Minneapolis Officer Mohamed Noor & Partner Are Lying. - Update

Regarding the authorities looking for drugs in the victims system, I think the important thing is whether Noor was intoxicated or something not the victim.

What he did was so out of line one wonders was he high or drunk

Noor if not charged at least with negligent homicide or manslaughter should never be a cop again

a reply to: roadgravel

So why did they report all clear no back up needed at 11:39? Why did the officer have his weapon drawn if it was all clear? As it was reported he already had it out. Seems unlikely to still be cruising with your gun drawn and feeling a heightened sense of fear right after saying everything looked great.

It's because he is a maniac that murdered in cold blood. From the looks of how things are going, the Minnesota Department Of Corrections is going to be adding another inmate or two to there rosters.

Justice will prevail.

Cops shoot to stop the threat, not shoot to kill.

The threat to whom - to them? If they are that threatened then hand in the gun and stop being cops. If they want to shoot to stop what is a real, real threat then use a tazer.

a reply to: Willtell

Except the search warrant was for Justine's home and looking for "Bodily fluids" and "Etc".

They were/are trying to make this victim look as if she either deserved, sought out, or was perfectly capable of getting shot by the police because of "Something" in her system.

Noor will be checked for drugs indeed, before his entry into the Correctional facility they send him to.

a reply to: SR1TX

No, really they arent.

a reply to: SR1TX

Probably because officer H saw the situation as OK but Noor may not have in his own mind. It seems as though Officer H was acting in a normal role but Noor some how went bonkers for whatever reason. Wonder if we will ever know his thought process.

a reply to: SlapMonkey


Well that was a very reasonable response so cheers.

I just wanted to address this part.

But your implication that this is the norm or the standard of the modern legal system is, as you accused others of being, very naïve (or ideologically driven...either one).

I threw that in completely unnecessarily, I did it because of it was my tit for tat way of throwing back at X for constantly saying to people ignorance of law is no excuse, I wanted to point out the disconnect in that statement.

My stance comes from my one bad experience with cops, it was all good until one of them completely screwed my over as a personal project while he was screwing my ex, my son as a result almost died because of that prick, and has since suffered immense trauma. It pisses me off that people like that cop get away with that behaviour, hence why we call it the thin blue line.

I should add I am not anti cops, I am anti corrupt cops. If I saw a cop being beaten in the street I would certainly jump in on the side of the cop, I should at least try and be clear as to where I am coming from.

originally posted by: Willtell
Regarding the authorities looking for drugs in the victims system, I think the important thing is whether Noor was intoxicated or something not the victim.

It does matter what is in the system of Ms. Damon at the time, and I wrote a post on some of the possible side effects of Ambien specifically to show why it matters--drugs often make people act irrational, and so if she were on some medication and she was experiencing some of the side effects (which include hallucinations [hearing things that weren't there...like maybe a rape?] and dizziness [maybe explains why she may have slapped the cruiser] and excitability/nervousness [which may have made her approach the cruiser in a perceived threatening way), it would matter in both determining why Noor fired (other than just being apparently a poorly trained and jumpy LEO) and what actions Ms. Damon may have committed in those few apparent seconds prior to getting shot that may have made her appear as a threat versus a calm, rational citizen.

That is why it matters what is in a suspect's/victim's system.

What he did was so out of line one wonders was he high or drunk

Noor if not charged at least with negligent homicide or manslaughter should never be a cop again

I can agree with this, but it's worth keeping in mind that irrational fears (and apparently Noor, being jumpy, had them) can make people do inexplicable things in the heat of the moment. Even if not on drugs or impaired, though, he certainly does not show the discipline necessary to be a police officer.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Well that was a very reasonable response so cheers.

Thanks for that--I was starting to think that this thread was populated by either people trying to explain things logically, or just ideologically driven people out to negate anything said by people in the professions. You and NightSkyeB4Dawn are some of the few keeping discussing this incident tolerable and worthwhile.

