San Francisco Police Shoot and Kill Teenager over $2 bus fare GRAPHIC VIDEO

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by BeyondPerception

 

Uhm yeah... If you go back and read through the posts you will have the same infomration we have.

Including where witnesses say they kid had a gun.
Including where witnesses say they kid shot at the cops.
Including witness video showing the gun laying on the ground.

What more do you want?

You're disregarding the massive amount of witnesses who claim there was no gun.
You're disregarding the massive amount of witnesses who say he didn't shoot at police.
You're disregarding the fact that the low quality video does nothing more than show an object that appeared to be a gun sitting on the ground. In no way does that video confirm it is in fact a gun, nor prove it is 'the gun' used in this 'crime', hence there is no evidence linking the gun to this guy other than 'confidence'.

reply to post by Xcathdra


i merely posted/patted OP on the back and made reference to past history of 70's Harlem
and merely noted that it's pointless to waste time debating a trained sophist.


as there is a difference between bias and prejudice, as you well know.

So its ok for you to stereotype...?

whatever are you talking about, project much?

Every time the idiotic race card is played, it convulutes the actual issue.

yes, that is correct, so why why have you brought it up?

The facts speak for themselves.
The kids actions speak for themselves.

facts? i see no facts here,
just speculation and various allegations/versions that conflict at multiple points.

oh and you screaming "case closed, move along" it seems

If thats something you cant accept, then thats your problem, not mine.

in the context of this post/reply:
back at you.

Next time try to deal with the facts surrounding the topic, instead of trying to mire the topic with accusations and insinuations that are baseless.

as opposed to attacking me, and obviously confusing me with some one else. which i find offensive, as you have confused me with a racist it seems.

as well as skillfully avoiding any mention of what those allegations were, namely, the practice among many, leos of keeping a "throwaway gun" for purposes of incrimination, usually kept in an ankle holster. [just thought i'd mention it to bring other readers up to date.]

Whatever your personal issue is with the police, may I suggest you get over it and quit stereotyping and applying your personal situaiotn to every single incident.

lol, says the man who pissed all over my "zomg!! i met a a good cop today" thread with your trolling and back and forth with another pair of posters.
lol
i have no personal issues with police, just with authoritarians, psychopaths, sociopaths, and any other kinds of creatures who think they can employ violence, both overt and covert without any kind of accountability or retribution.

trash is trash whether it wears a uniform or not, whether it's got a 10 figure bank balance or not, whether it lives in a ghetto or a georgian townhouse, trash is trash. and it comes in all sizes, shapes, and colors.

They arent the same, the facts arent the same, they will never be the same.

yup, keep repeating that gibberish, you'll eventually hypnotize yourself into believing it,

but not me.

So its ok for you to stereotype...?

apparently not, but it seems to be okay for you.

just because i'm from harlem [ i was born in Greenwich Village by the way]
doesn't mean i'm black.

i actually look like a native american,
when i was younger and could pass for white i looked jewish.
so much for your detective skills.

a kid was shot like a dog in the street and allowed to die,
much confusion exists as those who shot him, and who would have continued to shoot if he'd managed to get himself up into a more dignified position, claim he had a gun and fired it at them [the alleged gun, was suspiciously, not immediately available]. other witnesses deny this.
officers at the scene then set about doing anything and everything, except try to save that kid.

that was pretty clear from watching the video,
it's not a play were any symbolism needs to be interpreted/explained.

actions do speak louder than words.

by the way what were the results of the paraffin tests done to the kids hands?
after all that would quickly resolve the matter, wouldn't it?

i told you,
i am not gonna waste any time arguing about it.
you are arguing with so many other posters here you're getting confused.

you already judged/stereotype the kid. it's a "good kill" in your book.

just not mine.

reply to post by BeyondPerception


Oh ok.. so because witnesses support the Police version of events, they must not be trustworthy then. It doesnt change the facts though.

The Kid had a gun - Police and Witnesses say this.
The kid pulled the gun and shot at police - Police and Witnesses say this
Witnesses have come forward with video footage showing the gun.

The city has the microphones setup in the city that can detect gunfire, and in this case it did. One shot, consistent with police and witness testimony. Followed about 1.6 seconds later by more shots, which would be the police returning fire.

