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.

 

Video shows police killing of Daniel Shaver in Mesa, Arizona (viewer discretion advised)

page: 6
84
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: worldstarcountry

See here.

You fall under the umbrella of the second sentence--every single thing that you said in your response is either ideologically driven or an appeal to emotion, jettisoning all appropriate facts of the case.

You're welcome to your opinion, though, just don't pretend that it supersedes the letter of the law--the jurors didn't, and they were intelligent enough to see that in just six hours of deliberation in a murder case. Unanimously.

But, I'm sure that you know better than they do concerning all of the details of the case. Maybe you should have been an expert witness in the trial?




posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
The officer also asked him if he was drunk and he said no. If the kid had been honest perhaps the officer would've taken that into account that he may not be able to follow instructions very well.

Be honest, obey commands. Don't get yourself killed.


People tend to lie about not being drunk, WHEN THEY ARE DRUNK. Or, they are drunk but don't think that they are. So your excuse for the officer there is a really chitty one.

ETA: plus, his commands were contradictory AND some didn't even make any sense. I'm in my fourth year of being stone cold sober 24 hours a day and I would have been second guessing what the hell that yelling screaming cop wanted me to do.
edit on 8-12-2017 by KansasGirl because: (no reason given)


+3 more 
posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Trying to equate my right to defend myself in my home with this obvious abuse of power by a mentally unstable LEO is ridiculous.

Statements like these make me think you're just trolling and you get off on making inflammatory statements that 99% of the population will disagree with.




... our founding fathers would have done exactly as these officers did.





This officer did everything right in this instance,..



Of course, you don't have to concern yourself with reason since everyone is focused on that "emotionally inflaming part", "But, he was unarmed."

I guess if I have a beef with someone I can just call the cops and say I saw someone with a gun. There is a good chance an unbalanced, unqualified thug might show up and take care of it for me.

I'm glad Philip Mitchell Brailsford's life is ruined, but that's small consolation considering an innocent father of two girls is dead because of his actions.

Fascist





edit on 12/8/2017 by ZombieWoof because: replied to wrong person



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl
ETA: plus, his commands were contradictory AND some didn't even make any sense. I'm in my fourth year of being stone cold sober 24 hours a day and I would have been second guessing what the hell that yelling screaming cop wanted me to do.

Yeah and did you notice that neither the man or his wife were allowed to get clarification - every time they tried to say that they did not understand the command they were told (screamed at) to shut up.
So, so sad.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey
Hey look, you can deny it all you want but the guys on tactical in your group likely have the same setup in play. The only reason to make the arrest as difficult as they did was because they wanted to see someone die and get away with it legally.

The easiest way to do that is by giving orders they know 90%+ of regular civilians will # up on approaching an armed man and die int he process. Sure I will testify if thats doable, why not? The whole world has seen the video now, everybody is a witness.

I also seen hundreds upon hundreds out of millions of arrests even of fleeing and previously ARMED suspects of the cops just approaching and cuffing the suspect once they are on the ground. Hell we get to see it live on TV out of California, or Texas, or Georgia or wherever at least 15 times a year. Fact is a difficult arrest is the easiest way for a cop to murder legally now. It was probably the method chosen due to all the body cameras and demands of accountability over the last decade. So now they tactical has to come up with creative ways to add those notches to their belt for bodies turned cold and get away with it.

We will probably see an increase in this being the way innocent people are murdered through compliance over the next couple of years.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Yeah, but I want the details. I can find sources that claim to have the actual documents from his termination, which I assume would be much more specific, but the network that I'm on right now will not download the Scribd documents in whole.

Maybe you can see them? On this photography is not a crime page, if you scroll down, you'll find multiple Scribd documents embedded--the majority of the pages are blank and missing the images for me. If you feel like scrolling through them and find it, that'd be awesome, but no expectations either way.

In any event:

Craig Mehrens, the attorney for Brailsford, said the firing "represents pure politics." He said Meza called Brailsford four days after the shooting "and told him he had, with other senior officers, viewed the video; and they had all concluded that it was a `good shoot.' "

ABC local affiliate

I tend to agree, unless you have information that might sway me otherwise. I have yet to read all of the pages in this thread because of all of the emotional opinions directed at me.

edit on 8-12-2017 by SlapMonkey because: local affiliate, not ABC News



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: notsure1



Tats all over and "your Fu#### "engraved on his gun. Take the uniform off and who looks like the thug?


I'm not as bothered by the tats as by the dead look in his eyes. Nobody is home in there.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZombieWoof
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Trying to equate my right to defend myself in my home with this obvious abuse of power by a mentally unstable LEO is ridiculous.


While the rest of your comment is unworthy of discussion, I'll ask you this in reference to your above quote:

Do you think that a LEO's right to self defense ends when he goes on duty and puts on the uniform?

I ask because I made the comparison specifically because I don't necessarily have the right/authority to approach Mr. Shaver in the hotel, but I do in my home. LEOs, on the other hand, not only have the right/authority to do so, but also the obligation. But with the authority and obligation, they do not negate their right to self-defense and use of deadly force. In fact, they have an even broader ability to use said force than I would, all backed up by statutes.

So, yes, equating the two is appropriate...the question just becomes (and I'll repeat):

Do you think that a LEO's right to self defense ends when he goes on duty and puts on the uniform?

If so, you're wrong.

If not, then you must accept that this shooting would have been justified in one's home just as it was in this hotel for the LEO.

Now, if you want to engage in intelligent, rational discussion, I'll continue with you. If you want to keep yelling immature words like "troll" and "fascist," just because you disagree, then this will be the final comment directed to you from me.


