Cop Shoots Apparently Helpless Man In The Back (Update: Officer quits to avoid IA questions)

reply to post by ALLis0NE


You know what is even funnier? The fact that you are now trying to ignore what has been said about your clear racist policy by changing the subject and picking on me for a topic I already admitted to!!

Hilarious stuff.

I give you something to eat, and you chew on it for hours. Typical sheep.

Lets hope some day you figure out what you are eating.

reply to post by ALLis0NE


Still avoiding the topic I see

Keep on diggin that hole mate, you might see China if you dig long enough.

I can't tell you how many times in my career I (and my partners) stand by and wait till PD has the scene safe. That scene, before the shooting, is nothing new to me. I have a few observations.

1) I saw two flashes and heard two shots.

I played it again and again . . . it looked and sounded like two shots.
The one officer by the head of the perp seemed to react to the second "Pop".
The one BART officer who is speaking into a Mic (portable radio) clipped on his left shoulder reacted to the first "POP", he turns, second "POP", he turns back.
This is important because the second shot seemed to be from the BART cop. He takes his gun out and points, hears a POP and pulls the trigger.
Investigation and release of information will also show if that cop shot twice. That would explain the 2 shots as well.

2) Cops do not (should not) draw a weapon unless there is cause to do so.

What did that cop see (or hear) that made him draw his gun? I have been in spots where a weapon turns up on a Perp. Someone yells "Gun!" Who knows, the Vids audio sucked too. I will not speculate that the perp in this Vid had a Gun, Knife, H-Bomb . . . He could have been unarmed.
One officer could have yelled "GUN!" First "POP" you hear could have been from another gun by a teen, accidental discharge from another officer . . .
I don't know.

3) Look at the reactions of ALL the BART officers afterwards.

The Officer who discharged his gun at the perp was NOT gloating about it. He places his hands to his head as in "Holy %&$!" This could have been an accidental discharge.

Bottom line - this perp should NOT have been shot, unless he pulled a weapon.

In any event, this incident is a Cluster &*%$ for sure and Rev. Al Sharpton is probably on a plane right now putting on his make-up.
My concern now is RIOTS!

reply to post by Kryties


Avoiding the topic?

Ive said what needs to be said...

1: I see what appears to be a weapon in another suspects hand.

2: The victim that was shot could have been resisting arrest.

3: It was an accidental shooting.

4: There is absolutely no plausible explanation for a cop to decided to just shoot and kill someone in the back. No police officer, after completing a rigorous testing process, and 2 years of service, would waste their entire career by shooting someone intentionally in the back.

Police officers know, when you shoot someone, get prepared for hours of internal investigation, and hours of court room time, hours of reports to work out, instant relief from duty, and you might possibly loose your job. It's a hassle no sane officer wants to go through.

To think this officer just decided to shoot someone is absolute insanity.

Oh yeah, lets completely ignore the part of the video where the cop puts his hands to his head in shock and surprise. Can't talk about anything that would derail your anarchist mission can we now.

reply to post by ALLis0NE


I seem to recall you attempting to lay blame for the shooting over the fact that you found a clip where it appears that someone not involved in the incident was holding something you deemed to be a gun....and inferred from that that the cops had the right to shoot the man on the ground.

I also recall you inferring that because the dead man was 'Negro" that behaviour of this sort is typical for African Americans based on the number of African-Americans in prison!

I would be foolish to think anything other than you are a racist , based upon your own words, who is attempting to excuse the police for this horrendous crime.

THAT is what the topic I am referring to is about....you know the one you keep ignoring and attempting to make ME look like the kook 'anarchist'.

reply to post by Kryties


Still chewing on it huh?

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by ALLis0NE

 

I seem to recall you attempting to lay blame for the shooting over the fact that you found a clip where it appears that someone not involved in the incident was holding something you deemed to be a gun....and inferred from that that the cops had the right to shoot the man on the ground.

If you recall that, it means you don't know how to read.

I didn't blame anything on anyone, you are just (once again) lying.