Video shot by a witnesses who shows a person picking the gun up and leaving with it.

A press conference by the Chief stating they have identified the person and found a gun at the residence and are currently testing it.

Your paranoia towards law enforcement is amazing to say the least. You and several others see so many conspiracies that you cant see the trees while standing in the middle of the forest. The simple fact that you dismiss eyewitness testimony and officer testimony is evidence of that.

Believe what you want...

The facts speak for themselves in this case. You would know this if you read the thread and ALL the information and links provided in it. That would mean you would need to not only read the info, but also to stop seeing only what you want while ignoring the rest.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
i merely posted/patted OP on the back and made reference to past history of 70's Harlem
and merely noted that it's pointless to waste time debating a trained sophist.

1970s harlem, 2011 San Francisco - Yeah.. roughly the same...

/end sarcasm

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
as there is a difference between bias and prejudice, as you well know.

I am very well aware of it. Bias and prejudice are constantly used to paint a picture when its convenient, regardless of the facts.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

So its ok for you to stereotype...?

whatever are you talking about, project much?

Obfuscate much?

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

Every time the idiotic race card is played, it convulutes the actual issue.

yes, that is correct, so why why have you brought it up?

To point out that using it in your argument makes as much sense as comparing this incident to Harlem in the 1970s.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

The facts speak for themselves.
The kids actions speak for themselves.

facts? i see no facts here,
just speculation and various allegations/versions that conflict at multiple points.

Thats because you are ignoring them and only seeing what you want to see, which is a picture that will always paint Law Enforcement in a bad light, regardless of circumstances involved.

What is evident is your dismissal of the kids possible motives created by his own past actions, while condemning law enforcement any chance you get.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
oh and you screaming "case closed, move along" it seems

Ive never said that. What I did and have been saying is in this case the facts are speaking for themsleves.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

If thats something you cant accept, then thats your problem, not mine.

in the context of this post/reply:
back at you.

Ah... more Obfuscation...

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

Next time try to deal with the facts surrounding the topic, instead of trying to mire the topic with accusations and insinuations that are baseless.

as opposed to attacking me, and obviously confusing me with some one else. which i find offensive, as you have confused me with a racist it seems.

Racist? Nope..

Opprotunist? Yup

But by all means, continue ignoring the facts while trying to paint the picture of a kid who had no issues, who had no gun, who never shot at the police, and who was brutally executed by the police for no reason at all. That has been the cruxt of your argument to date, so you might as well stick with it.

God knows is evident you and some others have no intrest in the truth, and only going after law enforcement.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
as well as skillfully avoiding any mention of what those allegations were, namely, the practice among many, leos of keeping a "throwaway gun" for purposes of incrimination, usually kept in an ankle holster. [just thought i'd mention it to bring other readers up to date.]

I didnt avoid it. I answered it by stating that you are so blinded by your hatred of law enforcement that you only see what you want. You are doing it in this case, where you are arguing there is no evidence the kid was armed, while putting forth a ridiculous argument that the gun that was found was planeted by the police, when you in fact have nothing to support that claim.

The term, by the way, is called being a hypocrite.

You only see what you want, and you reject anything that undermines that view. You have proven my point by your rgument of the throw away gun, the no proof of the kid having a gun while stating, with no proof, the cops planeted it, the defense your not stereotyping, when you in fact are, and again i refer you to your quote above where you state the pratice among leos.

I can keep going, but you dont need my help to undermine your own argument and claims.. You do that just fine on your own.

Whats sad though, is you are so blinded by your hatred and paranoia, that you dont see yourself doing it.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

Whatever your personal issue is with the police, may I suggest you get over it and quit stereotyping and applying your personal situaiotn to every single incident.

lol, says the man who pissed all over my "zomg!! i met a a good cop today" thread with your trolling and back and forth with another pair of posters.
lol
i have no personal issues with police, just with authoritarians, psychopaths, sociopaths, and any other kinds of creatures who think they can employ violence, both overt and covert without any kind of accountability or retribution.

Again I refer you back to your comments about LEOs routinely placing throw down guns. I refer you to your argument there is "no proof" the lkid was armed, yet you push an argument that the cops planted the gun, with absolutely no proof of your own.

