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.

 

Breaking: Lavoy Finicum Tased By OSP Implicates Murder By The Feds

page: 5
30
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Another point I think might have been missed is that no officer shoots a pistol with one hand.
...this is counter intuitive to any and all tactical training, nevermind the fact that he was "shooting" in the direction of other officers. Add that with the fact that he reaches to his right holster immediately after and this looks alot more like a tasing.

...it sure would be interesting to know if this officer is right handed.

BUT there could've been other officers out of view to the north or south of the camera who fired as the officer in question was tasing.

Also, as it's only been claimed that Lavoy was unarmed, it would be interesting to know (maybe from prior interview footage) if Lavoy wore a 'cross-draw' holster which could be why he reaches across to his left side with his right hand.
edit on 5-2-2016 by rexsblues because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

source for that?



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




Interesting... witness testimony you say? Considering the 2 guys who went back to prison were convicted based on witness testimony... meh.
maybe I'm being dense but I'm missing your point.



A gun was located in Finicums coat pocket.
which we don't actually know as fact yet. The investigation is ongoing and it will be 4 to 6 weeks before it is finished. I've asked before why a man who carried his guns properly(holstered) would suddenly decide to keep it in his pocket. Another question is was he wearing his shoulder holster, as seen in some pics, at the time of the shooting. He never actually was seen with a gun in his hand so we don't have any proof at this point that he was armed.



The complete video shows him reaching.
why assume that it was for a gun? what if he wasn't actually armed and OSP had just assumed that he was? what would they most likely do if that was discovered?



The complete video shows him almost hitting an officer to avoid spike strips.
It is clear that LEO jumped out drawing his gun in the video and was firing on Levoy's truck based on witness statements. Levoy was avoiding the roadblock. I never saw any spike strips in the video.



Then again we saw in Ferguson a myriad of "witnesses" whose testimony turned out to be lies for the sole purpose of not liking law enforcement.
That has absolutely nothing to do with this case.

edit on 2/5/2016 by OveRcuRrEnteD because: clarity



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 10:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Gryphon66

source for that?


Source for what?

Finicum's book?

Noted in above post.

ETA: I just checked it out ... if you use the Amazon link above, click on the book cover, you get to see excerpts ... and you can read his Preface, which is what I quoted from above.
edit on 5-2-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: TheTory

Words do have consequences as I explained. The moment he made those comments he changed the dynamics pf his situation.

Law Enforcement cant approach an armed man who said hes not going to jail and ask for clarification. The claims are taken at face value.

If a person says they are a navy seal, whether they were or not, will be viewed as a person who was a navy seal.

Words have consequences. Don't believe me?

Walk into an airport and tell people you have a bomb.
Yell fire in a crowded theater.

You can take his words that you paraphrased at face value, but you can't take the manipulation of what he said into something that he didn't say into account?

I did.. Did you?


His comments (not verbatim) -
I won't spend time in a concrete box.
They shouldn't point guns at me.

There was no distortion of his words.

What conclusion would you come to after hearing those words? Factor in everything and it can paint a picture.

You paraphrase him, then say in the next breath that there was no distortion of his words, right after you incorrectly quoted him. I'm not sure who you are hoping to convince with that method of argument, but you definitely haven't convinced me, nor have you made a very convincing argument, in my opinion.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Logarock
This isn't exactly true.
Actually it is.



originally posted by: Logarock
We have all seen due process sold out in exchange for some early opinion swaying propaganda one way or another.


This is relevant how?

Secondly you guys arent listening..
Due process for the officers who shot Finicum.
Due process for the 16 people arrested.

Quit being paranoid.

And Mr. Finicum's due process, what happened to that? Oh yeah, I guess his body got processed at the morgue. That's not exactly how it's supposed to work...they did it wrong.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
I'm amazed at how few people on the streets know anything about this occurrance.
It is the one damning fact that can not be denied by anyone.

Agreed, sadly. I doubt the general public is really getting much of this. You never know, though...it took awhile for what actually happened at Waco and Ruby Ridge to sink in, but it did eventually. At least the limited versions of the whole truth that we were able to learn did.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Vector99
If you have nothing to hide you throw everything you have to those that inquire.


Wrong, on all levels - proceduraly and legally - period.

The video shows he reached into his pockets.
A gun was found in his pocket.

The FBI released the video because of all the armchair sleuths who were claiming there was no justification to shoot him.

Doesn't matter if he was armed or not in my opinion, the fact is he did not have a gun in his hand when he was shot to death.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

Actually I thought you might enjoy the dedication from his book ... and I think it's okay to cite a few short excerpts here ...




"To my friends, neighbors and citizens of this great land, please reflect on the events written herein."

...

"Whenever a dominant nation of the earth collapses, the record is one of horror and suffering."

...

"It is my belief that freedom will arise again in this land, but only after much blood and suffering. This is my witness and my warning."


from, Lavoy Finicum's "Only by Blood and Suffering" as cited above

Even if it wasn't a work of fiction, that was artistic expression, which is a far cry from an interview given to a news reporter. Even in your quotes he hasn't made any threats, though I tend to agree with the sentiments expressed, sadly.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

The officers movements are concurrent with use of a taser, followed by the drawing of a service pistol. The way Lavoy fell is consistent with the way people look when they fall from a taser shot. If Lavoy fell as a result of a taser shot, then the deployment of that taser was successful, and the officer could have simply continued to administer shocks until he was within range to disarm and handcuff the target.

