Oregon shooting of Mr Lavoy UP CLOSE & Higher Res!! (won't get better than this I bet)

I dated a cop for several months. She liked to hang out with other cops, both police and sheriff( DAs too), so that's what we did. I observed them disobeying the law constantly. Im not referring to minor infractions either. The majority of them, that I met, behaved as if they were not just the law, but above it

a reply to: Jakal26

My bad! I was thinking of the dude that got killed in Ferguson , Mo. Getting my incidents and names mixed up.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

Please, they have just as much a reason to lie as the shooters, if not more. The cops don't need to say he was reaching for a gun, they just need to say they thought he was, and it sure looked like that's what happened to me. We can SEE the shooting. You believe two people with every reason to lie more than your own eyes. Problem with authority? Confirmation bias?

Witnesses are notoriously unreliable, even if they don't have a very good reason to make up BS like these two.

I've gotten a fair amount of bootlicker comments, but I really do try to view these things objectively. I REALLY hate bad cops and have no problem calling them out. I don't have a horse in this race, but to me it certainly appears the gentleman did a faux surrender, then went for a gun, he doesn't appear to be clutching at a wound, he appears to be dicking with his jacket. Considering past behavior, it doesn't seem at all unreasonable that he may have decided to try and escalate.

a reply to: visitedbythem

Awesome story bro....one I don't doubt a bit.
But if you cannot see how pointless or invalid and off topic that post is in regards to the OP....well, I'm just gonna tell you, it's WAAAAAYY off topic.

Well maybe the police should have gone into ferguson and started shooting people who reached toward their jackets

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Flatfish

Yeah but according to the FBI the fun was in his pocket which is on his jacket which was pulled away from his body where his other hand was on his body probably checking a gunshot.

That's what I see.

ah
those are called delusions
they are..... unfortunately fairly common

a reply to: Domo1

it certainly appears the gentleman did a faux surrender, then went for a gun, he doesn't appear to be clutching at a wound, he appears to be dicking with his jacket.

Someone the other day posted a vid of a [supposed] daesh fighter taking a .50 cal round in the gut and claimed that it was "evidence" that Finicum was "clutching a gun shot wound"....now, obviously, the [supposed] daesh fighter instantly buckled over and hit the dirt, but this was their "proof"....I couldn't help laughing and just staying out of that one. It was ridiculous.

Finicum looks nothing like someone clutching a gun shot wound. No where freakin near it.
The straws they are grasping at are non-existent.

(P.S...there are those now claiming the whole video is "fake" because "no blood"....yeah, they're going there. I called that one from moment one, but I'm sure a lot of us did)

a reply to: visitedbythem

Annnnd you're still so far off topic it's ridiculous.
What is your point?

You really telling me you cannot see him reaching, not just once but multiple freakin' times, into his pocket?
Really?

Umkay then....have fun with your delusions.

a reply to: Jakal26 I disagree. The cops I met were very paranoid. They were not there to serve and protect. They easily could have had a bean bag gun ready at all check points and hit him as he run. The intent is clear. They didnt want to drop him alive. He was dead because they intended to use deadly force and thats what they did. They did it because they feel they are above the law and if you looked into their personal lives you woould more then likely see drugs, serious alcohol use, abuse,sexual nonsense and all kinds of things I saw first hand

a reply to: visitedbythem

One doesn't have to be "paranoid" to see Finicum reaching for his gun.
One also doesn't have to be "paranoid" to shoot Finicum in this situation.

.....yeah, they should just use "bean bag rounds", that'll teach em to attempt to pull out a gun.

Are you serious? (Wait, don't answer that)

He was dead because they intended to use deadly force and thats what they did.

Well, apparently, they suck at their intended goal because Finicum is the only one dead right now.
Which leads us to the next question, if they were so hell bent on murdering these people, how come the rest of them (that surrendered) are still breathing?

Oh, but I know, I know...you're going to tell us about the "over 100" bullets they "fired into the truck" now....without a shred of proof of that either.
Color me not surprised, or amused....

a reply to: visitedbythem

I'm not sure it was a .50, no. And yeah, I've shot a few of them in my day too, so I know what they are capable of.