So yes, you have a problem with law enforcement. As I stated above, you are so blinded by that hate that you dont see yourself doing it.

As far as the sociopath BS.. Cry to someone else... I love how you and other bleeding heart liberals condemn the police for u[]returning fire while hail the kid as a victim. Again that goes back to my argument that you are so blinded by your hatred towards law enforcement, that you excuse crimes committed by anyone if the police are somehow involved.

The Police did not start this.. The kid did.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
trash is trash whether it wears a uniform or not, whether it's got a 10 figure bank balance or not, whether it lives in a ghetto or a georgian townhouse, trash is trash. and it comes in all sizes, shapes, and colors.

Then call a spade a spade and quit protecting the kid because he is young and black while trying ti paint law enforcement in this case as soemthing they are not.

The term is personal accountibility.. Something else you and some of the other cop haters refuse to apply to anyone other than law enforcement. Again your argument to date supports my accusation, since you are so quick to hang the cops while you ignore the actions of the kid. Your argument - no proof the kid did anything wrong, yet amazingly you have all the proof you need to hang the cops.

Yeah....

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

They arent the same, the facts arent the same, they will never be the same.

yup, keep repeating that gibberish, you'll eventually hypnotize yourself into believing it,

but not me.

Thats because you are already to the level of parnoid delusional when it comes to law enforcement. I love it when you make accusations that prove my point.

As I stated you really dont need my help to look bad.. You do just fine all on your own.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

So its ok for you to stereotype...?

apparently not, but it seems to be okay for you.

No where have I stereotyped.. That would be you. Again, you dont ever know what the hell you type. You need to pay attention.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
just because i'm from harlem [ i was born in Greenwich Village by the way]
doesn't mean i'm black.

Care check - aisle 2.

Once again you bring race into the equation... Typical.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
i actually look like a native american,
when i was younger and could pass for white i looked jewish.
so much for your detective skills.

again, care check aisle 2.

Although once again I applaud your ability to only see what you want in order to paint your own picture while you ignore facts,.

Once again you bring up the race issue.

How sad for you.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
a kid was shot like a dog in the street and allowed to die,
much confusion exists as those who shot him, and who would have continued to shoot if he'd managed to get himself up into a more dignified position, claim he had a gun and fired it at them [the alleged gun, was suspiciously, not immediately available]. other witnesses deny this.
officers at the scene then set about doing anything and everything, except try to save that kid.

Dont blame the police because of the kids stupidity and your ignorance when it comes to law enforcement. And once again, I point out the kid would never have been in that position had he not broken the law in the first place.

Quit trying to blame everyone else for the kids actions.

Unless your saying you support any and all criminals who violate the law? Thats seems to be your stance from your own arguments.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
that was pretty clear from watching the video,
it's not a play were any symbolism needs to be interpreted/explained.

Thats because the facts speak for themselves. You know what facts are right, its those pesky things you continually ignore because you are so intent to blame any and all except the kid for what occured. Your doing because of your personal hatred towards law enforcement.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
actions do speak louder than words.

Which is why the kid should not have run, pulled a gun, or shot at the police.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
by the way what were the results of the paraffin tests done to the kids hands?
after all that would quickly resolve the matter, wouldn't it?

And you said you read all the info... Apparently you didnt. The kids hands tested positive for GSR.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
i told you,
i am not gonna waste any time arguing about it.
you are arguing with so many other posters here you're getting confused.

Not at all... You and the other posters are making the exact same argument, which is based on ignorance and hatred of the police, which is clouding your view of the incident. See my above answer for proof of that.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
you already judged/stereotype the kid. it's a "good kill" in your book.

just not mine.

Not at all.. What I have done is look at the facts and information present, which is something you apparently refuse to do, and went from there.

