This wasn't a case of an evil white cop shooting a poor black man for no reason.
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Of course everything is premature, but IF he was on PCP, disregarding lawful orders, and reaching into a vehicle it definitely portrays himself to police as a potential deadly threat reaching for a weapon.
Ultimately he didn't pose an Immediate deadly threat and that is why there are charges, but it seems to come down to discipline in the face of anxiety.
I hadn't heard that and from all first indication I thought it sounded like she (officer)probably carelessly overreacted.
Of course being high on PCP is not a reason or justification to get shot but certainly brings into question his likley behaviour which of course could be misinterpreted as non-responsive and threatening.
This is another example of why we always should wait until all the evidence is presented at a hearing or in this case a trial.
This wasn't a case of an evil white cop shooting a poor black man for no reason.
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Of course everything is premature, but IF he was on PCP, disregarding lawful orders, and reaching into a vehicle it definitely portrays himself to police as a potential deadly threat reaching for a weapon.
Ultimately he didn't pose an Immediate deadly threat and that is why there are charges, but it seems to come down to discipline in the face of anxiety.
'His own poor choices?' He had his freaking hands up in the air.
T
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Seriously? The man had his hands in the air, slowly made his way to the side of his car and by apparent video evidence his window was rolled up. All this and he was closely surrounded by 4 armed officers. He actually played NO part in orchestrating his death.
Do we know for a fact if the window was up or partially down? Â
This wasn't a case of an evil white cop shooting a poor black man for no reason.
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Of course everything is premature, but IF he was on PCP, disregarding lawful orders, and reaching into a vehicle it definitely portrays himself to police as a potential deadly threat reaching for a weapon.
Ultimately he didn't pose an Immediate deadly threat and that is why there are charges, but it seems to come down to discipline in the face of anxiety.
Bullshit.
He had his hands up over his head and was walking away from them. He posed not imminent threat
T
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Seriously? The man had his hands in the air, slowly made his way to the side of his car and by apparent video evidence his window was rolled up. All this and he was closely surrounded by 4 armed officers. He actually played NO part in orchestrating his death.
I said if and yes if he was on PCP, not listening to commands, and reaching into a vehicle-he played a starring role in this death. He had his arms up and it appears he puts them down, making his arms up initially unimportant.
He was running around saying his car was going to blow up, there was something going on that won't be confirmed until tox.
I dont get the idea that any person "sensing" that someone might be on PCP is remotely a justification for shooting them if they are turned the other way ( I understand that other reasons are more understandable threats).
Lets think a moment:
Courts require well research and proven tests to assess alcohol and drug amounts and types. Arent the police agents of the judicial system? Why should a person in a high anxiety state be able to assess another person in a high stress situation well enough to kill them?
Lets remember that the definition of a normal person is normal a normal amount of the time.
Even if we accept the magical thinking that maybe they are on PCP from 50 feet away....all drugs and food and lack thereof make some one off their best.
The most powerful drug is adrenaline and cortisol flooding the systems of both people
If I am jet lagged and at the tail end of a hard week and walking out of starbucks at 5 am trying to get enough boost capacity to push another few hours...I can assure you I am not alert, quick to respond or working on all cylinders especially if someone starts yelling at me or drawing a gun....I might start to wander off to my car to get my ID and show them I was harmless.
Or lets say I was just in an accident while late to an appointment...I am going to be angry and agitated.
Some cop who took a course alerting them to look for signs of stress is going to make the leap that I am on PCP?
I wouldnt touch it if you gave me a mountain of it ( like to be in control of my own senses thank you).
Great pay? Great selection and testing? Great training?
All in favor.
Amping them up to look here there and everywhere to make logic leaps about what is inside citizens who are not aiming a weapon?
Nonsense.
The first job is to protect and serve. All the people
I hadn't heard that and from all first indication I thought it sounded like she (officer)probably carelessly overreacted.
Of course being high on PCP is not a reason or justification to get shot but certainly brings into question his likley behaviour which of course could be misinterpreted as non-responsive and threatening.
This is another example of why we always should wait until all the evidence is presented at a hearing or in this case a trial.
You are of course correct everyone should wait, but people won't, so I wrote my opinion and wrote IF.