I simply stated that I see what appears to be a weapon in a persons hand, who is suspiciously approaching the back of an officer. The point being, that if a weapon is known to be at the scene of a crime, all officers are in a "caution" mode, which will raise the threat level of every person in that area. This has a major effect on the actions of all officers, and how they react towards suspects. Yet another reason for a gun or taser to be drawn.

To say that person I pointed out with a weapon is "not involved" is actually yet another misinformed post by you (typical from you). Actually, the person that is holding what I think is a weapon gets detained by the police in the video. So he is involved.

Originally posted by Kryties
I also recall you inferring that because the dead man was 'Negro" that behaviour of this sort is typical for African Americans based on the number of African-Americans in prison!

You need to stop "recalling" and learn to read.

The point I was trying to make is the ultimate one. The only reason the cops and the victim are in that location and situation, is because of a reported "fight". None of this would have happened if there was not a fight. Just a plain fact. Correct?

Since the victim was being detained for "fighting", I call that the actions of a typical Negro. Only because of FACTS and statistics that I know, about Negros and their encounters with the law. Fighting and aggression is actually a real problem with Negros, and of course other races, but is more visible in Negros through statistics.

In no way was my words racist. I was simply saying that it is "typical" for a Negro to be detained by the police, because of the current day statistics.

Originally posted by Kryties
I would be foolish to think anything other than you are a racist , based upon your own words, who is attempting to excuse the police for this horrendous crime.

You are foolish just for thinking, period.

Attempting to excuse the police, LOL. There you go again, thinking I am taking sides. Wow, get a clue.

A crime??? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Oh I know, you threw that out the window right? Just like you think the cop did to the suspect right? Hypocrite.

Certainly can't be an accident! Oh no! The evil police man is gonna get you! Fear, terror, fear, terror! Sheep these days.


[edit on 6-1-2009 by ALLis0NE]

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
reply to post by Kryties

 

1: I see what appears to be a weapon in another suspects hand.

Suspect? That man was a bystander that just happened to stand in the way of the camera. In no way does it appear that he was also being detained or arrested by BART.

2: The victim that was shot could have been resisting arrest.

And that deserves being shot in the back?

3: It was an accidental shooting.

Accidental or not, the unfortunate thing is the officer will get off with a slap on the wrist where anyone else in his shoes would have been immediately shot by police.

4: There is absolutely no plausible explanation for a cop to decided to just shoot and kill someone in the back. No police officer, after completing a rigorous testing process, and 2 years of service, would waste their entire career by shooting someone intentionally in the back.

If the officer was as well trained as you infer, then he should have known the difference between a taser and a sidearm. It's not like this is a case of someone forgetting their glasses are on their head, this officer pulled out a lethal weapon and shot the man in the back. If this turns out to be an 'accidental' shooting then god help the rest of us if police continue to make the mistake of grabbing their gun instead of their taser.

Police officers know, when you shoot someone, get prepared for hours of internal investigation, and hours of court room time, hours of reports to work out, instant relief from duty, and you might possibly loose your job. It's a hassle no sane officer wants to go through.

Key words: No sane officer. Is it possible that this officer was mentally disturbed, or overwhelmed at the situation he faced (in which case he shouldn't be a cop in the first place)?

To think this officer just decided to shoot someone is absolute insanity.

To dismiss the possibility that the officer was mentally disturbed or unqualified to hold the taser/gun is absolute insanity.

Oh yeah, lets completely ignore the part of the video where the cop puts his hands to his head in shock and surprise. Can't talk about anything that would derail your anarchist mission can we now.

The officer could have held his hands up in shock when he realised that he just shot the man in cold blood in front of so many witnesses, and at how much *snip* he would be in as a result of that. I'm not saying that this is what happened, just putting forward another valid theory about the same gesture.

Anarchist mission? HA. I am simply putting forward other completely valid theories as to the same incident and you are attempting to discredit me by insulting me and putting me into a false category. I am also simply attempting to show that your remarks are racially motivated, as evidenced by your own words on multiple occasions.




[edit on 6/1/2009 by Kryties]

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
reply to post by Kryties

 

If you recall that, it means you don't know how to read.

