for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

NFT: Officer Who Shot Philando Castile Found Not Guilty

eclipz928 : 6/16/2017 7:18 pm
Quote:
Castile's death garnered widespread attention -- and sparked nationwide protests over the use of force by police -- after his girlfriend broadcast the shooting's aftermath on Facebook Live....

"I didn't want to shoot Mr. Castile," Yanez testified."That wasn't my intention. I thought I was going to die."
Yanez's lawyers alleged Castile had been smoking marijuana the day of the shooting, which they said affected his judgment.

Castile was bleeding heavily in the Facebook video but managed to say he wasn't reaching for his gun, which he had a permit to carry. His girlfriend said Castile was reaching for his ID in his back pocket when he was shot.
Castile's fully loaded gun was found in his shorts pocket, Ramsey County prosecutors said.

Reynolds issued a statement Friday, saying Castile was pulled over because he had "a wide nose," like a robbery suspect who was being sought.

"He did nothing but comply with Officer Yanez's instructions to get his driver's license. He was seat belted and doing as he was told, when he was shot by Officer Yanez who fired seven shots into the vehicle where my .... daughter and I also sat. It is a sad state of affairs when this type of criminal conduct is condoned simply because Yanez is a policeman. God help America."

Minnesota Cop Acquitted on All Charges - ( New Window )
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Show All |  Next>>
This will  
ctc in ftmyers : 6/16/2017 7:25 pm : link
end well.

Since I wasn't in the courtroom. I don't have a clue nor an opinion.

Do you have a transcript of the testimony that persuaded the jury to come to the conclusion they did?
RE: This will  
bluepepper : 6/16/2017 7:31 pm : link
Quote:
end well.

Since I wasn't in the courtroom. I don't have a clue nor an opinion.

Do you have a transcript of the testimony that persuaded the jury to come to the conclusion they did?

Don't think you need to study the transcripts for this one. Juries simply do not convict police officers in cases like this. Even the guy in SC who chased after a driver and shot him in the back didn't get convicted by a jury.
Central argument of the defense  
eclipz928 : 6/16/2017 7:42 pm : link
was that Castile's judgment was impaired by drugs and the officer had a legitimate fear for his own safety - very much the same argument that was made for Officer Betty Shelby in Tulsa who was also acquitted of similar charges less than a month ago.
RE: Central argument of the defense  
madgiantscow009 : 6/16/2017 7:55 pm : link
In comment 13502402 eclipz928 said:
Quote:
was that Castile's judgment was impaired by drugs and the officer had a legitimate fear for his own safety - very much the same argument that was made for Officer Betty Shelby in Tulsa who was also acquitted of similar charges less than a month ago.


I believe he was reaching for his ID that was located right by his gun.
Ridiculous  
hassan : 6/16/2017 8:56 pm : link
And I'm not a fan of blm but this case is horrendous. This guy needed to spend some time in the can for this.

RE: RE: This will  
charlito : 6/16/2017 10:03 pm : link
In comment 13502395 bluepepper said:
Quote:


Quote:


end well.

Since I wasn't in the courtroom. I don't have a clue nor an opinion.

Do you have a transcript of the testimony that persuaded the jury to come to the conclusion they did?


Don't think you need to study the transcripts for this one. Juries simply do not convict police officers in cases like this. Even the guy in SC who chased after a driver and shot him in the back didn't get convicted by a jury.


I'm not sure but I'm guessing a lot of jurors who are black fear that the police can find out where they live and make there life hell. That would be in the back of my mind.

I think one of the jurors who was black in the Charleston police murder case didn't find the officer guilty.
RE: RE: RE: This will  
madgiantscow009 : 6/16/2017 10:59 pm : link
In comment 13502463 charlito said:
Quote:
In comment 13502395 bluepepper said:


Quote:




Quote:


end well.

Since I wasn't in the courtroom. I don't have a clue nor an opinion.

Do you have a transcript of the testimony that persuaded the jury to come to the conclusion they did?


Don't think you need to study the transcripts for this one. Juries simply do not convict police officers in cases like this. Even the guy in SC who chased after a driver and shot him in the back didn't get convicted by a jury.



I'm not sure but I'm guessing a lot of jurors who are black fear that the police can find out where they live and make there life hell. That would be in the back of my mind.

I think one of the jurors who was black in the Charleston police murder case didn't find the officer guilty.