The 9-11 call indicated he was saying his car was going to blow up and him ignoring commands with guns drawn seem to indicate he was no in a sound mind frame.
It appears at the 49/50 second mark [as the row of police splits some we see Mr Crutcher] it appears he suddenly drops his arms and his hands go below waist level. That sudden movement maybe is what they saw and fired. Another second or two he was on the ground. It would take those two officers a second or so to react to what they saw and fire.
It is what I think I saw but the video is not in high def or very large.
I don't think that's even questionable, but regardless of your mental state, when you disregard law enforcement instructions and behave in a bizarre manner you are putting yourself at-risk.
I'm not victim blaming, or excusing the officers behavior, she's been deservedly charged, but leaving your car in the middle of the road and not listening to police officers trying to figure out why you're there and what kind of shape you're in and if you mean to do harm to yourself or anyone else and ignoring their instructions can absolutely put yourself in an at-risk situation.
I think most people (on social media at least) view this solely from the victims perspective. and that's understandable. It's a tragic mistake (I believe).
But if you ask yourself this one question, if Terence Crutcher had followed police officer instructions do you think he'd be alive today?
I think you will agree more likely than not the answer is yes, so while he didn't orchestrate his death and while he 100% did not deserve to die, he could have avoided the situation.
not following orders and the officer thought he was high on whatever but observed no gun it would seem he should have been tased BEFORE he got to his car. Remember this guy broke no laws and was not a suspect for ANY wrongdoing. A gun and not a taser drawn was wrong
not following orders and the officer thought he was high on whatever but observed no gun it would seem he should have been tased BEFORE he got to his car. Remember this guy broke no laws and was not a suspect for ANY wrongdoing. A gun and not a taser drawn was wrong
One male cop did actually tase him, and within milliseconds after the female cop shot him.
I don't even know if tasing is proper protocol, but non-lethal force in that situation is certainly more reasonable.
Wood said "it's important to remember" that Shelby was on the scene with Crutcher for about a minute and a half before the start of the video clip released by police on Monday.
When Shelby approached the car, the doors were closed, and the windows were open, Wood said. She looked into the passenger's side to make sure no one was on the floor of the car, and as she was getting ready to move to the driver's side, she turned around and saw Crutcher walking toward her, Wood said.
Wood said that Shelby then said to Crutcher, "Hey, is this your car?"
Crutcher didn't respond, simply dropping his head while continuing to look at Shelby, "kind of under his brow," Wood said. Crutcher then began to put his hand into his left pocket, Wood said, adding that Shelby told Crutcher, "Hey, please keep your hands out of your pocket while you're talking to me. Let's deal with his car."
Crutcher did not respond, Wood said, so Shelby ordered him again to get his hand out of his pocket. He then pulled his hand away and put his hands up in the air, even though he was not instructed to do so, which Shelby found strange, Wood said.
Shelby tried to get Crutcher to talk to her, but he simply mumbled something unintelligible and stared at her, Wood said. He then turned and walked to the edge of the roadway and turned to look at her, his hands still in the air, Wood said. He put his hands down and started to reach into his pocket again, Wood said, and she ordered him again to get his hands out of his pocket.
At this point, Shelby, a drug recognition expert, believed Crutcher was "on something," Wood said, possibly PCP.
Shelby then radioed in that she had a subject "who is not following commands."
"You can kind of hear a degree of stress in her voice when she says that," Wood said.
Tulsa Police Officer Shares Her Side of the Story in …
Tulsa Police Officer Shares Her Side of the Story in Terence Crutcher's Shooting (ABC News)
Shelby then pulled out her gun and had Crutcher at gunpoint as she commanded him to get on his knees, Wood said. She pulled out a gun instead of a Taser because she thought he had a weapon, and she was planning to arrest him for being intoxicated in public and possibly obstructing the investigation, Wood said.
Shelby ordered Crutcher to stop multiple times as Crutcher walked toward the SUV with his hands up, Wood said.
But those orders cannot be heard in the audio from the dashcam video, which starts as another patrol car pulls up to the scene, showing Crutcher walking toward the SUV with his hands up as Shelby follows him, apparently with her weapon drawn and pointing at Crutcher.
