"Road rage" cop now likely to face charges based on new video.

Cop likely to face charges in ‘damning’ road-rage slay video.

The “damning” video showing an off-duty cop waited just one second before gunning down a motorist in a Brooklyn road-rage incident is certain to result in criminal charges, law enforcement sources said Saturday.

The NY Post originally reported that Delwran exited his vehicle and began to viciously attack officer Wayne Isaacs.

At the time of the original article, I have to assume that the NY Post had not seen the video but instead relied on a description provided by the video's owner:

The owner of the Atlantic Avenue building in Brooklyn said he plans to give his video to the NYPD.

“The video shows the guy coming out of his f–king car, running up to [the cop’s] car, going in the driver’s-side window and just punching the s–t of this poor cop. Then all of a sudden you see sparks,” he said, adding that the next image is of Small hitting the pavement.

He added that Small “was wailing on [Isaacs’] face, like ‘pow, pow!’ He was looking to knock this guy out, punching and punching. Maybe four punches.

Small’s girlfriend initially told police investigators that Isaacs exited his car and opened fire on Small, but police sources rejected that narrative.

Well, this video seems to contradict those statements.

Small can be seen approaching Issac's car and is shot almost immediately.

I see him sling his arm forward and then he got shot .
Or am I missing something ?

Let the courts figure it out.
What if that is the cut end of a longer video where the road rager goes up to the car a second time after a first session of violence?
Internet youtube clips can be cut to show whatever narrative the user wants to portray.

a reply to: imsoconfused

Cops lie, I know from experience. I listened to one talk about if he was going to lie or not right in front of me. I couldn't believe it bc I have always trusted cops in the highest regard. I still do, but some have no regard and take advantage of their power.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Let the courts figure it out.
What if that is the cut end of a longer video where the road rager goes up to the car a second time after a first session of violence?
Internet youtube clips can be cut to show whatever narrative the user wants to portray.

What? That is not the official narrative. You cant change it when video comes out.

a reply to: imsoconfused

Which would explain why there are crickets and tumbleweeds in here.


I realize that it may be a difficult concept to grasp but cops are human.

And as humans, sometimes they do bad things.

But in the defense of ATS-ers, that NY Post article seems pretty definitive.

If true, it would also mean that the cop lied.

originally posted by: imsoconfused

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Let the courts figure it out.
What if that is the cut end of a longer video where the road rager goes up to the car a second time after a first session of violence?
Internet youtube clips can be cut to show whatever narrative the user wants to portray.

What? That is not the official narrative. You cant change it when video comes out.

Did the case go to court yet, if not then there is no official narrative just conjecture and speculation.

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: imsoconfused

Which would explain why there are crickets and tumbleweeds in here.

I realize that it may be a difficult concept to grasp but cops are human.

And as humans, sometimes they do bad things.

But in the defense of ATS-ers, that NY Post article seems pretty definitive.

If true, it would also mean that the cop lied.

Of course he lied. Like he is going to say the guy walked up to my car so I blasted him. I did not see one punch thrown

So the whole dept lied to try and cover this up. THe OS says the guy punched the cop in face several times and he had no choice but to shoot..

But any good cop would have seen the guy had not been punched.

a reply to: gladtobehere

It appears there may have been a punch thrown but that does not really matter either as we have no sound. If the guy rushed up to the car and said something like "I am going to F you up" then obviously you would not have to wait until he makes good on that threat to fire. It is hard to see. But I don't think we have to worry much about BLM on this particular shooting.

Could very well be manslaughter or some such crime. The investigation I am sure is far from over though.


iTruthSeeker

Why does it have to be stated that he is an off-duty cop?? I mean why does that matter? If I were to be in the news its not "off-duty IT guy" lol. I get that he should use better judgement (but so should everyone) but lets face it, not everyone is wired the same way.

originally posted by: HawkeyeNation
Why does it have to be stated that he is an off-duty cop?? I mean why does that matter? If I were to be in the news its not "off-duty IT guy" lol. I get that he should use better judgement (but so should everyone) but lets face it, not everyone is wired the same way.

Because for some reason people think being a cop makes you some sort of hero.

It's like they say "veteran", like being in the military makes you something special. You chose a job so you could kill people, woohoo.

Can ordinary citizens shoot someone for coming up to their car?

Did the man have a gun drawn?

Is it okay for a cop to shoot someone for coming up to their car but not an ordinary citizen?

Do we have another case of lower standards for public servents here?

So what if it goes to court? Cops word vs this grainy video? Yea the cop will still skate any day all day.

Not right but true.

There is certainly no way the officer was being punched repeatedly that is for sure. Ill be damned if a hand was even placed on the vehicle.

But the state will probably say that is what happened. A hand touched the cops car. You know what that means.. Lethal force authorized.

originally posted by: iTruthSeeker
a reply to: gladtobehere

If the guy rushed up to the car and said something like "I am going to F you up" then obviously you would not have to wait until he makes good on that threat to fire. It is hard to see. But I don't think we have to worry much about BLM on this particular shooting.


iTruthSeeker

Seriously.....?

Also, what the hell does BLM have to do with this?

a reply to: gladtobehere

It is like the wild west...regardless who's killing who it's crazy out there...

originally posted by: Quauhtli
Can ordinary citizens shoot someone for coming up to their car?

It depends, but in some places the answer to that question is, "Yes."

originally posted by: gladtobehere

Small can be seen approaching Issac's car and is shot almost immediately.

Looking at that sequence, I can only agree. As for coming in a second time, he is traversing vehicles, that gells with his car being back a bit, and still on the road. Looking in full screen, it does not look like there much time to do anything that should get him shot in the head and chest, he just about gets his head to the car window, besides that, the policeman was mobile, he even moves off after, then stops. Shades of Ferguson, that policeman had his engine running too and could have gunned it, but no, just shoot...because you can. Pathetic.

originally posted by: HawkeyeNation
Why does it have to be stated that he is an off-duty cop?? I mean why does that matter? If I were to be in the news its not "off-duty IT guy" lol. I get that he should use better judgement (but so should everyone) but lets face it, not everyone is wired the same way.

Because police are a protected class under the law.

Like listing race on college applications. Should it be necessary? No. Is it necessary? Yes.

originally posted by: Quauhtli
Can ordinary citizens shoot someone for coming up to their car?

Did the man have a gun drawn?

Is it okay for a cop to shoot someone for coming up to their car but not an ordinary citizen?

Do we have another case of lower standards for public servents here?

It's more like 'no standards' and make it up as you go along. In fact, I do believe reading about some police departments having no definitive guidelines about the use of guns, re deadly force.