On May 2, 2017, Slager pleaded guilty to 18 U.S.C. § 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law as part of a plea agreement, which has a potential maximum penalty of life imprisonment and a $250,000 fine.
unbelievable  
Vanzetti : 6/17/2017 2:17 am : link
of all the shootings, this was probably the worst. Cop just panicked.


I don't think a long jail sentence is required but Yanez should be kicked off the force and have to pay 10% of his future earnings to that poor little girl, who had to witness that.

Not sure how to fix this problem...  
trueblueinpw : 6/17/2017 2:48 am : link
I honestly don't think that cop wanted to kill Mr Castile. I have no reason to doubt the officer feared for his life. But, the facts would seem to indicate the officer didn't need to kill Mr Castile and the officer wasn't actually in any extraordinary danger. (On the matter of danger, one has to assume the police are by nature of their work in some danger always.) I think an error of professional judgement which leads to the loss of life should have serious consequences. I'm not sure jail makes any sense here.

Gotta say too, that the civilian was armed didn't help this situation; it I usually does not.

What is most frustrating is that we don't seem to be leaning from these gun violence tragedies. Every day it's more of the same. Decent people needlessly being killed by guns. Every day.
I can't express an educated  
rebel yell : 6/17/2017 8:07 am : link
opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.
The victim smoking marijuana made him MORE dangerous?  
JerryNYG : 6/17/2017 8:39 am : link
Really? Who believes that bullshit?
There is literally not one conceivable reason to think Castile  
shockeyisthebest8056 : 6/17/2017 9:40 am : link
was going to shoot the officer. The reason given for why Castile was supposedly reaching for the gun was weed that wasn't known about until after the fact.

The officer's supervisor testified (and police audio confirmed) that the officer said he didn't see the gun. When asked about that statement, the officer said he meant he didn't see it until he did. Another officer testified that the gun fell out of Castile's pocket as he was moved onto a backboard. However, a paramedic testified that an officer had to reach deep into his pocket to remove the gun.
Ridiculous  
hassan : 6/17/2017 10:17 am : link
There is no need to sit through the trial. The basic argument laid forth by the defense that the taint of marijuana made him dangerous is utterly bogus. le is trained to not panic like that in this situation and he did.

As earlier mentioned, LE almost never gets prosecuted for this type of shooting. Removing race from the equation.
At least he didn't cause the guy's death by encouraging him  
Mad Mike : 6/17/2017 10:25 am : link
to kill himself. That would've been so much worse, and definitely warranted jail time.
I have great respect for all police  
Ron Johnson 30 : 6/17/2017 10:29 am : link
But many who are carrying weapons shouldn't be cops to begin with.
For those of you so sure the cop was wrong  
halfback20 : 6/17/2017 10:41 am : link
How are you so certain? There was no video of this incident.
RE: The victim smoking marijuana made him MORE dangerous?  
halfback20 : 6/17/2017 10:43 am : link
In comment 13502621 JerryNYG said:
Quote:
Really? Who believes that bullshit?

I dont think that was their argument. Fwiw, they argued it impaired his judgement.
The cop shot Philando because he said he feared for his life  
JerryNYG : 6/17/2017 11:01 am : link
Philando's marijuana use (which the officer did not know of at the time) was given as at least a partial explanation for why the officer was justified in his shooting.

How does that make any sense?

You don't have to wonder why large segments of the population do not trust law enforcement. It is an awful shame because communities need good policing and the police need trust and partnership with the communities to do a good job.

The ongoing violence without consequence undermines that partnership.
RE: I can't express an educated  
eclipz928 : 6/17/2017 11:13 am : link
In comment 13502605 rebel yell said:
Quote:
opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.

No one disputes that people in law enforcement have a tough job, but the risks and challenges involved in their line of work should not absolve them of accountability.
RE: The cop shot Philando because he said he feared for his life  
halfback20 : 6/17/2017 11:56 am : link
In comment 13502695 JerryNYG said:
Quote:
Philando's marijuana use (which the officer did not know of at the time) was given as at least a partial explanation for why the officer was justified in his shooting.

How does that make any sense?

You don't have to wonder why large segments of the population do not trust law enforcement. It is an awful shame because communities need good policing and the police need trust and partnership with the communities to do a good job.

The ongoing violence without consequence undermines that partnership.


