate. If the suspect is on the ground and not a threat, continuing to pump him full of bullets isnt proper policy -- it's execution.
That's not to say the police have a duty to only try to wound. It's probably appropriate for police to shoot center mass because shooting at a limb is lower probability. If you must use deadly force then you need to make sure you effectively neutralize the suspect even if that means taking a likely kill shot. So normally you dont need to consider the distinction. But shooting with the specific purpose of killing the suspect? Grossly inappropriate. If the suspect is on the ground and not a threat, continuing to pump him full of bullets isnt proper policy -- it's execution.
No, my point was that if they are in a situation where it is deemed necessary then and only then they are trained to shoot to kill not trained to try and shoot to wound.
No, my point was that if they are in a situation where it is deemed necessary then and only then they are trained to shoot to kill not trained to try and shoot to wound.
I believe they are trained to neutralize the threat, not to kill. I dont believe that it is the policy of any LE agency that when you shoot, it should be with a specific intent to kill the suspect. Often the shot will kill the suspect because you shoot center mass rather than movie style disarming shots. It's a fine distinction that often doesnt matter.
Bill's post cast the job as shooting to kill (to the extent the manual says so), and therefore you use as many shots as needed to kill. That is really where the distinction comes in. I think the job is neutralize the threat, so you stop shooting if the suspect is no threat, but still not dead.
Honestly I dont even see how that is arguable. Under Bill's conception, it would be appropriate to come and put a bullet in the suspect's brain 5 minutes after he is down. I dont think he really meant that.
Quote:
No, my point was that if they are in a situation where it is deemed necessary then and only then they are trained to shoot to kill not trained to try and shoot to wound.
I believe they are trained to neutralize the threat, not to kill. I dont believe that it is the policy of any LE agency that when you shoot, it should be with a specific intent to kill the suspect. Often the shot will kill the suspect because you shoot center mass rather than movie style disarming shots. It's a fine distinction that often doesnt matter.
Bill's post cast the job as shooting to kill (to the extent the manual says so), and therefore you use as many shots as needed to kill. That is really where the distinction comes in. I think the job is neutralize the threat, so you stop shooting if the suspect is no threat, but still not dead.
Honestly I dont even see how that is arguable. Under Bill's conception, it would be appropriate to come and put a bullet in the suspect's brain 5 minutes after he is down. I dont think he really meant that.
I agree once the person is neutralized they stop and don't then try and make sure he is dead, I don't think anyone believes that. But I do believe that once they deem it is necessary to shoot they are shooting to kill and often trained to empty their weapons.
Quote:
it's a very tough issue to address, there's got to be an underlying reason to why they exist in the first place, right? I can tell you Los Angeles has been trying to address gang violence forever without any real results. It fucking sucks to see kids get sucked into that lifestyle, when you know there are only so many ways that story will end.
I'm not trying to be contrarian because I find this despicable too, but do you think if people got as angry about every preteen caught in the crossfire as they do about every police shooting progress might be made? The distrust of police goes way beyond officer shootings, to be sure, but a kid is at much greater risk of death from other young men than he is from the police. If black lives really matter, shouldn't a good deal more focus be placed on the much greater risk to black lives, which is gang and drug violence?
you are not being contrarian, i have a similar thought... but that doesn't get ratings unfortunately.
Quote:
In comment 12643056 WideRight said:
Quote:
thats one of the lessons from Ferguson.
I thought the Holder Justice Department found that that the officer was justified, or am I mistaken?
Why do you call it the Holder Justice Department? What is the relevance of invoking Holder's name here? I ask because his name is tossed around like a boogeyman in some circles. It just seems provocative.
The relevance is that Holder's Justice Department has a history of not covering up incidents nor being pro cop. The media can not pull out the ghost of Bull Connor or William F. Buckley Jr. and say these were just a racist, conservative coverups. At least in the media, his failure to charge carries more weight.
Quote:
because justice is taking its course in this case.
Let the jury decide
I think you're being naive. Some people who gerl victimized by police will see this as the proverbial straw.
And people who haven't been victimized will use it as an excuse to loot and torch some minority owned small businesses.
The focus is all fucking wrong 9 year old murdered in cold blood - ( New Window )
1. Unrelated to the thread subject.
2. Because it would force a lot of politicians to criticize their own constituents and leave the narrative (it's all racism and bigoted cops) that gets them elected.