T
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Seriously? The man had his hands in the air, slowly made his way to the side of his car and by apparent video evidence his window was rolled up. All this and he was closely surrounded by 4 armed officers. He actually played NO part in orchestrating his death.
+1
I have no idea how people can actually claim this guy had his hands in the air the entire time and ignore his actions including walking away, dropping his hands and making his way to his vehicle.
The affidavit says Shelby initially approached the vehicle and cleared the driver’s side front before moving around to the passenger side. That’s when she encountered Crutcher, who was walking toward her, and asked him if the car belonged to him and if it was disabled. Crutcher was mumbling to himself and wouldn’t answer Shelby’s questions, the document says.
Crutcher kept putting his hands in his pockets, and Shelby ordered him to show his hands, police say in the affidavit. Crutcher then began walking away towards the vehicle with his hands in the air, not responding to Shelby’s orders to stop, the document says.
At that point, Shelby pulled out her service weapon and followed Crutcher to the vehicle. She pointed it at him, and another officer arrived and told Shelby he had his Taser ready, according to the affidavit.
That’s when, police say, Crutcher reached into the driver’s side front window, and the officer fired his Taser and Shelby fired her weapon, striking Crutcher.
The police footage shows Crutcher approaching the driver’s side of the SUV, then more officers walk up and Crutcher appears to lower his hands and place them on the vehicle. A man inside a police helicopter overhead says: “That looks like a bad dude, too. Probably on something.”
,,,
Shelby later told police she was in fear for her life and thought Crutcher was going to kill her, the document says.
emphasis added
I assume this cop wasnt actually looking to murder the victim. Obviously, malicious intent gets no sympathy from me.
So if it is just a bad decision, do we really want to prosecute that? There is no mere mistake I can make at work that will get me prosecuted. But for the police, a very, very bad mistake can lead to a homicide prosecution. You have to wonder who will want to be a police officer under those circumstances. Police Departments already have a problem vis a vis a certain personality type being drawn to the badge (authoritarians).
RE: I just have a lot of sympathy for cops even on bad shoots Â
I assume this cop wasnt actually looking to murder the victim. Obviously, malicious intent gets no sympathy from me.
So if it is just a bad decision, do we really want to prosecute that? There is no mere mistake I can make at work that will get me prosecuted. But for the police, a very, very bad mistake can lead to a homicide prosecution. You have to wonder who will want to be a police officer under those circumstances. Police Departments already have a problem vis a vis a certain personality type being drawn to the badge (authoritarians).
morally, I wouldn't want to prosecute someone acting in good faith that just made a mistake and I believe he put her in a bad situation.
on the other hand, if a law was broken there should be consequences.
I don't think he deserved to die and a lot pf people say that, but it's the actions and not the "deserves" that have to be judged.
RE: RE: I just have a lot of sympathy for cops even on bad shoots Â
I assume this cop wasnt actually looking to murder the victim. Obviously, malicious intent gets no sympathy from me.
So if it is just a bad decision, do we really want to prosecute that? There is no mere mistake I can make at work that will get me prosecuted. But for the police, a very, very bad mistake can lead to a homicide prosecution. You have to wonder who will want to be a police officer under those circumstances. Police Departments already have a problem vis a vis a certain personality type being drawn to the badge (authoritarians).
morally, I wouldn't want to prosecute someone acting in good faith that just made a mistake and I believe he put her in a bad situation.
on the other hand, if a law was broken there should be consequences.
I don't think he deserved to die and a lot pf people say that, but it's the actions and not the "deserves" that have to be judged.
I agree. Deserving to die imply's the officer is making a moral judgment when in fact rightly or wrongly they are responding to a perceived threat based on the persons words and actions.
RE: RE: RE: I just have a lot of sympathy for cops even on bad shoots Â
I assume this cop wasnt actually looking to murder the victim. Obviously, malicious intent gets no sympathy from me.
So if it is just a bad decision, do we really want to prosecute that? There is no mere mistake I can make at work that will get me prosecuted. But for the police, a very, very bad mistake can lead to a homicide prosecution. You have to wonder who will want to be a police officer under those circumstances. Police Departments already have a problem vis a vis a certain personality type being drawn to the badge (authoritarians).
morally, I wouldn't want to prosecute someone acting in good faith that just made a mistake and I believe he put her in a bad situation.
on the other hand, if a law was broken there should be consequences.