Ongoing violence? In the grand scheme of things these shootings are very rare.
RE: I can't express an educated  
Chris in Philly : 6/17/2017 12:22 pm : link
In comment 13502605 rebel yell said:
Quote:
opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.


Because their job is hard or stressful is not an excuse...
RE: RE: The cop shot Philando because he said he feared for his life  
eclipz928 : 6/17/2017 1:45 pm : link
In comment 13502736 halfback20 said:
Quote:
In comment 13502695 JerryNYG said:


Quote:


Philando's marijuana use (which the officer did not know of at the time) was given as at least a partial explanation for why the officer was justified in his shooting.

How does that make any sense?

You don't have to wonder why large segments of the population do not trust law enforcement. It is an awful shame because communities need good policing and the police need trust and partnership with the communities to do a good job.

The ongoing violence without consequence undermines that partnership.



Ongoing violence? In the grand scheme of things these shootings are very rare.

That depends on your definition of "rare". In 2016, police shot and killed a total of at least 957 people (and 991 in 2015). Obviously that number doesn't account for how justified it was to use lethal force, but in comparison police in the UK shot and killed a total of 23 people . . . over a span of 10 years.

Of course there are huge differences between the US and the UK, particularly in regards to culture and population size, but the annual rate of police-related shootings should in no way minimize the circumstances surrounding each individual case. Any loss of life is tragic, and we as citizens should be particularly vigilant when that loss of life is caused by someone holding a position of authority.
The article said  
fkap : 6/17/2017 4:08 pm : link
the evidence showed the victim said he had a gun, cop said don't reach for it, and then the victim reached for something. when a cop tells you not to reach after you've just admitted you have a gun, you don't reach. how fucking hard is that to understand?
RE: RE: I can't express an educated  
rebel yell : 6/17/2017 4:09 pm : link
In comment 13502756 Chris in Philly said:
Quote:
In comment 13502605 rebel yell said:


Quote:


opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.



Because their job is hard or stressful is not an excuse...


Did I use the word excuse or try to absolve the officer? No, I didn't. I urged those who criticize to try a shoot/don't shoot simulator. If you've never been in imminent danger, felt you adrenaline flow, or been shot at....you're clueless. I have and I know the feeling.
RE: The article said  
Sgrcts : 6/17/2017 4:23 pm : link
In comment 13502884 fkap said:
Quote:
the evidence showed the victim said he had a gun, cop said don't reach for it, and then the victim reached for something. when a cop tells you not to reach after you've just admitted you have a gun, you don't reach. how fucking hard is that to understand?


He was reaching for his ID. Which the officer asked him to provide.
RE: The article said  
Deej : 6/17/2017 4:30 pm : link
In comment 13502884 fkap said:
Quote:
the evidence showed the victim said he had a gun, cop said don't reach for it, and then the victim reached for something. when a cop tells you not to reach after you've just admitted you have a gun, you don't reach. how fucking hard is that to understand?


The cop also told him to get ID, which is what he was reaching for. Also, if the cop thought that Castile matched a robbery suspect, which was the purported reason he was pulled over for the 49th time in 13 years, then procedure was to have all occupants exit the vehicle while the police are covered with guns drawn, precisely to avoid a situation like this.
RE: I can't express an educated  
RC02XX : 6/17/2017 5:43 pm : link
In comment 13502605 rebel yell said:
Quote:
opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.


This is always a cop out to me (no pun intended). LE job is very difficult; we know that and they know that. However, it doesn't absolve them from holding a far higher level of standard than their regular civilian counterparts. If a police officer is so damn scared to do his job at the risk of himself over that of the public, then he needs to stop being a cop. The whole idea that at the end of the day the police need to ensure they come home alive is missing the whole point of such a position and authority. They are given such authority over others, and in return, they assume the risk to themselves over putting such risk on others.

The fact of the matter is that none of us have to immerse ourselves into their situations to understand how difficult their jobs are. It's given, and at the same time, it's fully expected that these individuals choosing such a profession are held to a higher standards than your everyday citizen. To put us all on the same plain or standards is the wrong way to look at the entire LE profession.
the way I understand it  
fkap : 6/17/2017 5:44 pm : link
the cop asked for ID, the guy said he had a gun, at which point the cop said 'don't reach', and the guy reached.

maybe procedures weren't followed. that doesn't equal up to murder.
RE: RE: The article said  
madgiantscow009 : 6/17/2017 5:57 pm : link
In comment 13502896 Deej said:
Quote:
In comment 13502884 fkap said:


Quote:


the evidence showed the victim said he had a gun, cop said don't reach for it, and then the victim reached for something. when a cop tells you not to reach after you've just admitted you have a gun, you don't reach. how fucking hard is that to understand?

