BREAKING: Dashcam Video Just Released Shows Cop Murder Zachary Hammond

What happened to the good 'ol days when if a cop told you to stop and put up your hands, you complied? I guess I'm just old school where I wouldn't make a run on a cop in my car, especially if I had a gun drawn on me. If everyone thinks cops are so trigger happy, why put them in a position to shoot you, especially if you're in possession of coke and marijuana in your car?

a reply to: UnBreakable
Seems that you are remembering days that never happened....
When was it in the history of the world when teenagers used logic and reason to determine their behavior?
It isn't the teenagers' behavior that has changed so dramatically---it is the cops' behavior. Teenagers have always been stupid from time to time---it's the very nature of an adolescent due to incomplete brain development.
Cops, on the other hand, are supposed to be adults in control of their emotions and behavior. However, if the cop's brain has been fried by drugs---you get this sort of behavior.
Drug test them all and get rid of the druggies in blue. How about we try that instead of attempting the patently impossible---expecting teenagers to think and act logically?

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
Finally the dash cam has been released in the Zachary Hammond case and it looks pretty damning for the cop. Remember this cop said he was coming right at him and had to shoot because he feared for his life.

This kid was 19 years old and is dead over a couple of grams of weed that his girlfriend sold. Also a witness has come forward saying the cops planted evidence under the body then held up his dead hand and gave it a high five.

I guess we can see why they did not want to release the video.

Cop needs to be charged with murder..

eta

a statement from prosecutors .

The past three months have been extremely difficult for the residents of Seneca, its city employees and the 45 members of its police force. While the effects of outside agitators to tear apart our community lingers, we are thankful the investigation has come to an end and shows Lt. Tiller was acting in self-defense. The night of July 26 was a tragic event for this community and I personally will always grieve for the Hammond family. I would like to thank the hard work of the local and state investigators who handled the cases expertly and professionally. I would like to thank Solicitor Adams, who suffered numerous personal attacks, for her diligence. I thank Chief John Covington for his courage and strength during these trying times as he and his family have been repeatedly maligned. I thank our Mayor and City Council for standing with us during this tragedy. It is now time to start healing Seneca.

unbelievable. I cant believe they found this justified. I really think I am going to be sick..

r with his gun drawn as Hammond’s date, Tori Morton, allegedly sold a few grams of marijuana to an undercover cop.

According to Seneca Police Chief John Covington, Hammond drove toward Lt. Tiller in an attempt to murder him. Fearing for his life, Tiller shot Hammond twice at point-blank range killing him. But according to witness statements and Hammond’s autopsy, the teenager was not attempting to run down Tiller in the moments before his death.
Hammond’s autopsy revealed that the teen was shot in the back of his left shoulder and his side.

In a letter from Hammond’s attorney to the FBI, a witness has recently come forward describing officers planting evidence under Hammond’s body and high-fiving his dead hand after the shooting. Although police found no weapon or drugs on Hammond, Chief Covington claims that a white powdery substance was found at the scene.

www.abovetopsecret.com... original thread.

www.wyff4.com...



thefreethoughtproject.com...

"They"... It was not they.

I can't imagine the sheer frustration of being a cop right now. One guy messed up, they all pay for it. What's the point of even trying to be a good cop?

"And Democracy will ALWAYS descend into anarchy." - Niccolo Machiavelli, Plato

Take a statistics class. One million police. Over three hundred million people. We nitpick every death and put an incredible amount of blame on police as a whole.

It's like... It's like we live in this utopian idea of our country, with absolutely no understanding of reality. We apply our morals to things where morals are inherently different.

You know, major opposition of war didn't start until people saw on media thousands of young men lined up in body bags. Major opposition of police didn't start until media started focusing on every death due to police.

Why? Because most of us can't handle it, our moral spectrum is severely different. We're exposed to these things that have always been occurring, and suddenly we turn it into a huge deal.

Hundreds of thousands die in WWII, civilians, soldiers, so many deaths, yet our country stood together.