I don't think he deserved to die and a lot pf people say that, but it's the actions and not the "deserves" that have to be judged.
I agree. Deserving to die imply's the officer is making a moral judgment when in fact rightly or wrongly they are responding to a perceived threat based on the persons words and actions.
When I used it (he didn't deserve to die) I had no moral decision in mind, it was procedural and based on the victims actions. Based on the video and what I've read I didn't get the sense lethal force was called for, but of course there are other details that will probably come to light at trial that maybe explain the officers state of mind and decision making process.
It had nothing to do with a moral decision IMO, just a bad decision.
because she made a mistake but not a threat to society.
Should have pulled the tazer or done nothing.
That is my initial thought.
The one thing I disagree with is the taser thing people say. The gun drawn was the correct thing for her to do since lethal coverage has to be present before a non-lethal option. She shouldn't have fired the gun though.
The reason for the firearm is that she was the first one there and if she believed he was on drugs and not responding--she could articulate that she would fear for her safety in a one on one fight because of the size difference and a taser has a lower probability to work and without lethal cover a non-functioning taser could be a fatal mistake.
Police are not paid to get injured or killed, so they have a lot of tactical options--though danger is part of the job.
He certainly didn't deserve to die....some have added. Â
All take judgement, but never been in a situation like that.
If he did make a sudden move by dropping his hand below waist level or near his waist line, officers would take that as a threat to the lives. Two officers did!
A taser doesn't always stop someone. Even if he was hit by the taser, if he had a gun in his pants he could still get a shot off.
So I'll ask again, when does an officer deserve to die?
.
does not always stop someone like the public thinks it does. The officer it seems was waiting for backup.
But it should have been used as he walked to the car. If it didn't stop him that's another story. He had his hands up and there was no indication of a weapon.
RE: He certainly didn't deserve to die....some have added. Â
All take judgement, but never been in a situation like that.
If he did make a sudden move by dropping his hand below waist level or near his waist line, officers would take that as a threat to the lives. Two officers did!
A taser doesn't always stop someone. Even if he was hit by the taser, if he had a gun in his pants he could still get a shot off.
So I'll ask again, when does an officer deserve to die?
.
Was there a gun?
RE: He certainly didn't deserve to die....some have added. Â
All take judgement, but never been in a situation like that.
If he did make a sudden move by dropping his hand below waist level or near his waist line, officers would take that as a threat to the lives. Two officers did!
A taser doesn't always stop someone. Even if he was hit by the taser, if he had a gun in his pants he could still get a shot off.
So I'll ask again, when does an officer deserve to die?
.
Was there a gun?
I think his point is police officers are killed in the line of duty every year. So the next time someone doesn't obey an officer and then makes a move that the officer interprets could indicate going for a weapon if the officer instead hesitates he/she easily could end up dead.
All take judgement, but never been in a situation like that.
If he did make a sudden move by dropping his hand below waist level or near his waist line, officers would take that as a threat to the lives. Two officers did!
A taser doesn't always stop someone. Even if he was hit by the taser, if he had a gun in his pants he could still get a shot off.
So I'll ask again, when does an officer deserve to die?
.
Of the two officers who did one used a taser and one didn't. One decided to use lethal force, one did not. The one who did will need to answer for their decision.
and this officer will be judged if she goes to trial by a group of people who are not police officers so I don't see what the relevance is that people on here who are not police officers have judged her actions.
It makes me very sad for the family of the slain man.
I am also one who cannot imagine why someone would want to be an officer these days. It is clear we need a set of standardized rules of engagement, like what is given to the military.
It appears that use of lethal force requires not just an honest belief that your life is threatened, but conclusive evidence of that threat.
A thought exercise: assume that you are an officer and believe your life is in imminent danger (not talking about this specific case). Under that assumption, answer this question honestly. How long would you be willing to wait before discharging your weapon in your own defense?
If you are pretty sure that you would be able to hold off on defending yourself (remember, you are supposed to believe that your life is in danger), then we need you to join the police force. You are the type of person who we need to protect and serve the rest of us.