The cop also told him to get ID, which is what he was reaching for. Also, if the cop thought that Castile matched a robbery suspect, which was the purported reason he was pulled over for the 49th time in 13 years, then procedure was to have all occupants exit the vehicle while the police are covered with guns drawn, precisely to avoid a situation like this.


we'd need to hear the audio and without it would be tough to know.

Did the cop ask for the ID and then Castile informed him he had a gun and then the cop told him not to reach for it?

That is the only thing that makes sense since the cops would have disarmed Castile themselves before caring about ID. Did this happen in quick succession or was Castile ignoring commands or distracted in any other way?

Did the cop think he matched the robbery suspect or did he match a vague description of the local population?---so I looked up the demographics of the area and:

The racial makeup of the city was 90.58% White, 2.06% African American.

So, I am just speculating of course, but that leaves me to believe he should have done a high risk stop. So why didn't he?

The town has 8,000 people in it and is pretty well off--it would be interesting to see how many stops like that he has done, maybe none. In contrast, a friend of mine who is a cop worked in Maryvale, Phx, AZ and would do multiple a night on illegal gang members.

A tangent, but I agree the situation should have been avoided with a proper stop and the cop should be fired and the department should look into hiring only cops with experience that they won't get in saint Anthony, MN.

But really all that matters criminally would be if Philando was asked to stop reaching at the vicinity of his gun and he didn't. This also happened the day after the Alton Sterling shooting so I wonder if that had an impact on either men.

I would be interested in his GF's detailed description or testimony of events because the video was vague. She is being charged with a 3 on 1 attack with her wielding a hammer against another lady and then driving back with bear mace to spray the already seriously injured victim--so I don't know how credible I would find her though.
RE: RE: RE: I can't express an educated  
RC02XX : 6/17/2017 6:05 pm : link
In comment 13502885 rebel yell said:
Quote:
In comment 13502756 Chris in Philly said:


Quote:


In comment 13502605 rebel yell said:


Quote:


opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.



Because their job is hard or stressful is not an excuse...



Did I use the word excuse or try to absolve the officer? No, I didn't. I urged those who criticize to try a shoot/don't shoot simulator. If you've never been in imminent danger, felt you adrenaline flow, or been shot at....you're clueless. I have and I know the feeling.


I have and I have been in my share of firefights as well and know how difficult those situations are. However, as a law abiding and tax paying citizen, I feel that it is our place to criticize when we believe that there is injustice. This police officer may be a great guy or not, and it doesn't matter. All that matter is that his actions led to another man's death needlessly. And because he's an officer of the law, he is given a pass. There is something so wrong with that.
RE: the way I understand it  
GMenLTS : 6/17/2017 6:51 pm : link
In comment 13502937 fkap said:
Quote:
the cop asked for ID, the guy said he had a gun, at which point the cop said 'don't reach', and the guy reached.

maybe procedures weren't followed. that doesn't equal up to murder.


It wasn't a murder charge. That's a pretty important part here. This completely fit the bill for all 3 charges. 2nd degree manslaughter, and two counts of intentional discharging of firearm that endangers safety. Remember, girlfriend AND child were both in the car. And this guy ripped off 7 shots.

So that said. If he'd been convicted, Yanez could have been sentenced to 10 years in prison and fined $20,000 on the manslaughter charge and five years and fined $5,000 on each of the other charges.

God knows the judge could have lessened the sentence.

Unfortunately, we'll never know. All we get to know is that at this point, white or black, if a cop shoots and kills you in this country, the south park defense of 'it's coming right for us' basically gets you off the hook most of the time.

People aren't asking for cops to be hanged here. But I think a lot of folks are right to wonder where the fuck the justice is.

I sure as hell am.
I don't think cops should be sent away for long prison terms  
Vanzetti : 6/17/2017 7:05 pm : link
for acts committed in the line of duty unless it is compounded by planting evidence.