Ten thousand deaths and thousands of civilian deaths in two countries where the only enemy we have is among those civilians, we raise arms. Because we don't understand, we don't understand reality. Only our idea of America.

Fighting for oil and resources is wrong, fighting for control is wrong. Yes, it is, but that doesn't change the fact that that's the reality of the human race. The fact that each faction has to survive independent of the others.

Don't act like you were there, no, I encourage you to look at that video logically, and then take a step back into the numbers, the statistics.

This kind of thing will happen no matter what, it's sad but you can't fight statistics. What matters is how we react to it. Yes, investigate this guy. But don't create a hype train, don't suddenly oppose the only domestic force on the ground.

Be rational, logical, try to understand. Then be critical with yourself about the reality of it.

Why is it no one wants to ask the question, are we part of the problem? You realize our complete inability to even entertain the idea is pretty damn solid evidence that we are right?

Or do we get to just bow out? If that's your opinion, that's the very problem. We want no responsibility but we want perfect results. That is the utopian idea I'm talking about. Say it outloud, it sounds so inane it's not even funny.

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: UnBreakable
Seems that you are remembering days that never happened....
When was it in the history of the world when teenagers used logic and reason to determine their behavior?
It isn't the teenagers' behavior that has changed so dramatically---it is the cops' behavior. Teenagers have always been stupid from time to time---it's the very nature of an adolescent due to incomplete brain development.
Cops, on the other hand, are supposed to be adults in control of their emotions and behavior. However, if the cop's brain has been fried by drugs---you get this sort of behavior.
Drug test them all and get rid of the druggies in blue. How about we try that instead of attempting the patently impossible---expecting teenagers to think and act logically?

Uh, I was once a "stupid teenager" and was stopped on more than one occasion while drinking beer and smoking joints in the car with my friends. I was the one whose "brain was fried by drugs". Never once did I attempt to flee in my car or be disrespectful to a cop. I manned up and took my punishment. And I remember those days and they did happen. No doubt there's bad cops. There's also youth now who think they're entitled and beyond having to deal with any repercussions of their actions. And you're talking about cop's brains being "fried by drugs"? What about this kid who apparently had coke and marijuana in his car? And the kids who since they were five being put on drugs starting with Ritalin? Sorry I don't agree with your "all cops are bad, everyone is innocent" agenda.

a reply to: UnBreakable

Jump to conclusions much?
Please show me where I said "all cops are bad, everyone is innocent."
You do know that everyone is innocent until proven guilty?

I was a stupid teenager once as well. Just because you and I didn't do stupid stuff like running from the cops doesn't mean that a portion of our peers didn't react inappropriately. But none of my peers were shot by police for stupidity---even if they had booze or weed in the car.
It isn't the teens' behavior that had radically changed---they've always done stupid-squared. It is the cops' behavior that has changed. Never once in my youth, or during my children's youth, did cops come at a car they believed contained illegal substances with guns drawn, ready to shoot.
The War on Drugs changed their behavior because it gave the departments financial incentives. As always---follow the money.

a reply to: crazyewok

Yeah, but he said "every other civilized country in the western world," not just a tiny country on an island in Europe.

Remember, the world doesn't revolve around either the US or the UK.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: crazyewok

Yeah, but he said "every other civilized country in the western world," not just a tiny country on an island in Europe.

Remember, the world doesn't revolve around either the US or the UK.

Well look at Sweden then? Again they have only a handful of police shooting. When they shoot its for a good reason.

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
Where exactly was he in danger?? He was in about as much danger as anyone walking through a Wal-Mart parking lot with cars backing up.

Hell the kid even drove up on the curb to try and avoid this jackass. Some people are effing retarded.

Your ideological blinders keep you from seeing the facts, or maybe it's a lack of being able to put yourself in that situation, or maybe you just don't know how law enforcement is trained to handle situations like this--hell, I don't know why you can't see the possible danger, but it's there, whether your eyes can process the information through your brain or not.