This is another instance of further discipline and scrutiny of the system only being brought about by incontrovertible video recording. (And the city and CPD alike apparently did everything they could to suppress and even destroy video footage).
When the people who cover-up these excessive force killings are held accountable, there will at least be more immediate remediation of bad officers and systematic failures.
Always on body cameras and laws allowing public access and review of thosse recordings will likely advance the causes of both the police and the communities they are paid to serve.
Quote:
In comment 12643306 GMenLTS said:
Quote:
I wanna know why the focus isn't on Tyshawn Lee..
The focus is all fucking wrong 9 year old murdered in cold blood - ( New Window )
That's an awful incident, but it doesn't involve the police. I get that there should be more coverage of this sort of violence, and I have to imagine that shining a light on it would shock and horrify many people who have no idea this sort of thing is a way of life in some sectors of society.
The light is needed, but it all comes down to what sells.
I was going to mention the media coverage in my next post, piggybacking off of duned's. I understand that reality but I just don't see why the murder of a 9 year old shouldn't sell as much as a cop shooting. Never did understand it.
These shootings to get coverage but they quickly get swept under the rug as it doesn't seem to draw nearly the fervor that these cop shootings draw.
And that, to me, is a national disgrace.
9 years old. Cold blood. Because of a gang retaliation. What the actual fuck.
I need to run to visit some properties out in queens but I'll be very interested to see where this discussion trends to when I log back in.
It is a disgrace. Unfortunately it's viewed by many to be an isolated problem and it doesn't affect them. I believe part of the solution is more policing, not less. What Guiliani did in NY. Minorities are the most likely to be victims of crimes. Of course you have one or two bad cops that destroy that trust between the cops and the good citizens of these neighborhoods.
Obviously, neighborhood communities and law enforcement have to work together, but incidents like the OP subject, which get alot of coverage, can't help but breed distrust. It's not just the shooting but the real or perceived cover-ups. Conversely, I can't help but think that violent atmospheres contribute to overreaction by police. They have ever right to protect themselves but it would seem we need to give them more tools for better outcomes. Better and continuous training? Availability of tasers not just guns? Should be noted, in this particular incident, police on the scene didn't have one. City didn't have the funds to equip every police car with a taser. Apparently now trying to find the funding.
With all the funding spent on counterterrorism programs, we can't find funds to combat gangs? Drug & employment programs? Alternative & safe after school programs? Sports leagues and community centers?
Additionally, Giuliani mishandled a office involved shooting, in that, he leaked the juvenile records of a victim of a police shooting in an attempt to tarnish the victim.
And, notwithstanding Giuliani's constant bashing of Dinkins (some well earned), it was Dinkins who hired most of the cops necessary for Bratton's "cops on dots" strategy that was at the core of NYC's crime reduction.
This is another instance of further discipline and scrutiny of the system only being brought about by incontrovertible video recording. (And the city and CPD alike apparently did everything they could to suppress and even destroy video footage).
When the people who cover-up these excessive force killings are held accountable, there will at least be more immediate remediation of bad officers and systematic failures.
Always on body cameras and laws allowing public access and review of thosse recordings will likely advance the causes of both the police and the communities they are paid to serve.
Without that whistleblower—and without that video—it’s highly unlikely that Chicago Police officer Jason Van Dyke would be facing first-degree murder charges today.
“When it was first reported it was a typical police shooting story,” Kalven said, where police claim self-defense and announce an investigation, and “at that point the story disappears.” And, typically, a year or 18 months later, the Independent Police Review Authority confirms the self-defense claim, and “by then no one remembers the initial incident.”
“There are an average of 50 police shootings of civilians every year in Chicago, and no one is ever charged,” said Futterman. “Without the video, this would have been just one more of 50 such incidents, where the police blotter defines the narrative and nothing changes.”
Last December, Kalven and Futterman issued a statement revealing the existence of a dash-cam video and calling for its release. Kalven tracked down a witness to the shooting, who said he and other witnesses had been “shooed away” from the scene with no statements or contact information taken.
In February, Kalven obtained a copy of McDonald’s autopsy, which contradicted the official story that McDonald had died of a single gunshot to the chest. In fact, he’d been shot 16 times—as Van Dyke unloaded his service revolver, execution style—while McDonald lay on the ground.
continued ... - ( New Window )