I think if there were lesser penalties, juries would be more likely to convict. Yanez should not be a field officer. you just can't panic the way he did and be trusted or effective

RE: RE: RE: RE: I can't express an educated  
rebel yell : 6/17/2017 7:13 pm : link
In comment 13502944 RC02XX said:
Quote:
In comment 13502885 rebel yell said:


Quote:


In comment 13502756 Chris in Philly said:


Quote:


In comment 13502605 rebel yell said:


Quote:


opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.



Because their job is hard or stressful is not an excuse...



Did I use the word excuse or try to absolve the officer? No, I didn't. I urged those who criticize to try a shoot/don't shoot simulator. If you've never been in imminent danger, felt you adrenaline flow, or been shot at....you're clueless. I have and I know the feeling.



I have and I have been in my share of firefights as well and know how difficult those situations are. However, as a law abiding and tax paying citizen, I feel that it is our place to criticize when we believe that there is injustice. This police officer may be a great guy or not, and it doesn't matter. All that matter is that his actions led to another man's death needlessly. And because he's an officer of the law, he is given a pass. There is something so wrong with that.


Given a pass? Unless I'm mistaken, he went in from of a jury of his peers and was found not guilty, but he was also dismissed from the police force. I don't see that as a pass. I agree fully with your comment we should seek justice. That's a given.
RE: RE: RE: I can't express an educated  
Chris in Philly : 6/17/2017 7:19 pm : link
In comment 13502885 rebel yell said:
Quote:
In comment 13502756 Chris in Philly said:


Quote:


In comment 13502605 rebel yell said:


Quote:


opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.



Because their job is hard or stressful is not an excuse...



Did I use the word excuse or try to absolve the officer? No, I didn't. I urged those who criticize to try a shoot/don't shoot simulator. If you've never been in imminent danger, felt you adrenaline flow, or been shot at....you're clueless. I have and I know the feeling.


I don't care. He panicked and killed someone. He's a professional trained for exactly this kind of situation. If he could not handle it, he should not have been on the street.
Something else that should also be considered  
eclipz928 : 6/17/2017 7:42 pm : link
"Garfield [crime lab supervisor] also testified about the trajectory of the seven bullets that Yanez fired into Castile’s car. The driver’s side seat belt, seat, front armrest and back seat all sustained damage. One bullet hit about 2 inches from the edge of the arm rest on the passenger side where Reynolds was sitting. Another struck about 16 inches from where her daughter was strapped into her car seat in the back seat."

The officer's reaction in this incident not only resulted in Castile's death but also endangered the lives of two other people, including a young child.
Summary of witness testimony - ( New Window )
RE: RE: RE: RE: I can't express an educated  
rebel yell : 6/17/2017 7:47 pm : link
In comment 13502969 Chris in Philly said:
Quote:
In comment 13502885 rebel yell said:


Quote:


In comment 13502756 Chris in Philly said:


Quote:


In comment 13502605 rebel yell said:


Quote:


opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.



Because their job is hard or stressful is not an excuse...



Did I use the word excuse or try to absolve the officer? No, I didn't. I urged those who criticize to try a shoot/don't shoot simulator. If you've never been in imminent danger, felt you adrenaline flow, or been shot at....you're clueless. I have and I know the feeling.



I don't care. He panicked and killed someone. He's a professional trained for exactly this kind of situation. If he could not handle it, he should not have been on the street.


What makes you think he couldn't handle it? He did what he felt he needed to do and a jury agreed with his action.
Yanez said he smelled weed coming from the car and saw smoke.  
shockeyisthebest8056 : 6/17/2017 8:59 pm : link
The other officer said he did not.

Yanez said he saw Castille gripping the pistol.
The other officer never saw the gun.

Yanez said he "Didn't know where the gun was" to his supervisor, which was caught on police audio.
Yanez later said on the stand "what he meant was" he didn't know where the gun was initially, but then he saw it in Castile's hand.

Prosecutors asked Yanez why he didn't initially tell investigators about Castile handling the gun with as much certainty as he was now doing at the trial. They pointed out he used words like, "Gripping something"... "It looked like"... "It appeared"... without ever definitively saying it was a gun.

The prosecutor's toxicology expert said it was impossible to tell when Castille had last smoked weed since that test doesn't work properly on blood samples from a decomposing body. The defense toxicology expert said his test indicated Castile had just smoked weed within 2 hours of his death. He later admitted that most experts say postmortem blood tests are unreliable and that this was the first time they ever used that test on a sample from a dead body.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: I can't express an educated  
David in LA : 6/17/2017 9:55 pm : link
In comment 13502975 rebel yell said:
Quote:
In comment 13502969 Chris in Philly said:


Quote:


In comment 13502885 rebel yell said:


Quote:


In comment 13502756 Chris in Philly said:


Quote:


In comment 13502605 rebel yell said:


Quote:


opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.