What I have said from the begining is -
The kid didnt pay the fare to ride and was detained by police - Fact.
The kid ran from the police - Fact
The kid fired a round at the cops - Fact
The kid has GSR on his hands - Fact
Shell casing was recovered that is not from the officers duty weapon - Fact
Witnessess have confirmed law enforcements side of the story - Fact
Witness video footage shows a gun on the ground - Fact
Witness video shows someone taking that gun - Fact
The kid recently got out of prison for a sec rime and was on parole - Fact
The kid was a convicted felon in possession of a handgun - Fact
The police located the person who took the gun and retrieved it from his house - Fact

What are your facts? Aside from the ones you just decide to make up or ignore to support your argument?


As I said.. Go read the thread, read the links, and get back to me. At least then you can attempt to make an informed argument .

..........and with that, ill be back in the thread when results from the gun testing come out that links the gun to the kid and the crime scene. That should give you more than enough time to rethink your argument and get your facts straight.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
The Kid had a gun - Police and Witnesses say this.
The kid pulled the gun and shot at police - Police and Witnesses say this

Is adding "police" in with witnesses supposed to ADD credibility to it? Because to me, it takes away credibility. If 2 groups of witnesses are saying 2 different things, and the police side with one group, I would sooner believe the opposing group in ANY case where police action is being called into question.

Go try to sue police officers or government officials. Most of the time you will have no chance in court, regardless of how much evidence is against them. This is the mechanism by which the tyranny of the police state maintains itself. When they know we have no recourse, they feel free to abuse their power and dominate us. If we had legal recourse, this wouldn't be happening.

Originally posted by XcathdraOh ok.. so because witnesses support the Police version of events, they must not be trustworthy then. It doesnt change the facts though.

Here we go with more assumptions.

Consider 100 people saying no gun, no gun fire, and 2 people saying gun, and gun fire. Are we supposed to simply neglect an overwhelming difference in views, or just go with the fact that 2 witnesses thinks otherwise, and that since they go with the police's side of the story, they're definitely right?

Not claiming those are the numbers, but we're given no data on how many witnesses have statements saying they saw a gun and gun fire. The video speaks for itself on the contrary.

Wouldn't it make sense that 100 people scattered in an large area would have a better vantage point than that of 2 people? What do we even know about these witnesses, or their actual testimony?

And please explain to me how a witnesses statement ever becomes a fact.

Originally posted by XcathdraThe Kid had a gun - Police and Witnesses say this.
The kid pulled the gun and shot at police - Police and Witnesses say this
Witnesses have come forward with video footage showing the gun.

I already responded to this in my last post.

Oh you changed it slightly, police and witnesses?

Since when is it that police would never lie? Do you realize the seriousness of the case when a 19 year old kid is killed? This isn't just some case where a kid took a candy bar from a convenience store.

Maybe we should just stick with what police say, and not bother with evidence.

Originally posted by XcathdraThe city has the microphones setup in the city that can detect gunfire, and in this case it did. One shot, consistent with police and witness testimony. Followed about 1.6 seconds later by more shots, which would be the police returning fire.

See my post on last page talking about ShotSpotter.

Originally posted by XcathdraVideo shot by a witnesses who shows a person picking the gun up and leaving with it.

Sorry, but where is this video??? I've not come across any video displaying anyone either A) picking up a gun or B) leaving the scene with one. The video you're likely referring to has someone pick up a broken phone, not a gun.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
A press conference by the Chief stating they have identified the person and found a gun at the residence and are currently testing it.

Your paranoia towards law enforcement is amazing to say the least. You and several others see so many conspiracies that you cant see the trees while standing in the middle of the forest. The simple fact that you dismiss eyewitness testimony and officer testimony is evidence of that.

Can't see the trees while standing in the middle of the forest? Oh, so since I question non-factual evidence, I am suddenly looking at this whole case with my eyes closed.

And since when have I claimed to see any conspiracies? Take your time.

I simply ask you to provide factual evidence, not questionable evidence, of your claims, and all of the sudden you jump to a conclusion that I have paranoia of law enforcement, and am taking sides or something. I'm not taking sides with anyone, just asking for FACTS of BOTH sides before making a decision, since it's likely this case will get buried, just like this kid.

As for eyewitness testimony, or police testimony:
In general, people lie. Testimonies come from people. Therefore, testimonies alone cannot be seen as facts.

Until we eliminate the POSSIBILITY of someone lying, this will not change.

Originally posted by XcathdraBelieve what you want...