I myself wouldn't qualify, as I'm pretty sure I would fire under those conditions.
A fair assumption - evidenced by the instantaneous reaction of both officers (the one charged and the one who fired the taser). In the end, the fact that the other officer simultaneously fired their taser may ultimately be the critical evidence in the defense of the involved officer.
Quote:
Do they have to be hit before they can return fire?
Many people believe so.
This is what I was getting at. It appears that not only do many people believe so, but that the prosecuting attorneys also believe so.
Like I said, scary time to choose law enforcement as a profession.
This was tragic - it's going to boil down to whether this was just Â
someone who wasn't fit or sufficiently trained to be a police officer having made a terrible mistake in the line of duty, or whether they had some other issues or disregard for human life.
It's pretty obvious lethal force wasn't necessary here, and the other officer on the scene made the right split-second decision. She's got a lot of explaining to do.
Link - ( New Window )
now we will see if it gets protested like Charlotte.
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Of course everything is premature, but IF he was on PCP, disregarding lawful orders, and reaching into a vehicle it definitely portrays himself to police as a potential deadly threat reaching for a weapon.
Ultimately he didn't pose an Immediate deadly threat and that is why there are charges, but it seems to come down to discipline in the face of anxiety.
Of course being high on PCP is not a reason or justification to get shot but certainly brings into question his likley behaviour which of course could be misinterpreted as non-responsive and threatening.
This is another example of why we always should wait until all the evidence is presented at a hearing or in this case a trial.
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Of course everything is premature, but IF he was on PCP, disregarding lawful orders, and reaching into a vehicle it definitely portrays himself to police as a potential deadly threat reaching for a weapon.
Ultimately he didn't pose an Immediate deadly threat and that is why there are charges, but it seems to come down to discipline in the face of anxiety.
'His own poor choices?' He had his freaking hands up in the air.
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Seriously? The man had his hands in the air, slowly made his way to the side of his car and by apparent video evidence his window was rolled up. All this and he was closely surrounded by 4 armed officers. He actually played NO part in orchestrating his death.
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Of course everything is premature, but IF he was on PCP, disregarding lawful orders, and reaching into a vehicle it definitely portrays himself to police as a potential deadly threat reaching for a weapon.
Ultimately he didn't pose an Immediate deadly threat and that is why there are charges, but it seems to come down to discipline in the face of anxiety.
Bullshit.
He had his hands up over his head and was walking away from them. He posed not imminent threat
Quote:
T
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Seriously? The man had his hands in the air, slowly made his way to the side of his car and by apparent video evidence his window was rolled up. All this and he was closely surrounded by 4 armed officers. He actually played NO part in orchestrating his death.
I said if and yes if he was on PCP, not listening to commands, and reaching into a vehicle-he played a starring role in this death. He had his arms up and it appears he puts them down, making his arms up initially unimportant.
He was running around saying his car was going to blow up, there was something going on that won't be confirmed until tox.
Lets think a moment:
Courts require well research and proven tests to assess alcohol and drug amounts and types. Arent the police agents of the judicial system? Why should a person in a high anxiety state be able to assess another person in a high stress situation well enough to kill them?
Lets remember that the definition of a normal person is normal a normal amount of the time.
Even if we accept the magical thinking that maybe they are on PCP from 50 feet away....all drugs and food and lack thereof make some one off their best.
The most powerful drug is adrenaline and cortisol flooding the systems of both people
If I am jet lagged and at the tail end of a hard week and walking out of starbucks at 5 am trying to get enough boost capacity to push another few hours...I can assure you I am not alert, quick to respond or working on all cylinders especially if someone starts yelling at me or drawing a gun....I might start to wander off to my car to get my ID and show them I was harmless.
Or lets say I was just in an accident while late to an appointment...I am going to be angry and agitated.
Some cop who took a course alerting them to look for signs of stress is going to make the leap that I am on PCP?
I wouldnt touch it if you gave me a mountain of it ( like to be in control of my own senses thank you).
Great pay? Great selection and testing? Great training?
All in favor.
Amping them up to look here there and everywhere to make logic leaps about what is inside citizens who are not aiming a weapon?
Nonsense.