Because their job is hard or stressful is not an excuse...



Did I use the word excuse or try to absolve the officer? No, I didn't. I urged those who criticize to try a shoot/don't shoot simulator. If you've never been in imminent danger, felt you adrenaline flow, or been shot at....you're clueless. I have and I know the feeling.



I don't care. He panicked and killed someone. He's a professional trained for exactly this kind of situation. If he could not handle it, he should not have been on the street.



What makes you think he couldn't handle it? He did what he felt he needed to do and a jury agreed with his action.


Because someone is dead, you dolt. It was completely avoidable. If someone is riding passenger, with their kids, and they disclose that they have a firearm, I don't think the officer was in immediate danger. You bootlickers are something else.
RE: RE: RE: The cop shot Philando because he said he feared for his life  
halfback20 : 6/17/2017 10:10 pm : link
In comment 13502803 eclipz928 said:
Quote:
In comment 13502736 halfback20 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502695 JerryNYG said:


Quote:


Philando's marijuana use (which the officer did not know of at the time) was given as at least a partial explanation for why the officer was justified in his shooting.

How does that make any sense?

You don't have to wonder why large segments of the population do not trust law enforcement. It is an awful shame because communities need good policing and the police need trust and partnership with the communities to do a good job.

The ongoing violence without consequence undermines that partnership.



Ongoing violence? In the grand scheme of things these shootings are very rare.


That depends on your definition of "rare". In 2016, police shot and killed a total of at least 957 people (and 991 in 2015). Obviously that number doesn't account for how justified it was to use lethal force, but in comparison police in the UK shot and killed a total of 23 people . . . over a span of 10 years.

Of course there are huge differences between the US and the UK, particularly in regards to culture and population size, but the annual rate of police-related shootings should in no way minimize the circumstances surrounding each individual case. Any loss of life is tragic, and we as citizens should be particularly vigilant when that loss of life is caused by someone holding a position of authority.


Considering police have millions of contacts with people every year, less than 1000 is what id call rare.
RE: RE: RE: RE: The cop shot Philando because he said he feared for his life  
GMenLTS : 6/17/2017 11:52 pm : link
In comment 13503017 halfback20 said:
Quote:
In comment 13502803 eclipz928 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502736 halfback20 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502695 JerryNYG said:


Quote:


Philando's marijuana use (which the officer did not know of at the time) was given as at least a partial explanation for why the officer was justified in his shooting.

How does that make any sense?

You don't have to wonder why large segments of the population do not trust law enforcement. It is an awful shame because communities need good policing and the police need trust and partnership with the communities to do a good job.

The ongoing violence without consequence undermines that partnership.



Ongoing violence? In the grand scheme of things these shootings are very rare.


That depends on your definition of "rare". In 2016, police shot and killed a total of at least 957 people (and 991 in 2015). Obviously that number doesn't account for how justified it was to use lethal force, but in comparison police in the UK shot and killed a total of 23 people . . . over a span of 10 years.

Of course there are huge differences between the US and the UK, particularly in regards to culture and population size, but the annual rate of police-related shootings should in no way minimize the circumstances surrounding each individual case. Any loss of life is tragic, and we as citizens should be particularly vigilant when that loss of life is caused by someone holding a position of authority.



Considering police have millions of contacts with people every year, less than 1000 is what id call rare.


And yet, it's still too fucking much.

Period.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: I can't express an educated  
rebel yell : 6/18/2017 6:59 am : link
In comment 13503016 David in LA said:
Quote:
In comment 13502975 rebel yell said:


Quote:


In comment 13502969 Chris in Philly said:


Quote:


In comment 13502885 rebel yell said:


Quote:


In comment 13502756 Chris in Philly said:


Quote:


In comment 13502605 rebel yell said:


Quote:


opinion because I didn't sit through the trial. I only saw the video. However, I do encourage those who criticize and convict without having sat through the proceedings to try a day or two in LE, or immerse yourself in a shoot/don't shoot training simulator.



Because their job is hard or stressful is not an excuse...



