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.

 

Australian Justine Damond shot dead by US police in Minneapolis

page: 6
59
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Well, if I read right..it seems the camera's don't go on until the vehicle is exited..so just shoot from the vehicle and no camera's to film the homicide..that is my cynical interpretation .




posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: caf1550
a reply to: dreamingawake

The cameras were off because my departments Dash Cams don't turn on until the Lights are turned on or until the officer opens the door to the cruiser. As for the body cams, they can either be manually turned on by the officers themselves, or they can have sensors on them that will automatically turn them on when an officer draws a firearm (those are much more expensive and most departments don't have them)

Unfortunately for this situation we do not have the full details yet since the Bureau of Criminal Investigation is now handling the case and they try to keep everything very hush hush. Now I always support the police and all of the cases like this. Now it is tough to come to a conclusion about why the officer shot as it is now being investigated, If he was in the wrong he should be prepared to be indicted and charged. We will just have to let this investigation play out.


Excellent post and I agree...

The other weird thing being looked at, although I dont know if this relevant to anything that occurred, was the officers religion and background. He was from Somalia and was a Muslim and only had been on the force for 2 years.

Media also pointed out he was under investigation for a previous incident where he forced a female to go to the hospital for psychiatric evaluation. For those not familiar with law enforcement all states have mental health laws that allow officers to force a person to go to the hospital for psychiatric evaluation if the person is acting in a manner that creates a danger to themselves or others. Once there its up to medical staff (usually psyche nurses / psyche docs) to determine if the person needs to be admitted for mental health reasons or is ok to be released on their own / to a family member / safe environment with out patient assistance.

We need more info...
edit on 18-7-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   
So this is just being reported now.

Shooting


One of the officers involved in the fatal shooting of Justine Damond said he heard a loud noise before realizing his partner had shot through an open window, striking Justine Damond in the abdomen, according to information released Tuesday evening by the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.


The officer driving the car went on record with the BCA today and this is what he said. It seems like the Officer who fired the fatal rounds through the door could have been startled from noises that he percieved as gunshots while Ms. Damond was at the cruiser.


The new information from the BCA does not fully answer those questions — in part because Noor refused to be interviewed by investigators, so his mind-set is still a mystery — but it offers a timeline of what happened that night. The BCA said Noor's attorney, Thomas Plunkett, has not indicated whether the officer will give an interview.


Now I for one cannot understand why Officer Noor does not want to give an interview, my professional opinion he should be giving the interview while the events are still fresh in his head. Now if this is a bad shooting which it seems more and more to be, Officer Noor should fully expect criminal charges being brought against him which is the correct thing to do.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: caf1550

Well for these types of investigations, as you know, he is covered by Miranda as well as his Garrity rights. Refusing to be interviewed in a criminal investigation sense is lawful. From an internal affairs point of view its a no no as a refusal can and is taken as guilt.

Departmental policy also needs to be looked at to see if it allows an officer the 3 days before providing a full statement (written / interview).

Did the officers know this woman was the reporting party when they made contact?
edit on 18-7-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 07:50 PM
link   
If he refuses to give an interview he should be arrested and booked into jail. I imagine that would be the result for Joe citizen.
Would negligent homicide be a reasonable starting point for a charge?



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: vonclod
If he refuses to give an interview he should be arrested and booked into jail. I imagine that would be the result for Joe citizen.
Would negligent homicide be a reasonable starting point for a charge?


As with any person accused of a crime, they are not required to provide evidence against themselves. Private citizens have it easier than law enforcement based on the extra levels of "investigations" that occur with law enforcement officers being investigated (criminal / internal affairs and federal civil rights).

I dont think negligent homicide (or whatever the state equivalent is) would apply. Generally speaking negligent in that sense means the person had no intent on killing another person. in this instance the intent was to stop the threat (or perceived threat).
edit on 18-7-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 07:58 PM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

Xcanthdra has a good point, nothing legally states that he has to give an interview before a warrant is issued for his arrest.

However like I stated before through my professional experience in a situation like this, you would want all parties involved to give interviews while the information of the event is still fresh in their minds. I applaud the other officer offering his view of the events because it will help to draw the bigger picture.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I guess we will not know what his intent was or what he perceived until he gives an interview, I understand the right to not speak, or lawyer up..it really stinks in this case.
Thank's for your input on the legal definitions.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Where is the outrage?
Where are the protests?
Does her life not matter?


edit on 2017-07-18T20:12:31-05:002201718America/Chicago7 by c2oden because: hypocrites



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: Xcathdra

I guess we will not know what his intent was or what he perceived until he gives an interview, I understand the right to not speak, or lawyer up..it really stinks in this case.
Thank's for your input on the legal definitions.


My personal opinion is close to caf1550's in that im not sure why the officer is not cooperating. It might be one of those at the time he thought one thing and after he pulled the trigger and wrapped his brain around what occurred he came to a different conclusion on his use of force.

The statement by his partner seems pretty damning so that also might have something to do with his reluctance. It is also entirely possible the officer who shot just wants a lawyer before he says anything / gives a statement / etc.

As for the legal aspect I am not trying to exonerate the officer (as I am often accused of doing in threads like this). I am just trying to provide some context to those who arent familiar with the law or how law enforcement operates.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I understand



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:15 PM
link   
I'll answer my own question.
Nobody is being paid to incite and protest.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: caf1550

I understood that report to mean the loud noise heard by the driver was the gunshot. I don't think that they meant there was a different loud noise before the gunshot (if that's what you are saying.)



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: c2oden
Where is the outrage?
Where are the protests?
Does her life not matter?



do you want the P.C. answer, the racist answer or the common sense answer?

ETA - or your own answer

edit on 18-7-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: c2oden
Where is the outrage?
Where are the protests?
Does her life not matter?



do you want the P.C. answer, the racist answer or the common sense answer?

ETA - or your own answer


The common sense answer, of course.
But, my answer is correct.
There does not seem to be any paid protesters attempting to incite violence.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: caf1550

I can only image the officer who did give a statement is none too pleased with his partner..his ears are still probably ringing.
And the shooter not giving a statement seems pretty shady..he should man up and speak.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: caf1550

I understood that report to mean the loud noise heard by the driver was the gunshot. I don't think that they meant there was a different loud noise before the gunshot (if that's what you are saying.)



If you read the article it says that over the radio, two loud noises are heard, one believed to be the gunshot and another unknown at this time.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

I totally agree with you, the officer who fired the fatal rounds should have given his statement already of the events that transpired, as for his partner I can only imagine what is running through his head at this time or the day the shooting occurred. He could have just as easily hit him by firing directly across his body, which I still cannot believe he did.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: c2oden

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: c2oden
Where is the outrage?
Where are the protests?
Does her life not matter?



do you want the P.C. answer, the racist answer or the common sense answer?

ETA - or your own answer


The common sense answer, of course.
But, my answer is correct.
There does not seem to be any paid protesters attempting to incite violence.

Maybe 'white people' just don't care as much?



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: c2oden

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: c2oden
Where is the outrage?
Where are the protests?
Does her life not matter?



do you want the P.C. answer, the racist answer or the common sense answer?

ETA - or your own answer


The common sense answer, of course.
But, my answer is correct.
There does not seem to be any paid protesters attempting to incite violence.

Maybe 'white people' just don't care as much?


Maybe they don't.
I don't know.

But if that was a black woman shot by a white cop, in the same manner, all hell be breaking loose.

24 7 news.



new topics

top topics



 
59
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join