The same person posted another video of a teen being shot at an atm with a much smaller weapon. The kid basically buckled over and hit the dirt immediately, but to them it was somehow "proof" that the kid was reacting like Finicum supposedly did in the video we see here.

I'd imagine the vids are still up in that thread right now, though I won't be bothered to go gather them and wouldn't post them anyways because I refuse to exploit those like said kid to attempt to make some "point" here, even if it is just to show those who believe that bs how wrong they are. Hell, they'd just claim it as "proof" as is already fully evident amongst the strongly biased here.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Charlie... the way your mind works is God's own private mystery.
Of course it was murder.
Those cops and feds set up the situation and planned to kill somebody.

a reply to: anon72

I saw a clip earlier today from a retired cop who broke the whole thing down. The cops made the confrontation possible just by the way they parked their vehicles on the hwy. And, without a gun actually visable....

They may get off crimially, but civilly, they will most likely be found at fault there. I will get the video and post it here."

I'm not making any predictions, but I did find this ruling from the 9th Circuit Court for the western states, thus including Oregon:

Where a police officer “intentionally or recklessly provokes a violent confrontation, if the provocation is an independent Fourth Amendment violation, he maybe held liable for his otherwise defensive use of deadlyforce.” Billington v. Smith, 292 F.3d 1177, 1189 (9th Cir.2002). If an officer intentionally or recklessly violates a suspect's constitutional rights, then the violation may be a provocation creating a situation in which force was necessary and such force would have been legal but for the initial violation.

Provoking a Confrontation and the Fourth Amendment

Billington v Smith

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: onequestion

I see him getting out of the truck, putting his hands out and then NOT getting on his knees or laying down flat offering no target or threat.

I then see him walk away from the truck, not with his arms in the air but rather extended out to his sides as if he could be holding and pointing a gun. This waving of his arms were at times pointed directly at the closest officers.

I see him reaching into his coat and then bringing out his arms and holding them in such a way as to give an appearence of having drawn a gun and then taking aim with it.

Never once does he drop to the snow in surrender. Until he is shot, he continued to demonstrate physical actions that can be easily considered aggressive.

Toss in the fact that he had bragged that he would not be taken alive. He had bragged that he was fully armed and that he would use those arms in defense of his life.

As far as the officer who shot him, well, I understand that he was local. If we discount the concept that he was a slavering murderer itching to kill someone we can see the possibility of something else.

Chances are that officer had never been in an action like this. I don't suppose there have been many gun battles up there in Burns that he has had experience with. Chances are he had been prepped on the nature of the driver, that he was armed and dangerous, that he had bragged about not being taken alive and that he had already run from the first stop down the road.

It is just as easy to consider that this cop was in fear of his life and acted to defend himself.

that's good that the shooter cop was so on alert from the briefing!

nothing like good training for gun toting law enforcers, right?

i wonder if he was told the dude was a vampire too?

and who did lavoy kill again? i missed that part where it's ok to just shoot him.

I may be seeing things as the video still isn't clear, but it appears at 00:15 that he has something in his right hand. I can't tell. But I will say this, they knew he was armed and the furtive movements that appear to be an effort to get to a weapon would have made me shoot him. It does not take someone but a second to pull and fire a weapon. When they say hands up, you do it and don't pull out your wallet or anything else ESPECIALLY if it is a felony stop which it was.

The rounds fired at the truck were obviously pepper ball rounds as you can see the white powder explode off them. The windshield looks like paper on the dash board to me. Now it would be good to camouflage real fire, but I doubt they fired into the truck. However, two panicking women who had never been in a shootout would assume nonlethal rounds were real gunfire and say they opened up on the truck.

If it was wrongful death, I doubt the government would release the video. The plane was at a distance of 1.5Km if I recall from the other video which is pretty standard for a plane. It is one of the reasons people don't know they are on camera. One would think the officers knew the stop was being survielled though.