Did I use the word excuse or try to absolve the officer? No, I didn't. I urged those who criticize to try a shoot/don't shoot simulator. If you've never been in imminent danger, felt you adrenaline flow, or been shot at....you're clueless. I have and I know the feeling.



I don't care. He panicked and killed someone. He's a professional trained for exactly this kind of situation. If he could not handle it, he should not have been on the street.



What makes you think he couldn't handle it? He did what he felt he needed to do and a jury agreed with his action.



Because someone is dead, you dolt. It was completely avoidable. If someone is riding passenger, with their kids, and they disclose that they have a firearm, I don't think the officer was in immediate danger. You bootlickers are something else.


Nice response. Shrill, hysterical...attack someone with a different point of view. Did you watch the entire trial? Do you have any clue what really happened? If you say yes, you're a liar.
Shocking!!!  
T-Bone : 6/18/2017 8:50 am : link
This quote sums it up perfectly...

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The cop shot Philando because he said he feared for his life  
halfback20 : 6/18/2017 9:51 am : link
In comment 13503059 GMenLTS said:
Quote:
In comment 13503017 halfback20 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502803 eclipz928 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502736 halfback20 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502695 JerryNYG said:


Quote:


Philando's marijuana use (which the officer did not know of at the time) was given as at least a partial explanation for why the officer was justified in his shooting.

How does that make any sense?

You don't have to wonder why large segments of the population do not trust law enforcement. It is an awful shame because communities need good policing and the police need trust and partnership with the communities to do a good job.

The ongoing violence without consequence undermines that partnership.



Ongoing violence? In the grand scheme of things these shootings are very rare.


That depends on your definition of "rare". In 2016, police shot and killed a total of at least 957 people (and 991 in 2015). Obviously that number doesn't account for how justified it was to use lethal force, but in comparison police in the UK shot and killed a total of 23 people . . . over a span of 10 years.

Of course there are huge differences between the US and the UK, particularly in regards to culture and population size, but the annual rate of police-related shootings should in no way minimize the circumstances surrounding each individual case. Any loss of life is tragic, and we as citizens should be particularly vigilant when that loss of life is caused by someone holding a position of authority.



Considering police have millions of contacts with people every year, less than 1000 is what id call rare.



And yet, it's still too fucking much.

Period.


99.9 % of those shootings are justified. Should more police die? Not defend themselves?
some will always find a reason to  
bc4life : 6/18/2017 9:58 am : link
justify these shootings, some will always argue that these shootings are unjustified. It's a difficult job and not all people are cut out for it. Use of deadly force situations are extremely rare, but if and when they arise - you have to be up to the challenge.

Person said he had a gun and a permit - officer feared for his life. IMO, this is similar to the Tulsa case, fear may well have been unreasonable. if you listen to police officer's voice during the event - does not seem in control of his emotions, very excited, very stressed. The fear has to be what a reasonable officer would think constituted an imminent threat of death or serious injury. Talk about finding pot in his system is nothing more than dirtying up the victim.

I was surprised and disappointed by this and the Tulsa verdicts.

RE: South Carolina - in state trial, one juror refused to convict and resulted in hung jury. he pleaded guilty at the federal trial
halfback20  
bc4life : 6/18/2017 10:03 am : link
That's a false dichotomy - managing these encounters in a tactically safe and professional manner is the goal. It's not a case of if I am in fear I shoot.

If you're in fear - how about waiting for a backup and like Deej said - conduct a felony traffic stop?

Remember, police officers voluntarily take these positions, fully aware that at some point they will be in harms way.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The cop shot Philando because he said he feared for his life  
eclipz928 : 6/18/2017 2:02 pm : link
In comment 13503137 halfback20 said:
Quote:
In comment 13503059 GMenLTS said:


Quote:


In comment 13503017 halfback20 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502803 eclipz928 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502736 halfback20 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502695 JerryNYG said:


Quote:


Philando's marijuana use (which the officer did not know of at the time) was given as at least a partial explanation for why the officer was justified in his shooting.

How does that make any sense?

You don't have to wonder why large segments of the population do not trust law enforcement. It is an awful shame because communities need good policing and the police need trust and partnership with the communities to do a good job.

The ongoing violence without consequence undermines that partnership.



Ongoing violence? In the grand scheme of things these shootings are very rare.