That however, was not how things played out.


The way he fell is also consistent with a shot to the central nervous system [head/spine]. Tasers are often ineffective if the target is wearing a coat.
The officer emerging from the trees on the left of the video seems to have a long barreled pistol or carbine that he is firing with his left hand. This may be an optical distortion.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: rexsblues
Another point I think might have been missed is that no officer shoots a pistol with one hand.
...this is counter intuitive to any and all tactical training, nevermind the fact that he was "shooting" in the direction of other officers. Add that with the fact that he reaches to his right holster immediately after and this looks alot more like a tasing.

...it sure would be interesting to know if this officer is right handed.

Notice also that he holds his arm straight out, rather than in the somewhat relaxed grip one would normally use with a firearm.


BUT there could've been other officers out of view to the north or south of the camera who fired as the officer in question was tasing.

Agreed.

Also, as it's only been claimed that Lavoy was unarmed, it would be interesting to know (maybe from prior interview footage) if Lavoy wore a 'cross-draw' holster which could be why he reaches across to his left side with his right hand.

I believe he did, though it is debatable that the weapon found on his person was in his possession before he was killed. The authorities may have planted it on him.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie




Agreed, sadly. I doubt the general public is really getting much of this. You never know, though...it took awhile for what actually happened at Waco and Ruby Ridge to sink in, but it did eventually. At least the limited versions of the whole truth that we were able to learn did.


Indeed! Is it paranoid to note and implicate our medias
dance around the truth? Of course it isn't and anyone who
suggests such a thing rests in the comfort of their denial.
And I site that as dirty.



One big SnF forn the OP!

edit on Ram20516v35201600000051 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheBadCabbie
Doesn't matter if he was armed or not in my opinion, the fact is he did not have a gun in his hand when he was shot to death.


Irrelevant...

Gun, wallet, cell phone...

You dont start putting your hands in pockets when police are telling you not to while pointing guns at you.

Further you demonstrated perfectly why people with a similar mindset to yours have such issues with incidents like this.

You cant substitute the law with your personal opinion - It doesn't work.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




You dont start putting your hands in pockets when police are telling you not to while pointing guns at you.


I woukld agree with that, but he brandished no weapon.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




... but his comments are pretty clear. Sure, he'd rather live out the cowboy fantasies he wrote about ... wind in his face et. al. ... but he also wrote in his book about the main character's successful gunfight against the evil Federal agents ... even twirling his revolver around his finger after having put all of them down.

Too bad life's not more like fiction, I guess. At least for Mr. Finicum.


Here's the comments:

Question: if they come with an arrest warrant, what are you going to do?

Levoy: They are not going to come up to a guy holding a rifle and put cuffs on him.

Question: If that arrest warrant comes, what are you going to do?

Levoy: I have no intention of spending any of my days in a concrete box.

Question: To avoid getting in that box what are you prepared to do?

Levoy: You guys have so many hypotheticals

Question: So you're prepared to die. Better dead than in a cell.

Levoy: Absolutely. Do you want to live in a cell?

The best that can be said is that he didn't want to go to jail or live in a cell. "I have no intention of spending any of my days in a concrete box" means exactly what it means, and can be achieved in a variety of ways. What he didn't state was his intention of going out in a blaze of glory, that he was suicidal, or that he would rather be gunned down than face a jury.

There is a reason leading questions are objectionable in courts of law, and the nonsensical response to his statements by the media and its parrots are proof of this.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Xcathdra




You dont start putting your hands in pockets when police are telling you not to while pointing guns at you.


I woukld agree with that, but he brandished no weapon.


Except nowhere in what you quoted did anybody say anything about brandishing, so it's irrelevant.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Xcathdra

The only evidence in the public realm is the drone footage.

On purpose, any closer look will reveal the truth.

Which in all seriousness people.......there should have been better and closer vid than this let out under the official heading. An Fin drone, like its a combat mission and we are so conditioned to looking at drone vids. Are we to understand there were no dash cams or body cams then......but the feds have a drone on station? Yea right.

Good point. Adding all the laser pointers were there ahead of time, too. But no other cams.

Telling.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

As noted, Mr. Finicum stated in his preface that he intended the book as a warning of what he thought a) was happening b) might happen.

I don't pretend to be able to read his mind, as some, I can only comment on what he said.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: TheTory

You're interpreting Finicum's statements, just as you are citing others for doing. Where did you come by this transcription?

The fact remains that he stated, repeatedly, that he was not going to be arrested and implied, quite strongly, that he was willing to fight ("man with a rifle") if that was attempted.

What's your point?



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




You're interpreting Finicum's statements, just as you are citing others for doing. Where did you come by this transcription?

The fact remains that he stated, repeatedly, that he was not going to be arrested and implied, quite strongly, that he was willing to fight ("man with a rifle") if that was attempted.

What's your point?


But I'm not extrapolating any intentions, feelings, or implications from his statements. My point is that yourself and others are.




top topics



 
30
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join