The kid drove up on the curb because he couldn't back up and had no other choice in his attempt to flee.

And yes, some people are effing retarded, like those who try to flee from cops and steer their vehicle in an officer's direction, whether or not operating the vehicle in that way was with intent to harm the officer.

ETA: Also, people get injured and killed by getting hit or run over by cars in parking lots, so I don't know why you chose that analogy, but it was terrible if you thought it aligned with your attempt at proving me wrong.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

If it's so obvious then perhaps you would be so kind as to specifically explain the danger posed to this officer from his position on the side of this moving vehicle. Unless that car could drive sideways and/or had the turning radius of a forklift then I'd say any danger posed to this officer that he or anyone else claims is 100% fantasy.

And remember we are not dealing with what ifs or could haves. So any scenario which places this officer in front of the vehicle is irrelevant because it didn't happen.

a reply to: Interstellardove



Spot on, although I'm not at all convinced that this officer was in the absolute wrong for firing his firearm.

Could have handled it differently, for sure, but not in the absolute wrong, because procedure and the law dictates that use of deadly force often falls on if the feeling of threat of bodily harm or death at the time was sincere at the time, not whether or not the hindsight opinions of YouTube watchers agree with the officer's reaction at the time.

a reply to: FraggleRock

The fact that you don't even understand the possibility of bodily harm in the video means that anything I say to you will be dismissed. You appear incapable of placing yourself in a similar position and considering how you would react. If you can tell me that you would, 100%, consider yourself to be in a perfectly safe position next to a car that is turning in your direction, driving over a curb, and trying to speed away, then it explains your question to me.

I'm not falling for your lesson in futility.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

In other words you cannot explain what danger was posed to this officer because I'm smart enough to know a car cannot run me over from the side. Carry on then.

a reply to: crazyewok

oh thats just great guys.. lets just tell all the impressionable young men who read ATS that if they # up they shouldnt just get booked and fave it.. lets encourage them that the right decision is to try to get into more trouble and possibly killed.. real nice people.. good job.. i know none of you making a stink about this would have the balls or even the stupidity to run away from a cop who drew his gun on u bc you broke the law... but you feel good about encouraging un educated young men to run off..

a reply to: alienjuggalo

It just blows my mind how people get all caught up in sketchy behavior and make bad decisions and then complain when the police get involved. How about looking at yourself and making changes to your own behavior instead of whining when the strong arm comes down on you.

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: UnBreakable

Jump to conclusions much?
Please show me where I said "all cops are bad, everyone is innocent."

Okay, my bad. You didn't say all cops are "bad", you just want to drug test them all. How about drug testing all young punks in a car during a drug sting? Therefore, the cops will know who has drugs and will try to hit them with a vehicle while fleeing.

From your previous reply:
"Drug test them all and get rid of the druggies in blue".

originally posted by: Generation9
a reply to: alienjuggalo

It just blows my mind how people get all caught up in sketchy behavior and make bad decisions and then complain when the police get involved. How about looking at yourself and making changes to your own behavior instead of whining when the strong arm comes down on you.

a reply to: FraggleRock

In other words, it was explained right in my comment to you, you apparently just don't have the reading comprehension to decipher the passive way it was mentioned.

I did that on purpose, and I got the result I expected.

originally posted by: FraggleRock
a reply to: SlapMonkey

In other words you cannot explain what danger was posed to this officer because I'm smart enough to know a car cannot run me over from the side. Carry on then.

You should be a police academy instructor then since you're obviously more aware to make a split second decision during a drug sting as to whether somebody wants to run you over.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

You explained absolutely nothing. You want to change facts to fit your narrative that this officer was in danger. Video shows him on the side of a moving vehicle, not in danger. You are playing with possibilities rather then facts.

a reply to: tonycodes



What the hell you blabberin on about?

Im not encouraging anything. Here if you run they pick you up later and you get a hefty prison sentence. A hell of a lot better than summary execution, least they get a trial here.