Not here to let my beliefs distract me. Just looking for facts.

Originally posted by XcathdraThe facts speak for themselves in this case. You would know this if you read the thread and ALL the information and links provided in it. That would mean you would need to not only read the info, but also to stop seeing only what you want while ignoring the rest.

I've read all of the information. How about going back to page 5 and reading what I originally posted.

No new solid evidence has come forward since then. Oh, ShotSpotter is proof? A sound bite is proof? Did you see all of the details relating to the data from ShotSpotter? Did you hear the recording? How exactly can YOU use a tid-bit of information told in the media, and make your mind up that something is proof.

And I am ignoring no information, I am trying to take all things into consideration, and not make any conclusions.

This case has been open a short period of time, with only a small amount of information proving this 'opened fire on police' aspect, and already you've made up your mind, simply because of some police statements, and a small amount of evidence proving this.

Originally posted by XcathdraIm not a lawyer, I am a Police Officer.

Well now, that puts things into perspective.

-------------------

Oh and, why do you keep retracting from my questions asked on the last page, and responding with something completely different?

Here, I'll post them again for you:

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
It's been reported that someone, seen in the video, had taken the firearm, and shell casings, from the scene.

Isn't tampering with evidence a pretty serious offense?

What's this guys name who did this? Where are the reports for his charges on tampering with an investigation and/or evidence?

Or did they just let him go and keep him anonymous?

They mention that firearm and shell casings were taken by this person, but only a gun was recovered.

Does it not seem the slightest bit fishy that someone would even think about taking shell casings from a scene?

Weren't these shots fired WHILE in pursuit? Not where he lay to die, where media states these casings were picked up from, since they're claiming the same person took both the gun and the casings? Hard claim that the same person picked up both the gun and shell casings. Doesn't anyone see this little loophole in the story?

Are we now trying to convince people that these citizens had it in their best interest to cover this whole thing up?

Where are the prints from the shooter on this weapon? Or did he wear gloves, and the mob took those too?

Only thing we've heard about 'the' gun is that an officer is 'confident' it was his weapon. Meh.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Consider 100 people saying no gun, no gun fire, and 2 people saying gun, and gun fire. Are we supposed to simply neglect an overwhelming difference in views, or just go with the fact that 2 witnesses thinks otherwise, and that since they go with the police's side of the story, they're definitely right?

No but when ShotSpotter picked up 2 shots whose sound signature did not match the officer's weapons and placed those shots as being fired within 25 meters of the officers shots, plus placed the shots as coming from a different direction I'd tend to believe the witnesses who said the suspect was firing.

A .45 ACP handgun produces a distinct sound- MUCH different than the sharp bark of a .40 S&W or the pop of a 9x19mm. It's more of a thumping sound than anything else. Ballistic tracking programs can differentiate between rounds with a good degree of accuracy.

Plus if 100 people are saying gun and 2 are saying no gun are we supposed to simply neglect an overwhelming difference in views or just go with the fact that 2 witnesses think otherwise and that since they go with the hood rat side of the story they're definitely right?

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
This isn't just some case where a kid took a candy bar from a convenience store.

You're right. This is a case of a convicted rapist who jumped parole and had warrants issued for the murder of a pregnant teenager and her unborn baby, along with the wounding of three other people, who started cranking rounds off at the police in the middle of the street because he wasn't man enough to face his crimes.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Sorry, but where is this video??? I've not come across any video displaying anyone either A) picking up a gun or B) leaving the scene with one. The video you're likely referring to has someone pick up a broken phone, not a gun.

See NUMEROUS posts where this has been discussed. The video showing the pistol is NOT the one where the guy in the striped hoodie is picking up a phone. The firearm is in a different video which is shot from the north facing south around 25 feet from where the suspect came to rest.

The video identifying the man who beat feet with it off the scene was turned in by a citizen who filmed it with her cell phone and didn't want another thug running around her neighborhood with a firearm. Just because it isn't on YouTube does not mean it did not happen. I took 2 big corn laden dumps today- just because the turds are not filmed being pinched off and posted to YouTube does not mean they do not exist at this moment floating around somewhere in my local sewage treatment plant.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
It's been reported that someone, seen in the video, had taken the firearm, and shell casings, from the scene.