+2 more 
posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Of course you can check every box call this a 'good shoot'. Does the fact that this guy did nothing wrong, was not armed, and did his best to comply with conflicting commands being barked at him from heavily armed and agitated commandos mean anything to you?

I pray you are not actually a LEO and you're not in a position of authority.

Here's the dismissal form



+3 more 
posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: RadioRobert

Glad to see that someone has caught on to reality and isn't just basing responses on feelings.



Isn't it saddening that, when something like this happens, people think that emotions and opinions supersede facts and knowledge?


You're doing a good imitation of a sociopath, dude.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: KansasGirl
ETA: plus, his commands were contradictory AND some didn't even make any sense. I'm in my fourth year of being stone cold sober 24 hours a day and I would have been second guessing what the hell that yelling screaming cop wanted me to do.

Yeah and did you notice that neither the man or his wife were allowed to get clarification - every time they tried to say that they did not understand the command they were told (screamed at) to shut up.
So, so sad.


Yes! I also woukd have tried to get clarification to those chitty screamed commands. Holy crap that guy didn't have a chance.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: notsure1

He doesn't look like a thug to me. He looks like a little dweeb trying to prove to the rest of the world he's a man. A certain percent of police fall into this category. The bullied become the bullies. It's pitiful.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: notsure1



Tats all over and "your Fu#### "engraved on his gun. Take the uniform off and who looks like the thug?


I'm not as bothered by the tats as by the dead look in his eyes. Nobody is home in there.


Agree. That's the look of a sociopath.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Somebody else already posted the notice of termination so I won't bother with re-posting it.

I won't lay claim to having pored over every single page of every document they have posted on PNAC, but it looks to me the way the verbiage reads that they term'd him for multiple policy violations, mostly stemming from the ejection port cover on his rifle, and getting arrested. I couldn't find anything from the department about the shooting itself, only what a detective had written based on the DA's review of the video.

While I do think his termination was likely to be at least partially politically motivated, I would like to point one thing out: if we're going to argue all day long that this shooting was within policy then it defies logic to argue that his termination from the department was not within policy. The policy says if you're arrested on a criminal charge you can be terminated.

It's disingenuous to use policy to defend one action and then decry the same policy for another action.
edit on 8-12-2017 by Shamrock6 because: added word



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: KansasGirl
ETA: plus, his commands were contradictory AND some didn't even make any sense. I'm in my fourth year of being stone cold sober 24 hours a day and I would have been second guessing what the hell that yelling screaming cop wanted me to do.

Yeah and did you notice that neither the man or his wife were allowed to get clarification - every time they tried to say that they did not understand the command they were told (screamed at) to shut up.
So, so sad.


Yes! I also woukd have tried to get clarification to those chitty screamed commands. Holy crap that guy didn't have a chance.


No offense, but it's pretty easy to say you'd do one thing in a situation. It's something else entirely to do it when you're actually in that situation. I would suspect that being drunk and having several firearms pointed at you might make it a little difficult for the average person to "get clarification" to commands.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Thank goodness for body cameras. God only knows how often this happened before they came into existence.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl
You're doing a good imitation of a sociopath, dude.

And you're doing a wonderful portrayal of an emotionally driven person who knows nothing about how the law is applied to actions.

I have the credentials to back up my understanding and interpretation of this incident--I'm at peace with my understanding. If you don't like the laws that led to this acquittal, call the legislators sociopaths, not me. But by all means, don't pretend like you know my emotions concerning the matter just because I can intelligently discuss the applicability of the law to this instance without a lot of fluff surrounding it.

You don't know me on a personal level, so please don't pretend to, just because you disagree with my comments in this thread.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Oh, I'm not arguing that he couldn't be fired, so that's not an issue with me.

And honestly, I don't care if the shooting was within policy, either--I just know, from what I've seen along with the ruling and having read the appropriate statutes, that it was justified within the confines of the law, and that's all that I generally ever argue in cases like this (which apparently makes me a sociopath).



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: TobyFlenderson

His dad was apparently an officer in Internal Affairs--I wonder if all of those tats are an attempt at rebelling against his dad at a younger age.

At least, that's my memory from a link that I read earlier...I've read so many at this point today, I could be mistaken.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: KansasGirl
ETA: plus, his commands were contradictory AND some didn't even make any sense. I'm in my fourth year of being stone cold sober 24 hours a day and I would have been second guessing what the hell that yelling screaming cop wanted me to do.

Yeah and did you notice that neither the man or his wife were allowed to get clarification - every time they tried to say that they did not understand the command they were told (screamed at) to shut up.
So, so sad.




Yes! I also woukd have tried to get clarification to those chitty screamed commands. Holy crap that guy didn't have a chance.


No offense, but it's pretty easy to say you'd do one thing in a situation. It's something else entirely to do it when you're actually in that situation. I would suspect that being drunk and having several firearms pointed at you might make it a little difficult for the average person to "get clarification" to commands.


On the difficulty getting clarification while drunk: yes exactly, which is why that officer should have known that just because the guy said he wasn't drunk doesn't mean he wasn't drunk. He seemed to suspect they were drunk, by his comments and wuestions, so he should have been EXTRA CAREFUL in giving clear and uncontradictory commands.

You're right, it is easy to say what you would do in a situation. However, I am a veteran, and I've been in situations with weapons and commands being barked and shouted just like this. This guy that got killed did what I've seen before in a stress situation like this: he tried his best to do what he was told, he tried to get clarification to the crappy instructions, and did the best he could under extreme stress.
edit on 8-12-2017 by KansasGirl because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
84
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join