Seattle police kill suspect in officer slayings

reply to post by JacKatMtn


sounds like most of the Chicago pigs

a recreation:
pig 1: *bam**bam*bam* freeze, police.
pig 2: oh, damn, that's not (suspects name)
pig 1: obviously a gang shooting
pig 2: *sigh* 4th drop gun I've used this week.

reply to post by ~Lucidity


I have read two reports now of the officers statement, and nowhere does he mention that he was fired upon. I am sure however that this will be edited and re-issued later saying that the suspect fired upon him to make the shooting an act of self defense.

reply to post by SpaDe_


I understand this. However, a "shootout" typically does mean shots were being fired both ways.

The police are going all out to paint this guy in a negative light:

"Documents related to those charges indicate a volatile personality. In one instance, he is accused of gathering his wife and young relatives and forcing them to undress.
"The whole time Clemmons kept saying things like trust him, the world is going to end soon, and that he was Jesus," a Pierce County sheriff's report said."

This whole thing has a bad smell to it.

Originally posted by SpaDe_
reply to post by SquirrelNutz

 

So, we should forgo trials in the US completely then? Sorry, but I diagree with you here. They have not even made it 100% possitive that this suspect was in fact the shooter, and now he is dead.

I'll give'em the benefit of the doubt on identification (not necessarily the authorization to shoot) considering they've no doubt poured EVERY resource into bringing this guy in (and/or taking him down), SO... assuming it IS the guy, then good riddance. I don't care about the circumstances - those cops will pay for their crime if any funny business is discovered.

I love the overtones on this thread, already, assuming that the cops were acting as vigilantes - hey, not a big fan of cops either, a lot of the time, but JESUS... if you're GONNA pick a side...

Do you even believe anything you read anymore? Due to the circumstances, nwo and all the things that have happened, I no longer believe this is the killer. There is a chance that they have a true "suspect" and there is a chance they have a guy they have set up to be to cover what really went done. And who knows what did?

reply to post by SpaDe_


I thought it was #ed up that the reports keep calling him 'suspect' yet they all talk like they're certain it is him. I dont know the story but if he was still just a suspect then there is no way he would have just been killed.

No kidding he is entitles to a trial and if they found him unarmed and still just shot him then shame on them, police are not suppose to kill period, it goes words > light restraint > threat > pepper spray > heavy restraint > baton > gun.

All I said was they KNEW (assuming he was not just a suspect!!) he already is dangerous and if they just did it in revenge to an unarmed killer, well they will be temporarily satisfied but they will never grow as human beings..

reply to post by Ridhya

If he fired on them, then yes way he would have been killed.

Why no witness interviews from the coffee shop crime scene? How about a video recording from the coffee shop? Obviously, the best way to hide the truth is to suppress evidence, a technique many cops are obviously familiar with. Looks like the disreputable media and the cops are joined at the hip with this one.

1. He had an officers gun from the police shooting!
2. He had a gun shot wound consistant with the discription of the suspect possibly being wounded.
3. He has had a history of violance, already had one 90 somthing year sentence, but was released thanks to Mr Huckabee

Im sure this guy is not the one,and the cop got the wrong guy just to shoot him down like the good little boy he was!!!!

If in fact he drew a weapon and brandished it in anyway, he's getting shot.
If he had no weapon and was shot, the officer shooting should be charged.
Hard as it may be, remove emotion.
The entire story is interesting, sad from the start but interesting.
I'd like to know his whole story.
But back on earth...if he's a cold killer...then good riddance.

I love all you judgemental people out there shouting down the cops for shooting this guy. Seriously? Have you lost all common sense? I think you guys have been hugging trees too tight and its been cutting off circulation to your brain.

Get a grip, the world isnt nicey nice....go ahead and play patty cake with someone thats a "suspected" murderer if you want and see if hes sweet to you, im sure dahmer would have loved that, probably would have invited you back to his house for steak.

I carry a concealed weapon, and if i had seen a suspected murders picture up, and the guy comes up on me somewhere and i tell him to stop advancing on me and he doesnt stop, im gunning him down, plain and simple. I expect the cops to do the same thing.

If your in a situation where your life could be taken or those of your family or other innocent people, you dont wait for the man to start firing at you, you put him down before he has a chance to raise his gun.

Give me a break people.

[edit on 1-12-2009 by ManBehindTheMask]

reply to post by HappilyEverAfter


If an officer feels threatened he is allowed to use lethal force. If the officer waits to see a weapon it's already going to be too late for him.