However, the government themselves will be the arbiters of any prosecution and they could care less about a civil suit for wrongful death as it is tax payer money anyway. They could put it out as a warning to citizens that if you try to stand up to the business end of authority you will be killed. With all the anti-government fervor in the country I could see some bureaucrat thinking this will quell any idea of going against the feds land grab out west. I think it will backfire in the long run if that is the thinking.

Anyway, at this point I have to reserve final judgement until any further information is released. At this point, I think his statement about dying rather than going to jail was a self fulfilling prophecy of events on that day.

originally posted by: Jakal26
a reply to: visitedbythem

One doesn't have to be "paranoid" to see Finicum reaching for his gun.
One also doesn't have to be "paranoid" to shoot Finicum in this situation.

.....yeah, they should just use "bean bag rounds", that'll teach em to attempt to pull out a gun.

Are you serious? (Wait, don't answer that)

He was dead because they intended to use deadly force and thats what they did.

Well, apparently, they suck at their intended goal because Finicum is the only one dead right now.
Which leads us to the next question, if they were so hell bent on murdering these people, how come the rest of them (that surrendered) are still breathing?

Oh, but I know, I know...you're going to tell us about the "over 100" bullets they "fired into the truck" now....without a shred of proof of that either.
Color me not surprised, or amused....

So from a grainy scratchy vid with no audio you worked all that out.....lol

You have no proof either you are talking out of your ass...

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Hey burgerbuddy. I guess you have proof otherwise huh? I'm speculating here from what I have seen of the video and what I have heard from reading these boards. I offered no proof above, only observation. My observation is not a pronouncement of fact. Rather a plausible interpretation from limited information we have been presented with.

You however appear to have made up your mind on exactly how this all played out yet I can suppose that the information you have available to you for a rational and considered understanding of it all is far superior to my own.
However I think not. Rather, your leap to invective innuendo indicates a lack of ''proof' of your position and are seeking to pump up your argument by wild accusations.

I believe the views expressed in this article reflect what's likely to occur in the investigation:
bearingarms.com - LaVoy Finicum Was Not Murdered. He Forced Oregon Police To Shoot Him....

LaVoy Finicum was not ambushed.

LaVoy Finicum was not murdered.

LaVoy Finicum intentionally disobeyed lawful orders from uniformed law enforcement officers and reached for a weapon. This is commonly known as “suicide by cop.”

Mr. Finicum has long stated that he would not be taken alive. His decision to reach for a weapon on his person forced the Oregon State Police officer (or officers) to fire on Mr. Finicum to defend his own life. This was a textbook defensive gun use by the officer (or officers). His hand motions towards his weapon are very similar to the motions we saw in the enhanced security camera footage from the death of Tamir Rice. Both rice and Finicum made what is called a “furtive gesture,” or a movement that reasonable people in that circumstance would agree is what appears to be an attempt to grab a weapon.

It's also clearly shown on the link Lavoy carried a 9mm in a shoulder holster on his left side. In hte video he's clearly seen reaching at his left side. This is strong evidence to justify the officers firing on him.

I have listened to the testimony from Shawna and Victory, but I remaine unconvinced the shots they say hit their vehicle--before Finicum exited--were actually live ammunition and not nonlethal rounds. Additionally, it's unclear to me whether either claims Finicum was shot or shot at before his arms lowered. Victoria claims there were bullet holes near the windshield where Finicum was just before he exited the vehicle. She claims she heard 3 shots when his arms were up and then she lowered her gaze to avoid gunfire and heard several more after, apparently killing him. She says they were shooting at him later when he was clearly dead. Claims there were FBI snipers in camo on the treeline. Shawna claims Finicum may have been wearing a bullet proof vest.

The only question is whether he was shot or shot at when his hands were up. Autopsy and examination of the body might reveal the shots and where they came from. Note this from the link:

If the autopsy shows that Finicum has no shots at all to the front, then the popular conspiracy theory that he was shot, causing hi mto stumble and lower his hands while facing the officers, will have been conclusively debunked.

These threads seem to predominate with the same very negative posters.....
The proof is still out there for either side....
Till some real clear footage and some audio shows up. well be arguing till the cows come home...
Perhaps that too is an intended consequence....