The first job is to protect and serve. All the people
Of course being high on PCP is not a reason or justification to get shot but certainly brings into question his likley behaviour which of course could be misinterpreted as non-responsive and threatening.
This is another example of why we always should wait until all the evidence is presented at a hearing or in this case a trial.
You are of course correct everyone should wait, but people won't, so I wrote my opinion and wrote IF.
The 9-11 call indicated he was saying his car was going to blow up and him ignoring commands with guns drawn seem to indicate he was no in a sound mind frame.
It is what I think I saw but the video is not in high def or very large.
Take a look, I think the link is good.
.
Link - ( New Window )
I'm not victim blaming, or excusing the officers behavior, she's been deservedly charged, but leaving your car in the middle of the road and not listening to police officers trying to figure out why you're there and what kind of shape you're in and if you mean to do harm to yourself or anyone else and ignoring their instructions can absolutely put yourself in an at-risk situation.
I think most people (on social media at least) view this solely from the victims perspective. and that's understandable. It's a tragic mistake (I believe).
But if you ask yourself this one question, if Terence Crutcher had followed police officer instructions do you think he'd be alive today?
I think you will agree more likely than not the answer is yes, so while he didn't orchestrate his death and while he 100% did not deserve to die, he could have avoided the situation.
One male cop did actually tase him, and within milliseconds after the female cop shot him.
I don't even know if tasing is proper protocol, but non-lethal force in that situation is certainly more reasonable.
When Shelby approached the car, the doors were closed, and the windows were open, Wood said. She looked into the passenger's side to make sure no one was on the floor of the car, and as she was getting ready to move to the driver's side, she turned around and saw Crutcher walking toward her, Wood said.
Wood said that Shelby then said to Crutcher, "Hey, is this your car?"
Crutcher didn't respond, simply dropping his head while continuing to look at Shelby, "kind of under his brow," Wood said. Crutcher then began to put his hand into his left pocket, Wood said, adding that Shelby told Crutcher, "Hey, please keep your hands out of your pocket while you're talking to me. Let's deal with his car."
Crutcher did not respond, Wood said, so Shelby ordered him again to get his hand out of his pocket. He then pulled his hand away and put his hands up in the air, even though he was not instructed to do so, which Shelby found strange, Wood said.
Shelby tried to get Crutcher to talk to her, but he simply mumbled something unintelligible and stared at her, Wood said. He then turned and walked to the edge of the roadway and turned to look at her, his hands still in the air, Wood said. He put his hands down and started to reach into his pocket again, Wood said, and she ordered him again to get his hands out of his pocket.
At this point, Shelby, a drug recognition expert, believed Crutcher was "on something," Wood said, possibly PCP.
Shelby then radioed in that she had a subject "who is not following commands."
"You can kind of hear a degree of stress in her voice when she says that," Wood said.
Tulsa Police Officer Shares Her Side of the Story in …
Tulsa Police Officer Shares Her Side of the Story in Terence Crutcher's Shooting (ABC News)
Shelby then pulled out her gun and had Crutcher at gunpoint as she commanded him to get on his knees, Wood said. She pulled out a gun instead of a Taser because she thought he had a weapon, and she was planning to arrest him for being intoxicated in public and possibly obstructing the investigation, Wood said.
Shelby ordered Crutcher to stop multiple times as Crutcher walked toward the SUV with his hands up, Wood said.
But those orders cannot be heard in the audio from the dashcam video, which starts as another patrol car pulls up to the scene, showing Crutcher walking toward the SUV with his hands up as Shelby follows him, apparently with her weapon drawn and pointing at Crutcher.
Quote:
T
This was a man who had no small part in orchestrating his own death through his own poor choices.
Seriously? The man had his hands in the air, slowly made his way to the side of his car and by apparent video evidence his window was rolled up. All this and he was closely surrounded by 4 armed officers. He actually played NO part in orchestrating his death.
+1
I have no idea how people can actually claim this guy had his hands in the air the entire time and ignore his actions including walking away, dropping his hands and making his way to his vehicle.
Crutcher kept putting his hands in his pockets, and Shelby ordered him to show his hands, police say in the affidavit. Crutcher then began walking away towards the vehicle with his hands in the air, not responding to Shelby’s orders to stop, the document says.