Isn't tampering with evidence a pretty serious offense?

No- not really in the grand scheme of things and especially in this case. The man who walked off with the firearm can say that he thought there was no connection to the shooting nearby and skate on a tampering charge even if he acted as his own attorney. Any attorney right out of law school would squash that charge in 15 minutes flat- assuming a judge would be dumb enough to find probable cause for the arrest in the first place.

Also no bystander took shell casings from the scene. The police recovered shell casings from the scene which encompasses the area from 3rd Street to the spot where the suspect collapsed after being shot.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
What's this guys name who did this? Where are the reports for his charges on tampering with an investigation and/or evidence?

Or did they just let him go and keep him anonymous?

He was not charged in exchange for his cooperation therefore his name is not going to be released due to privacy laws. As for incident reports they are only generated when crimes have been committed and a suspect is sought and/or arrested.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
They mention that firearm and shell casings were taken by this person, but only a gun was recovered.

No "they" do not. The firearm was taken from the scene. The shell casings were found along the route the suspect took in his attempt to elude the police due to the murder warrant he generated when he shot a pregnant teenage girl to death.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Does it not seem the slightest bit fishy that someone would even think about taking shell casings from a scene?

No news source has reported this- no idea where you're getting this from...

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Weren't these shots fired WHILE in pursuit? Not where he lay to die, where media states these casings were picked up from, since they're claiming the same person took both the gun and the casings? Hard claim that the same person picked up both the gun and shell casings.

Yes. They were found along the route he took in an attempt to evade police and escape arrest for murder. The media stated that shell casings were found by the police. Nobody in the media has claimed the guy who took the gun went back and collected shell casings. That is fantasy. They have said that the police are going to test the weapon to see if the shell casings match those that were recovered.

The scene by the way encompasses every inch the suspect stood on from first contact at the station until the ambulance picked him up and brought him to the hospital where he died 3 hours later.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Where are the prints from the shooter on this weapon? Or did he wear gloves, and the mob took those too?

Someone else has handled the weapon. External fingerprints on firearms are hard to isolate, especially after more than one person has handled the weapon- but they are recoverable. I would also imagine they will test unfired cartridges for fingerprints as they would be clearer, unmolested and proof that the suspect was in possession of the weapon.

Also keep in mind that this is reality and not an episode of CSI Miami. Prints take a while to be developed, fixed and recorded. Even with AFIS analysis takes a while.

Then again I believe even if someone had video of the rapist shooting at the cops you'd say the whole thing was staged by the police and the guy shooting wasn't really the suspect

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Oh and, why do you keep retracting from my questions asked on the last page, and responding with something completely different?

Here, I'll post them again for you:

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
It's been reported that someone, seen in the video, had taken the firearm, and shell casings, from the scene.

Isn't tampering with evidence a pretty serious offense?

What's this guys name who did this? Where are the reports for his charges on tampering with an investigation and/or evidence?

Or did they just let him go and keep him anonymous?

They mention that firearm and shell casings were taken by this person, but only a gun was recovered.

Does it not seem the slightest bit fishy that someone would even think about taking shell casings from a scene?

Weren't these shots fired WHILE in pursuit? Not where he lay to die, where media states these casings were picked up from, since they're claiming the same person took both the gun and the casings? Hard claim that the same person picked up both the gun and shell casings. Doesn't anyone see this little loophole in the story?

Are we now trying to convince people that these citizens had it in their best interest to cover this whole thing up?

Where are the prints from the shooter on this weapon? Or did he wear gloves, and the mob took those too?

Only thing we've heard about 'the' gun is that an officer is 'confident' it was his weapon. Meh.

edit on 7/21/2011 by BeyondPerception because: formatting / typo

Im not retracting from the questions at all. They have been answered, and you would know this if you actually read the thread and the source material links. Simply ignoring the answers because you dont like them / doesnt support your argument doesnt change anything.

Quit being lazy and go read.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
as well as skillfully avoiding any mention of what those allegations were, namely, the practice among many, leos of keeping a "throwaway gun" for purposes of incrimination, usually kept in an ankle holster. [just thought i'd mention it to bring other readers up to date.