That depends on your definition of "rare". In 2016, police shot and killed a total of at least 957 people (and 991 in 2015). Obviously that number doesn't account for how justified it was to use lethal force, but in comparison police in the UK shot and killed a total of 23 people . . . over a span of 10 years.

Of course there are huge differences between the US and the UK, particularly in regards to culture and population size, but the annual rate of police-related shootings should in no way minimize the circumstances surrounding each individual case. Any loss of life is tragic, and we as citizens should be particularly vigilant when that loss of life is caused by someone holding a position of authority.



Considering police have millions of contacts with people every year, less than 1000 is what id call rare.



And yet, it's still too fucking much.

Period.



99.9 % of those shootings are justified. Should more police die? Not defend themselves?

. . . precisely the kind of flawed thinking that has lead to the acquittal of all of these cops recently - the idea that the life of a police officer is somehow "more valuable" than all others.

In most of the recent high profile cases with video evidence - Eric Garner, Walter Scott, Tamir Rice, Terence Crutcher, Philando Castile - it was found to be conclusive that the officers were in no actual imminent danger.

We all want our police officers to be as safe as they can be while in the line of duty, but we should also be demanding that our law enforcement only use lethal force when the threat is clear, not just perceived. No one should ever end up dead because of a hunch.
Garner was not a gunfire case  
bc4life : 6/19/2017 5:08 pm : link
RE: Price - problem in that case was they pulled up right in front of Rice and created a split second decision situation unnecessarily. And, Dispatch Center failed to convey report that gun may have been replica.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The cop shot Philando because he said he feared for his life  
WideRight : 6/19/2017 5:32 pm : link
In comment 13503137 halfback20 said:
Quote:
In comment 13503059 GMenLTS said:


Quote:


In comment 13503017 halfback20 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502803 eclipz928 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502736 halfback20 said:


Quote:


In comment 13502695 JerryNYG said:


Quote:


Philando's marijuana use (which the officer did not know of at the time) was given as at least a partial explanation for why the officer was justified in his shooting.

How does that make any sense?

You don't have to wonder why large segments of the population do not trust law enforcement. It is an awful shame because communities need good policing and the police need trust and partnership with the communities to do a good job.

The ongoing violence without consequence undermines that partnership.



Ongoing violence? In the grand scheme of things these shootings are very rare.


That depends on your definition of "rare". In 2016, police shot and killed a total of at least 957 people (and 991 in 2015). Obviously that number doesn't account for how justified it was to use lethal force, but in comparison police in the UK shot and killed a total of 23 people . . . over a span of 10 years.

Of course there are huge differences between the US and the UK, particularly in regards to culture and population size, but the annual rate of police-related shootings should in no way minimize the circumstances surrounding each individual case. Any loss of life is tragic, and we as citizens should be particularly vigilant when that loss of life is caused by someone holding a position of authority.



Considering police have millions of contacts with people every year, less than 1000 is what id call rare.



And yet, it's still too fucking much.

Period.



99.9 % of those shootings are justified. Should more police die? Not defend themselves?



I think this is it. Like any quarternary event, Civilian shot/shoot or Cop shot shoot, the errors should be equally distributed. As it is now, the preponderance lethal errors falls upon the civilians, who by and large still have the presumption of innocence. Since the errors are so heavily skewed, one side is natrally going to be very resistant to change anything.
Same shit as always  
Sonic Youth : 6/19/2017 7:12 pm : link
Same apologists (e.g. madcow who has never uttered one thing that my imply any level of fault by a cop at any point -- yeah, such nuance, let's trust his judgement), same very-right-of-center talking points from a demographic I figure skews older, victim blaming, same arguments from those on the other side as well.

Might as well ban these threads along with political threads.

Honestly, I have no idea how anyone is surprised. Police are rarely convicted for shootings. Let's set aside whether you agree or disagree with the convictions, and all admit they are never convicted.

So what are the people who think this shooting was okay aiming for? The mere fact these judgements are criticized you compels you to take up the metaphorical arms? The system already acts how you want it to - police are rarely ever convicted for shootings/killings/murders, regardless of how controversial, and all effort this decade to bring greater accountability has failed.

You guys win!
Link - ( New Window )
And before madcow accuses me of being the polar opposite of him  
Sonic Youth : 6/19/2017 7:13 pm : link
and always blaming cops, that's 100% false and my posting history will show that.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Show All |  Next>>
Back to the Corner