At that point, Shelby pulled out her service weapon and followed Crutcher to the vehicle. She pointed it at him, and another officer arrived and told Shelby he had his Taser ready, according to the affidavit.
That’s when, police say, Crutcher reached into the driver’s side front window, and the officer fired his Taser and Shelby fired her weapon, striking Crutcher.
The police footage shows Crutcher approaching the driver’s side of the SUV, then more officers walk up and Crutcher appears to lower his hands and place them on the vehicle. A man inside a police helicopter overhead says: “That looks like a bad dude, too. Probably on something.”
,,,
Shelby later told police she was in fear for her life and thought Crutcher was going to kill her, the document says.
emphasis added
Nope, it doesn't.
Even if you believe you have no choice other than firing your weapon, how do you not immediately try and aid them afterwards?
If true I can't get my head around a number of police officers basically letting someone lay there and die within feet of themselves.
Should have pulled the tazer or done nothing.
Link - ( New Window )
So if it is just a bad decision, do we really want to prosecute that? There is no mere mistake I can make at work that will get me prosecuted. But for the police, a very, very bad mistake can lead to a homicide prosecution. You have to wonder who will want to be a police officer under those circumstances. Police Departments already have a problem vis a vis a certain personality type being drawn to the badge (authoritarians).
So if it is just a bad decision, do we really want to prosecute that? There is no mere mistake I can make at work that will get me prosecuted. But for the police, a very, very bad mistake can lead to a homicide prosecution. You have to wonder who will want to be a police officer under those circumstances. Police Departments already have a problem vis a vis a certain personality type being drawn to the badge (authoritarians).
morally, I wouldn't want to prosecute someone acting in good faith that just made a mistake and I believe he put her in a bad situation.
on the other hand, if a law was broken there should be consequences.
I don't think he deserved to die and a lot pf people say that, but it's the actions and not the "deserves" that have to be judged.
Quote:
I assume this cop wasnt actually looking to murder the victim. Obviously, malicious intent gets no sympathy from me.
So if it is just a bad decision, do we really want to prosecute that? There is no mere mistake I can make at work that will get me prosecuted. But for the police, a very, very bad mistake can lead to a homicide prosecution. You have to wonder who will want to be a police officer under those circumstances. Police Departments already have a problem vis a vis a certain personality type being drawn to the badge (authoritarians).
morally, I wouldn't want to prosecute someone acting in good faith that just made a mistake and I believe he put her in a bad situation.
on the other hand, if a law was broken there should be consequences.
I don't think he deserved to die and a lot pf people say that, but it's the actions and not the "deserves" that have to be judged.
I agree. Deserving to die imply's the officer is making a moral judgment when in fact rightly or wrongly they are responding to a perceived threat based on the persons words and actions.
Quote:
In comment 13136561 Deej said:
Quote:
I assume this cop wasnt actually looking to murder the victim. Obviously, malicious intent gets no sympathy from me.
So if it is just a bad decision, do we really want to prosecute that? There is no mere mistake I can make at work that will get me prosecuted. But for the police, a very, very bad mistake can lead to a homicide prosecution. You have to wonder who will want to be a police officer under those circumstances. Police Departments already have a problem vis a vis a certain personality type being drawn to the badge (authoritarians).
morally, I wouldn't want to prosecute someone acting in good faith that just made a mistake and I believe he put her in a bad situation.
on the other hand, if a law was broken there should be consequences.
I don't think he deserved to die and a lot pf people say that, but it's the actions and not the "deserves" that have to be judged.
I agree. Deserving to die imply's the officer is making a moral judgment when in fact rightly or wrongly they are responding to a perceived threat based on the persons words and actions.
When I used it (he didn't deserve to die) I had no moral decision in mind, it was procedural and based on the victims actions. Based on the video and what I've read I didn't get the sense lethal force was called for, but of course there are other details that will probably come to light at trial that maybe explain the officers state of mind and decision making process.
It had nothing to do with a moral decision IMO, just a bad decision.
Should have pulled the tazer or done nothing.
That is my initial thought.
The one thing I disagree with is the taser thing people say. The gun drawn was the correct thing for her to do since lethal coverage has to be present before a non-lethal option. She shouldn't have fired the gun though.