To say that person I pointed out with a weapon is "not involved" is actually yet another misinformed post by you (typical from you).

You need to stop "recalling" and learn to read.

You are foolish just for thinking, period.

Wow, get a clue.

All I am seeing in your post is "Blah blah blah insult. Blah blah blah insult. Yada yada yada insult."

Is it really that hard to create a post without childishly resorting to insulting me?

In no way was my words racist. I was simply saying that it is "typical" for a Negro to be detained by the police, because of the current day statistics.

And, as has been stated multiple times by several different members in this thread, you are not looking deeper into those numbers which includes a high number of detainees who have been arrested and jailed for minor crimes such as drug possession and other minor offences. If anything these numbers are showing a bias on the part of the police toward this type of behaviour amongst African Americans.

Once you take those prisoners out of the equation you get a very different statistic. But you won't do this because it doesn't fit with your narrow view of the world.

Are you all getting the impression that something is amiss yet,some of you side with the cops as doing their job,they chose their job because most of them are really useless for anything but bullying and harassing people,they should accept the risk,but they are too SMALL of people.I don't say all necessarily,but something is very wrong which does not get recorded frequently enough.
The cops are not your friends,sherriff's and deputies are a constitutional law enforcement entity,transit cops and police are not there to help you,they are frequently ex-military,and as such have no honor other than what is given them by less than honorable people higher up.
There is no honor in the US,do something about it,or go lay by your dish.

reply to post by zerbot565



haha wow, you don't even know your extremely racist do you??

I don't like to post so soon after I post . . . BUT.
I mentioned I was concerned about RIOTS now.
Let's NOT start one here at the forum please.

Bottom line . . . this incident is bad for many reasons.

1) A life was taken, a family member, friend is gone.
2) Persons that witnessed this will be affected in many bad ways and react in many bad ways.
3) The officers lives and careers have changed. (No matter what)
4) The "Vultures" will start circling. To be in front of a camera, to make a buck off the deceased, politics, "NEWS!" . . . etc.
5) Racial tension, it already started. (Please stop, I goes in bad directions).

Devils advocate:
I had a car chase go down right past our unit. It ended just I put the unit in drive. The Car hit the curb, ran up the sidewalk a bit and crashed into a Telephone pole (almost hitting an elderly woman). The "Perp" I saw got out of the car and reached into the front of his baggy ass pants, officer shoots once and hits the Perp in the right shoulder. Perp flies back into the car from the impact. We stand back till the scene is safe, only one person in the "Stolen car."
The "Kid" was a 15 y/o with a - get this - prior GSW. When I cut his shirt open, he had a Old Gunshot scar on his left shoulder. Now he has a matching set. The "Now patient" is high on crack, keeps yelling at me, "I love you man! I love you man!" as I attempt to stick a large bore IV into him and help his sorry ass.
Then he punches me in the face with his good arm and attempts to run out the back of the Ambulance. It takes 4 guys to hold down this 155 pound "Teen"! He gets cuffed to the stretcher this time. I try the IV again and notice blood dripping from me now. Yes, from my nose.

All kinds of bad thoughts were going on in my head at that time - let me tell you. But, we all did the right thing.

Point of this rant. Now, take a video of this scene.

15 y/o in a "Car accident". He gets out to say "Hello officers! I'm OK!", he adjust his pants and the police shoot him for no reason. He is removed to the "torture chamber" (My Ambulance) and is treated like an animal.

There was no gun on him . . . BUT . . . The Kid on crack was reaching for a gun. He missed the part when he hit the pole and it flew out under the brake pedal. It was recovered very soon after he was shot. I saw it, my partner saw it and the cops saw it. He was reaching for a wep!

Race played no part. This little "wack-job" could have killed and would have killed. Despite a shattered Clavicle, right sided pneumo and blood loss, he assaulted officers and me.
If a Video was taken, it would only show snippets of what people want to see.

Welcome to the Old World Order. You can be killed for being a confused polish immigrant in Vancouver, for being face down on the floor, for being a person not of your race or religion etc etc etc.

reply to post by zerbot565


You sir you are ignorant the "nintendo" kids you refer to are you're future and their rebellion will save this country imo.

