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.

 

Sharpton arrested as hundreds protest NYC police shooting

page: 3
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   
alright, let me try and muddy up this black and white, good guy - bad guy scenario with a little bit of gray reality:
- unclear as the circumstances are, this shooting may be more like the "straw" that broke the camel's back, than a major case in itself. There's lots of pent up tension regarding police/civilian relations and this just pushed it over the edge. The public outcry is due not so much to this incident alone, but to alot of what has gone on before.
- the guys had been partying till 4 in the morning - with booze and possibly other drugs in their systems, how rational and thoughtful could they have been to say, "oh, no, i won't go with you to get a gun - thats not nice". Give me a break, its inner city life in America the armed. Given that the police were not in uniform, how well were they able in their mental state to decipher the actual nature of the situation?
- mob behaviour is not just something the crowds are guilty of - ie. following the mob with the emotions only, and the mind disengaged. Once the firing starts, the police also get into it and sometimes don't stop as soon as a clearer mind would otherwise have decided. (therefore the 50 rounds, going not just towards the driver but apparently anyone in the car)
Its a messy business out there, and there is no clear good guy or bad guy. There is enough dirt to go around that needs attending to on both sides of the issue(s).




posted on May, 8 2008 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shazam The Unbowed
No.
Again, this article was published the day after the shooting. they were clearly idetified as "In all, Five plainclothes officers"



According to the person briefed on the accounts, the detective, his police badge around his neck, then pulled out his gun, identified himself as a police officer and ordered the occupants to show their hands. They did not comply, the person said, but instead gunned the car forward, hitting the undercover officer and, seconds later, an unmarked police minivan.


Note this does not come directly from the officers or direct witnesses to the event. It comes from "a person briefed on the accounts" of the detectives, which basically means someone who heard about the whole thing third-hand. It doesn't even state the source spoke directly with the detectives, and it doesn't cite who this source is. There's some other interesting info in this article as well:


The undercover detective who fired first had been monitoring the group in the club. Once outside, the detective heard Mr. Guzman say “Yo, get my gun, get my gun,” and head with the others to his car, according to police. The undercover officer followed the group on foot, then positioned himself in front of their car.


So let's get this timeline straight:

This "undercover officer" is watching this particular group.

They get up to leave so he follows them out.

He is close enough to clearly hear these guys talking amongst themselves, well enough to hear “Yo, get my gun, get my gun".

Instead of identifying himself at that point, calling for his backup, and questioning them, which he would have been fully justified in doing (and more than justified in searching their car--hearing someone say "get my gun" sounds like probable cause to me) he waits for them to get into the car (giving them time to arm themselves with a weapon-gun, car, whatever) and steps in front of it.

NOW he still has not identified himself at this point.

So, they get in the car. He (supposedly) has his badge around his neck. He (supposedly) identifies himself as an officer while drawing his weapon. And that's when the bad stuff goes down.

Now keep in mind a few of things here, people:

1) It's dark.

2) It's late.

3) The suspects are most likely intoxicated.

4) Everyone involved just left a strip club. If you've ever been to one something you'll notice is that they're loud as hell and when you leave your ears are often ringing.

5) At least one suspect has a criminal record, which means he is unlikely to trust police, but even further, he may have reason to believe there are others out there from within the criminal world who mean him harm for one reason or another.

All of these things lead to an altered perception of reality on the part of the suspects.

Let's put ourselves in their shoes:

You're drunk, you're tired, it's late and dark, and some random guy just followed you to your car. He pulls a gun. He's got something around his neck that's gold and shiny (assuming the detective told the truth). Whatever it is could be a badge, but it could also be a big ugly disco medallion. Under those conditions it's hard to tell. He yells that he's a cop. Maybe he is. But maybe someone you ticked off in jail or on the street has it out for you, and we all know that no tough guy hitter would ever impersonate a cop to get the drop on someone, right?

Point is, you don't know what the hell is going on, except there's a gun on you, more guys with guns on the way, not one person in a uniform, and in your mind there's every possibility that if you do as he says you'll still end up dead.

So what do you do?

What could the cops have done to prevent killing a man?

Many strip clubs, especially the "classy" ones, have surveillance cameras, including cameras watching the street, parking areas, etc. Where's the tapes?

If the cop suspected these guys in the first place why didn't he try and stop them earlier?

Why were they under surveillance? Were they even the primary target, or was it the club, as the article suggests? If it was the club why were they singled out? The article states they were outside when the detective overheard the "gun" comments. Why did he follow them?

Personally I think there's a whole lot about this case that has not been released to the public.

ANY time something like this happens and there is not a full, immediate disclosure of facts and evidence I get suspicious.

I don't believe police officers are above reproach and I know for a fact they often lie to protect themselves and their fellow officers, or to get convictions in difficult cases. The possibility of the detective making the "gun" thing up to cover his butt is one I'm willing to entertain.

I do not think race was a factor in this case, although Sharpton, having something of a one-track mind, is practised at finding hate crimes where none exist.

I do, however, think, based on the facts known to the public, that the officers in question displayed questionable judgment in their handling of the situation, especially the detective who fired the first shot.

Without having the incident itself on tape it's impossible for us to know exactly how this went down.

Maybe the cops are telling the absolute honest truth.

Maybe they're stretching the truth a little bit.

Maybe they're lying through their teeth.

Relying on internal investigations for, of, and by the NYPD is not likely to yield anything close to the Truth.

If Sharpton honestly wants an independent investigation I appluad his attention to this case, because I want the same thing.

If he's just grand-standing for more face time with the press he can rot in jail for using the people he claims to help as pawns in his little popularity contest.

[edit on 5/8/2008 by The Nighthawk]



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   
I didn't read this whole thread but I thought I might add that maybe someone should pump 50 rounds into Al Sharpton.

If it hasn't been said already.



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by gauncents
 


Good lord man, you are kidding right???
I may have laughed when I read your statement, but for the love of pete, do you want a full blown race war?



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by downtown436
 


Of course I'm kidding. I just can't stand that a-hole. He's the biggest racist!

But then again, I wouldn't lose any sleep if it did happen.



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by gauncents
 


He is the biggest racist I can think of at the moment. I really can't stand him either.



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Is this black on black crime? Sharpton needs to be put in the middle of iraq and lets see how his racism will work then. He needs to go to africa and see what africans are doing to each other. And leave him there.



posted on May, 9 2008 @ 02:23 AM
link   
From what it looks like, they are keeping things in order. But this is why people don't protest any more. There is no such thing as a peaceful protest when the cops get involved. And since our government doesn't respect our right to free speech, it's really a pointless effort--as it is in all fascist governments.



posted on May, 9 2008 @ 06:14 AM
link   
Alright... since there are some "Al" haters posting here, I figured you'd enjoy this...

From Hal Turner

I am sooooo sorry about no show on Wednesday

As you know, me and a group of guys went to the Al Sharpton protest to antagonize; it worked
While none of us got arrested, something did happen on the way out of the area. I won't say what happened - or what happened next -- but I can say that I am OK. All my guys are OK.

After this thing took place, it took several hours to make certain there could never be any repercussions from the matter. I didn't get home until just after 11:00 PM

Those several hours required me to be out of contact because we all had to pull the batteries from our cell phones and leave the phones and batteries in a car so there would be no GPS record of where we went. I had no choice; I had to do this and the show had to be missed.


Go visit Hal for more -- always worth a laugh or two



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join