The reason for the firearm is that she was the first one there and if she believed he was on drugs and not responding--she could articulate that she would fear for her safety in a one on one fight because of the size difference and a taser has a lower probability to work and without lethal cover a non-functioning taser could be a fatal mistake.
Police are not paid to get injured or killed, so they have a lot of tactical options--though danger is part of the job.
All take judgement, but never been in a situation like that.
If he did make a sudden move by dropping his hand below waist level or near his waist line, officers would take that as a threat to the lives. Two officers did!
A taser doesn't always stop someone. Even if he was hit by the taser, if he had a gun in his pants he could still get a shot off.
So I'll ask again, when does an officer deserve to die?
.
But it should have been used as he walked to the car. If it didn't stop him that's another story. He had his hands up and there was no indication of a weapon.
All take judgement, but never been in a situation like that.
If he did make a sudden move by dropping his hand below waist level or near his waist line, officers would take that as a threat to the lives. Two officers did!
A taser doesn't always stop someone. Even if he was hit by the taser, if he had a gun in his pants he could still get a shot off.
So I'll ask again, when does an officer deserve to die?
.
Was there a gun?
A taser doesn't always stop someone. Even if he was hit by the taser, if he had a gun in his pants he could still get a shot off.
The "If he had a gun" argument can get a lot of killed, black or white.
Quote:
But when does an officer deserve to die?
All take judgement, but never been in a situation like that.
If he did make a sudden move by dropping his hand below waist level or near his waist line, officers would take that as a threat to the lives. Two officers did!
A taser doesn't always stop someone. Even if he was hit by the taser, if he had a gun in his pants he could still get a shot off.
So I'll ask again, when does an officer deserve to die?
.
Was there a gun?
I think his point is police officers are killed in the line of duty every year. So the next time someone doesn't obey an officer and then makes a move that the officer interprets could indicate going for a weapon if the officer instead hesitates he/she easily could end up dead.
Hind sight is always 20/20
Follow what they say.
Live for another day.
All take judgement, but never been in a situation like that.
If he did make a sudden move by dropping his hand below waist level or near his waist line, officers would take that as a threat to the lives. Two officers did!
A taser doesn't always stop someone. Even if he was hit by the taser, if he had a gun in his pants he could still get a shot off.
So I'll ask again, when does an officer deserve to die?
.
Of the two officers who did one used a taser and one didn't. One decided to use lethal force, one did not. The one who did will need to answer for their decision.
and this officer will be judged if she goes to trial by a group of people who are not police officers so I don't see what the relevance is that people on here who are not police officers have judged her actions.
I am also one who cannot imagine why someone would want to be an officer these days. It is clear we need a set of standardized rules of engagement, like what is given to the military.
It appears that use of lethal force requires not just an honest belief that your life is threatened, but conclusive evidence of that threat.
A thought exercise: assume that you are an officer and believe your life is in imminent danger (not talking about this specific case). Under that assumption, answer this question honestly. How long would you be willing to wait before discharging your weapon in your own defense?
If you are pretty sure that you would be able to hold off on defending yourself (remember, you are supposed to believe that your life is in danger), then we need you to join the police force. You are the type of person who we need to protect and serve the rest of us.
I myself wouldn't qualify, as I'm pretty sure I would fire under those conditions.
Stops like this are the most dangerous for police.
Listen and follow what they say, even if it is wrong.
Don't make sudden movements.
Do they have to be hit before they can return fire?
Many people believe so.
Do they have to be hit before they can return fire?
Many people believe so.
Amazingly I have seen some here on BBI say police should never fire unless having first been fired upon.
A fair assumption - evidenced by the instantaneous reaction of both officers (the one charged and the one who fired the taser). In the end, the fact that the other officer simultaneously fired their taser may ultimately be the critical evidence in the defense of the involved officer.
Many people believe so.
This is what I was getting at. It appears that not only do many people believe so, but that the prosecuting attorneys also believe so.
Like I said, scary time to choose law enforcement as a profession.
It's pretty obvious lethal force wasn't necessary here, and the other officer on the scene made the right split-second decision. She's got a lot of explaining to do.