Originally posted by taserman

Originally posted by clay2 baraka

A person close to the investigation told the San Francisco Chronicle that BART officials are looking into the possibility that the officer thought he was firing a Taser and pulled out his gun by mistake.

Well, there is the defense.

As weak as that defense is, I am gonna bet the farm that it will hold up in court and the officer will go scot free.

Perfectly fine defense.

Put yourself in the officer's shoes. You are surrounded by a large mob of people who hate you and are issuing verbal threats against your life, one of them runs at you (whom a fellow officer tackles to the ground). While that man is tackled to the ground, he starts violently resisting arrest and tried to pull something from his shirt which could be used to kill you.

Your adrenaline is pumping, heart is racing, you can't hear or concentrate because of the large mob making so much noise around you ... do you think it's possible you could pull the wrong thing off your belt (a belt which has at least 30 different things on it?)

yup


I guess the "whoops, my bad" defence is perfectly fine now in cases like "this"

reply to post by igor_ats


Nope, it's not illegal. Recording conversations is illegal unless you're one of the participants in it. Photographing and taking video of cops is perfectly legal, and in many cases advisable. They will tell you it's not legal but that argument has been shot to hell many times over. Keep your cameras rolling

the law surrounding weather you may or may not take pictures varies from place to place but a general rule is that everyone is copyrighted if the photos in question is/are for commercial usage.

but in the u.s it goes some thing like this

the photographers right


and he who was shot should just have been silent if he did nothing wrong

Don't Talk to the Police" by Professor James Duane

reply to post by taserman


Its weird how you said the video did not show the cop shoot him, but yet you say you saw the victim reach into his pockets write before he got shot.. Also, nobody deserves to die for calling somebody a name, police know what their getting themselves into when they sign up, Oh boo hoo the cops were getting called bad names, well they knew that the second they signed up they would be hated. How come I haven't seen this on the news??

Originally posted by Kryties
Suspect? That man was a bystander that just happened to stand in the way of the camera. In no way does it appear that he was also being detained or arrested by BART.

Exhibit A:

A suspect (not the shooting victim) with a grey sweatshirt, blue pants with yellow marks on the left leg, and a yellow circle on the right leg, walks into view, palming an object in his right hand, at 0:12 seconds into the video
(object could possibly be a weapon):


At 0:20 seconds, the suspect then quickly approaches the officers backs, which gets the attention of the female officer:


At 0:28 the suspect is then quickly confronted by the female officer:


At 0:29 the suspect is then quickly confronted by a tall male officer:


At 1:52 minutes, suspect is yet again seen approaching the officers quickly, getting the attention of the officers. Shortly after, a male officer takes out a taser, or possibly a gun, which could have already been out:



At 2:54 minutes, one of the suspects that was seen walking up with the suspect I have circled is body-slammed to the ground and you hear a loud sound because of it.

Shortly after at 2:55, you hear the gun shot from the police officer that fatally wounds the victim.

Then,

At 3:24 minutes into the video, the suspect is then seen quickly entering the view, and it appears the suspect has thrown an object with his right hand(possibly the object he had earlier), directly towards the officers. A loud noise is heard. The male officer that is armed with a weapon then raises his shoulders and turns his back to shield himself from an attack from the suspect:



The suspect assaulted an officer. You better believe he got detained.

..will continue later

[edit on 6-1-2009 by ALLis0NE]

reply to post by zerbot565


Not really matter of copyright. More like a matter of wheter you're allowed to take pictures of officers or not, if you do you're automatically the copyright owner. Such images can be sold but not used in advertisement purposes. This is going bit off topic already. The point is that you're allowed to take pictures / video of police if you dont endanger them or the public. Officers can detain and arrest you for doing this but will release you later without any charges.
The laws have been twisted to such extend that if a police officer tells you to run under a train and you dont you can be arrested for disobeying an order or such. This of course hasn't happened (afaik) but when you're not breaking any laws and are excersising your rights and still get arrested it's imho the same thing.