It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Shawna Cox and Victoria Sharp's Interviews Match Precisely- LaVoy Finicum WAS Murdered in Oregon

page: 10
66
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 03:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Indigo5


Thanks for the reminder of the pointlessness of discussing facts with someone who communicates with all the credibility of a 4th grade bully troll.


But I do agree that it's pretty incredible to treat armed and trained officers of the law with every conceivable advantage and resource at their disposal as poor little helpless babies... or perhaps fourth graders?

All while imagining that one middle-aged man is the big bad boogeyman that's going to bring them all down singlehandedly.



Strange...Are you asserting that LaVoy was unfamiliar with guns? incapable of aiming and firing one? Or that somehow a bullet fired by a "middle-aged man" is much less lethal than a bullet fired by a police officer. Also strange that you think the police thought he could potentially "bring them all down singlehandedly"? That was not their concern. He was close enough to potentially kill either of those officers...and he was no stranger to firearms...

You have moved far enough away from any substance based discussion and seem to have retreated to pure trolling and hyperbole. I provided factual evidence both from video and Victoria's words verbatim.


edit on 2-2-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5


You have moved far enough away from any substance based discussion and seem to have retreated to pure trolling and hyperbole. I provided factual evidence both from video and Victoria's words verbatim.


I will make this real simple.

If you are going to suggest/imply/assert that law enforcement is not solely responsible for HOW THEY CHOSE to attempt to apprehend Mr. Finicum, I am going to state otherwise. They were in complete control.

If you are going to suggest/imply/assert that this was not an ambush, I am going to state otherwise. It was an ambush, by definition.

If you are going to suggest/imply/assert that officers had to kill Mr. Finicum because they were afraid that he might be a danger to them because of proximity -- not because he actually had a weapon in hand aimed at anyone -- then I am going to state they shouldn't have created that situation.

If you are going to suggest/imply/assert that anyone had the right to kill Mr. Finicum, I am going to state otherwise, invoking our natural inalienable and Constitutional right to life.

If you are going to suggest/imply/assert that you know what Mr. Finicum was thinking and/or intending, I am going to state that is impossible and you can not know that.

If you are going to suggest/imply/assert that a low rez video shot from a distance with no audio and limited/obscured perspective is conclusive, I am going to state that it is not.

And I'm the one who has moved away from "substance based" discussion? I'm the troll? Puhleeze.

Our words will stand on their own merit.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Wondering if this has been mentioned or not. In all the photos of Finicum his handgun has been holstered on his right side, in the video it appears he is grabbing at his left side, if that's the case what is he grabbing at?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   
You do realize they never intended him to get to that final road block. They tried to stop him a lot earlier. He already blew through the stop avoiding the spike strips. They hop in there cars follow him driver of the jeep decides to stop. He takes off again. The state troopers road block was the last ditch effort. By then he has shown he isn't going to cooperate with them. His choices led to the final result.

PS there is a hi res version and you clearly see him reaching for something
edit on 2/2/16 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

I believe most of us are angry. But no one has taken my gun, or property, I still get to vote,we can protest. I draw social security, never had debt, which I suspect is the real motive here. Land wars are stupid. Voting for good people and sensible zoning laws is fruitful.

Most Wars That have been fought Have been LAND WARS.
How do you think we have what we have now ?
LAND WARS

Read a bit of WAR History.
That should catch you up to date.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr


You do realize they never intended him to get to that final road block.


No, I don't know that. And neither do you. Neither do either of us know if that was precisely their intention, thus firing at him during the initial stop.

Other than being told that he was commanded to "surrender," we have absolutely no idea what transpired between the LEOs and Finicum. How exactly was he supposed to "surrender?"


By then he has shown he isn't going to cooperate with them.


Most people don't "cooperate" when being shot at. And they are under no obligation to do so.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: dragonridr


You do realize they never intended him to get to that final road block.


No, I don't know that. And neither do you. Neither do either of us know if that was precisely their intention, thus firing at him during the initial stop.

Other than being told that he was commanded to "surrender," we have absolutely no idea what transpired between the LEOs and Finicum. How exactly was he supposed to "surrender?"


By then he has shown he isn't going to cooperate with them.


Most people don't "cooperate" when being shot at. And they are under no obligation to do so.


Same way the other vehicle did pull over and stop. The jeep had not comply at first but then pulled over changing their mind that was a smart move.
edit on 2/2/16 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbo8
Wondering if this has been mentioned or not. In all the photos of Finicum his handgun has been holstered on his right side, in the video it appears he is grabbing at his left side, if that's the case what is he grabbing at?

Maybe this?

image source from 1-20-2016 article
edit on 2/2/2016 by Olivine because: addsourceinfo



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: dragonridr


You do realize they never intended him to get to that final road block.


No, I don't know that. And neither do you. Neither do either of us know if that was precisely their intention, thus firing at him during the initial stop.

Other than being told that he was commanded to "surrender," we have absolutely no idea what transpired between the LEOs and Finicum. How exactly was he supposed to "surrender?"


By then he has shown he isn't going to cooperate with them.


Most people don't "cooperate" when being shot at. And they are under no obligation to do so.


Actually we do know much of what transpired. In addition to the video and witness statements there is an article up on CNN where they interview Ms. Sharp as they are reviewing the video together. Here is a quote from Sharp during the interview as she watches the same video we all have viewed.


"You know, I can't say that he was reaching for a weapon or not," said Sharp.


cnn link



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbo8
Wondering if this has been mentioned or not. In all the photos of Finicum his handgun has been holstered on his right side, in the video it appears he is grabbing at his left side, if that's the case what is he grabbing at?