My stance comes from my one bad experience with cops, it was all good until one of them completely screwed my over as a personal project while he was screwing my ex, my son as a result almost died because of that prick, and has since suffered immense trauma. It pisses me off that people like that cop get away with that behaviour, hence why we call it the thin blue line.

I get it...it's hard to keep anecdotal experiences from effecting reactions to things--I've never really had that issue with cops personally, although I know a few who have. In any event, my sympathy for what you experienced and for your son. My old neighbor was married to a sheriff officer who used to beat the living piss out of her and verbally abuse her mixed-race son from a previous marriage. She got out of the marriage, but he's still a LEO...go figure.

I should add I am not anti cops, I am anti corrupt cops. If I saw a cop being beaten in the street I would certainly jump in on the side of the cop, I should at least try and be clear as to where I am coming from.

I don't know if I've every really seen you as anti-cop (I know we clash sometimes, but I'm not sure about LEO topics), but I do appreciate you clarifying your position, as it takes away ambiguity that can lead to assumptions. Cheers for that.

In the same breath, I'm not blindly pro-LEO, either, but I am pro-information that is accurate and verifiable, hence my harping on the details and constantly reminding people to wait for the results of the investigation. That (obviously) gets taken the wrong way by some people *cough* OP *cough* GusMcDangerthing, and then the grip of that presumption is never relinquished. If I wasn't so stubborn, I'd have quit this thread a while ago...

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Lot's of people do things in the heat of the moment. That's why there is Prison to ride out the consequences of being in such a state of mind after things settle down.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

If memory serves, I use to take Ambien, and it is a sleeping pill and does not lend one to excitability or
hallucinations, in my experience. But I guess anything is possible when a civilian who may have taken a sedative is gunned down in the night by a cop for no good rhyme or reason.

a reply to: Willtell

Major Side Effects You should check with your doctor immediately if any of these side effects occur when taking zolpidem: Less common: Clumsiness or unsteadiness confusion depression Rare Difficulty with breathing dizziness, lightheadedness, or fainting falling fast heartbeat seeing, hearing, or feeling things that are not there skin rash swelling of the face trouble sleeping unusual excitement, nervousness, or irritability wheezing

Ambien fact sheet

But don't let a little thing like facts get in the way of hyperbole.

a reply to: Willtell

Nevermind, it seems that Shamrock6 did the honors.

I will also add that anecdotal evidence is not good evidence--my wife can not take Percocet because it wires her up and keeps her up all night. The same thing happens when she drinks wine. My stepmom, on the other hand, passes out after one glass. Muscle relaxers have next to zero effect on me, while they knock my wife out if she has to take one.

That's why all medication comes with the warning that listed side effects are "possible," not definite or even probable. You have no idea how Ambien affected Ms. Damon, nor do I, but it makes sense that it's an issue in the investigation.

originally posted by: SR1TX
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Nevermind...not wasting my time. I forgot.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I starred that more for the edit than anything else.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I'm just going by my experience. I wouldn't care to even really get too involved with a hypothetical pissing match over the effects of a drug. It doesn't explain or prove anything why this cop shot down this poor woman in the night...

And unless she had a gun or was drunk on here NONE OF this drug talk MEANS A THING

a reply to: Willtell

You said

does not lend one to excitability or hallucinations, in my experience.

That was disproved by the drug's own known side effects.

Don't start a pissing match and then complain when your stream comes up embarrassingly short.

And thank you for repeating the same thing myself, and others, have said about the drug angle. So far, the only one trying to use the drug angle to smear the victim is Noor's attorney. I don't recall anybody in this thread doing anything with the drug angle other than explaining why law enforcement would be searching her home, and explaining that any sort of influencing factors such as alcohol or drugs in her system would simply help fill out the picture of what happened that night.

Or, on the other hand, knowing that she was not on anything would shut down any defense strategy centered on trying to blame Damond for creating the incident herself.

Again, thanks for repeating things others have said though. Seems to be a common theme in this thread at this point.

a reply to: Shamrock6

wrong thread.

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe
wrong thread.

I think that we all started feeling that way around page 5.