This is a criminal who:
1.Went on a rampage targeting police officers
2. Has a history of violence
3. Was considered armed and dangerous
4. Was given orders by the officer to halt and refused thus earning himself the death penalty

There are two separate stories here floating around. One is about the police thinking they had the suspect holed up in a building. They called in SWAT. No one was present.

The second story is what really happened to him. He had stolen a car. An officer was inspecting the vehicle. The suspect approached and was killed.

reply to post by Ridhya


Nail... head.
The guy was a suspect. OK, individual police officers can be 'certain' in their own mind.. but that doesn't warrant shooting a man dead. He deserved a fair trial before an impartial jury, just like anyone who has been accused of a crime, be it being a cop killer or whatever.

And besides - what happened to tazers? This, in my opinion, is the ideal situation for a tazer to be used.

Or do they only taze people who might have committed a crime? Real suspects still get pumped full of lead?
Although I'm sure living your life in a culture where guns are the norm, this probably doesn't seem as shocking to those over in the US.
There would be a national outcry if that happened over here (UK). Just like that bystander who was killed at the G20 protest - but again, that went quiet, didn't it.

Originally posted by selfisolated
reply to post by Ridhya

 

Nail... head.
The guy was a suspect. OK, individual police officers can be 'certain' in their own mind.. but that doesn't warrant shooting a man dead. He deserved a fair trial before an impartial jury, just like anyone who has been accused of a crime, be it being a cop killer or whatever.

And besides - what happened to tazers? This, in my opinion, is the ideal situation for a tazer to be used.

Or do they only taze people who might have committed a crime? Real suspects still get pumped full of lead?
Although I'm sure living your life in a culture where guns are the norm, this probably doesn't seem as shocking to those over in the US.
There would be a national outcry if that happened over here (UK). Just like that bystander who was killed at the G20 protest - but again, that went quiet, didn't it.

No, it is not an ideal situation for using a tazer when the suspect is considered armed, dangerous, and someone who specifically targeted other officers.

Here is the United States laws are clear that if an officer feels that their life is threatened they are authorized to use deadly force. It is really that simple.

Let's think about what might have been going through the mind of the officer. He is assessing the situation of a stolen vehicle. He is already on his toes as the car is still running. He senses someone behind him, turns and it is the suspect who killed four police officers. Police are already aware that he had stolen one of the police officers weapons whom he killed. They are aware that he has another weapon. The police officer orders him to halt and raise his hands. He refuses and begins running to the other side of the vehicle (presumably to take cover and have a shootout with this officer). The officer opens fire. Game over. This is a textbook example of the right of officers to use deadly force. The suspect was found to have a weapon on him.

For minor clarification:
You are the suspect in the murder of four people (police officers) and you seemingly just killed them out of random anger/malice/spite. If you have an officer who knows about the previous situation point a gun at you and order you to halt and put your hands up, you will most likely die if you don't. The officer is probably very scared for his own life and will do anything in his power to protect himself.

[edit on 1-12-2009 by Bugman82]

Originally posted by Ridhya
But he has already well proven himself to be a cop killer. Their mindset is 'here we have an extremely dangerous man and we do not want to risk more casualties'.

Thanks for saying that! The cops were facing a very dangerous suspect, armed and dangerous, with nothing to lose. Any attempt of confrontation (not unlikely in my opinion) on his part must have been met with deadly force.

Sorry but I choose cop's life over that of a murderer. We don't want more widows and orphans, and I'm glad this POS cad no more harm.

Originally posted by Bugman82
reply to post by HappilyEverAfter

 

If an officer feels threatened he is allowed to use lethal force. If the officer waits to see a weapon it's already going to be too late for him.

This is a criminal who:
1.Went on a rampage targeting police officers
2. Has a history of violence
3. Was considered armed and dangerous
4. Was given orders by the officer to halt and refused thus earning himself the death penalty

There are two separate stories here floating around. One is about the police thinking they had the suspect holed up in a building. They called in SWAT. No one was present.

The second story is what really happened to him. He had stolen a car. An officer was inspecting the vehicle. The suspect approached and was killed.

and its sickening communists like you that beleive the cops are the judge and jury here.

Anyone any info on possible "reason" for the four murders in the first place- for example, does anyone know if the cops were plain clothed in the cafe etc?

reply to post by selfisolated


taze him? man, are you kidding? Ok, I'll go with the cop huggers here on this one in that you don't want to cause involuntary spasms to a person holding a loaded weapon with his finger on the trigger. You just can't safely control this situation.

now, to put my anti pig hat back on...

dude, seriously? he's healthy, not an invalid, cripple, infant, elderly, protester or wheelchair bound.. and we all know what's what will really earn you a good multiple tasering.