According to the reports I have seen the 9mm was found in his left coat pocket



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

Okay, I want to try to understand what you are seeing... could you explain what you see in the video? I have not watched it, but as I understand it, the two vehicles are traveling down the highway, one behind the other as opposed to side-by-side. LEOs pull in behind the second vehicle -- not the first vehicle driven by Finicum -- and do they redlight him? Or just give verbal commands for him to pull over? And does the driver pull over to the side of the road? Or does he stop in the lane of travel? Does an officer approach the vehicle? Does it appear they give verbal commands without approaching the vehicle? Can you see an officer addressing them thru a PA horn? How does the surrender of the folks in the second vehicle appear to come about?

As for the front vehicle, which Finicum is driving, at what point do the the LEO vehicles redlight him? Or, if not redlighted, how does it appear they try to pull him over? Approximately how long does it take for him to stop? Does Finicum stop in the middle of the road or pull to the side? Do any officers approach the vehicle? Does it appear an officer addresses him through a PA horn? Does it appear that any officers have their weapons drawn and aimed during this time? Is there anything that tells you he was NOT shot at? Or do you just not see anything indicating that he was shot at? When Mr. Payne exits the vehicle, does he seem to flinch? Duck? Dodge? Dive? Does Mr. Payne close the door behind him? How long between when Mr. Payne exits the vehicle until Mr. Finicum drives away?

Skool me. Tell me what I'm missing. Tell me what I need to know.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: beyondtruth


Actually we do know much of what transpired.


Yes, we do -- much, not all.


In addition to the video and witness statements there is an article up on CNN where they interview Ms. Sharp as they are reviewing the video together.


Thank you for posting the link. This is good news. I will read it.


Here is a quote from Sharp during the interview as she watches the same video we all have viewed.


Good for her -- "I don't know" is the only right answer. No one knows what Mr. Finicum was thinking or intending.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: beyondtruth

Just to add... that link is probably worthy of its own thread. I hope you consider making your own thread for discussion. (And if you don't, someone else might!)

ETA: I take it back. I was wrong. It's not worthy of its own thread. That article just left me with even more questions than answers. But it's good to hear from Ms. Sharp.


edit on 2-2-2016 by Boadicea because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:36 PM
link   
According to the people on scene there were conversations through the window of Finicum vehicle between him and police. They were telling Finicum and the others to surrender. Finicum was yelling that he was going to leave and talk with the local authorities and for the feds/state police to stand down. Ryan Payne at this time got out of the vehicle and surrendered. (Shocker: he is still alive.) There is some conjecture that there were shots fired at the vehicle at this time (during first attempted stop), however there are conflicting statements about this.

Finicum left the scene of the first traffic and the rest is history. This is according to the various accounts given by people inside the vehicle with Finicum



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

You are dense and it is obvious? Did you say the above in my post? It is called paraphrasing. You have been called out on your dishonesty and now you are struggling.

All you did was reinforce my view that he was shot and was possibly clutching wounds.
edit on 2-2-2016 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

The video starts after they all ready avoided spike strips across the road what was going to be the initial stop. Instead they had to jump in the vehicles and follow them. You never asked yourself how law enforcement got behind them on a long winding road?? He went through there first intended stop.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Sorry to disappoint you Boa, but I was already working on the thread, which you can find here, thread

I think that the video is pertinent and that it does reveal some new and interesting things... As a follow up to the thread I just posted I will be posting my analysis of the video by police helicopter of the police chase that led to the death of LaVoy Finicum.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Boadicea

The video starts after they all ready avoided spike strips across the road what was going to be the initial stop. Instead they had to jump in the vehicles and follow them.


So all the LEO were on the side of the highway the two vehicles were traveling in plain sight? And every LEO was on the road outside of their vehicles as the vehicles approached? And rather than pull in behind the vehicles and facilitate a traffic stop in the usual fashion, they chose to put down spike strips and disable the vehicles? But one or both vehicles saw the spike strips and drove around them?

I have never heard anything about that before. What I heard/read is that the LEO vehicles were on a side street, and pulled onto the highway after the vehicles passed.

But that tells me nothing about what you actually see in the video.


You never asked yourself how law enforcement got behind them on a long winding road?? He went through there first intended stop.


I assumed they got behind them by turning the key in the ignition, engaging the engine, putting the car in drive, using the right foot to activate the accelerator and in turn the fuel injection to provide fuel to the engine, and then using the steering wheel to manuever the vehicle onto the highway and position themselves behind them... Am I assuming too much?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: akira131
a reply to: OveRcuRrEnteD

Ok. I don't know that I have much more to add. But I'll ask these questions... is this what we really want? People are acting like this is Lexington and concord but is it really?


I'm going to make one short post and then that's it for me. I'll follow the comments but no replies regardless of the bait dangled.

One word... Uranium. Millions of $$$$$$$$$$$$ are at stake. It's not about protecting the environment or wildlife. It's about promises made by names you'd all recognize. Unless they find a way to intimidate or silence him, the governor of the state will be making national news within just a few days. Utah wants their land back.

ETA:
The environment can't be much of an issue when an open strip mine style operation and yellow cake processing plant are planned!
edit on 2 2 2016 by CornShucker because: self explanatory



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: beyondtruth


Sorry to disappoint you Boa, but I was already working on the thread


Uh oh... you might regret telling me... I might actually be compelled to join in the fray!!!


I think that the video is pertinent and that it does reveal some new and interesting things... As a follow up to the thread I just posted I will be posting my analysis of the video by police helicopter of the police chase that led to the death of LaVoy Finicum.


That did it... now I really do have to go check out these new and interesting things you found...



new topics

top topics



 
66
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join