Errrr.....

I was an officer for many, many years working in a department of 38 full time and 19 reserve officers and not one carried a throwdown at all- much less in an ankle holster.

If you had any conception of firearms usage and employment you would know that

#1 An ankle holster prints like a mo-fo and can be spotted from across the street
#2 An ankle holster is damn near impossible to draw from
#3 In order to draw you need to hike your pant leg up past mid calf
#4 Drawing from an ankle holster takes a good 4-5 seconds even if the motion has been committed to muscle memory
#5 Ankle holsters flop around like crazy when walking- much less running
#6 Many officers wear shorts and having a handgun flopping around like a fish out of water is just not happening
#7 Even if an officer was as brain dead as to purchase one of these worthless rigs to carry his BACKUP firearm he would have to qualify as if it were a service weapon- refer to #2, #3 and #4.

In addition to all of the above firearms are traceable. Between manufacturer records, NICS checks and BATF Form 4473s any handgun can be run down from the day it left the factory. Even grinding off serials don't work as it is possible to raise the serial from the opposite side of the stamped numbers with a weak acid solution.

Just thought I'd mention this to keep other readers up to date.

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by HappilyEverAfter
He'd no doubt still be alive had shots not been fired.

edit on 20-7-2011 by HappilyEverAfter because: typo

As in "If the convicted rapist and parole jumper wanted on a homicide warrant didn't shoot at the cops he'd still be alive" or "If the police just stood there and let the convicted rapist and parole jumper wanted on a homicide warrant continue to crank rounds out of his illegal handgun at them and innocent bystanders on a city street he'd still be alive?"

"If the convicted rapist and parole jumper wanted on a homicide warrant didn't shoot ".
Correct on the first assumption.
This 'kid' was well on his way to dead years ago, the trail of responsibility and consequence is BEHIND him, as it is with all of us.

Originally posted by SFA437
No but when ShotSpotter picked up 2 shots whose sound signature did not match the officer's weapons and placed those shots as being fired within 25 meters of the officers shots, plus placed the shots as coming from a different direction I'd tend to believe the witnesses who said the suspect was firing.

Source? Haven't seen any information relating to evidence of shots being fired in 2 directions, nor information claiming the accuracy of this technology, but the opposite (see below).

Making up your own stories again, are we?

While the technology is not precise enough to identify individual weapons, police say the information will help them reconstruct what happened during the shooting Saturday afternoon. blogs.sfweekly.com...

Originally posted by SFA437
Plus if 100 people are saying gun and 2 are saying no gun are we supposed to simply neglect an overwhelming difference in views or just go with the fact that 2 witnesses think otherwise and that since they go with the hood rat side of the story they're definitely right?

Here we go with more assumptions. Way to change my perspective for me.

It's a matter of weighing opinions. There is obviously more weight on one side. Do the math.

And I've already made my point clear on testimony.

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
This isn't just some case where a kid took a candy bar from a convenience store.

You're right. This is a case of a convicted rapist who jumped parole and had warrants issued for the murder of a pregnant teenager and her unborn baby, along with the wounding of three other people, who started cranking rounds off at the police in the middle of the street because he wasn't man enough to face his crimes.

As usual, you use his priors as justification for his death. He already served time for his other crime of promoting prostitution, 2 years, hence why he was on parole. He wasn't even an adult when he committed the crime. Or is your philosophy 'Once a convict, still a convict.'.

Initially charged with child rape, Harding ultimately pleaded guilty to attempted first-degree promoting prostitution. He was sentenced to nearly two years in prison on April 2, 2010, and appears to have recently been released.
www.seattlepi.com...

The rest of it is moot. However you want to spin it, he was a person of interest in the other crimes, not a convict.

Person Of Interest Met With Parole Officer Hours Before Shooting

www.kirotv.com...

I didn't know fleeing suspects check in with their parole officers.

How do we even know that Harding was aware he was wanted for questioning?

Originally posted by SFA437
See NUMEROUS posts where this has been discussed. The video showing the pistol is NOT the one where the guy in the striped hoodie is picking up a phone. The firearm is in a different video which is shot from the north facing south around 25 feet from where the suspect came to rest.

The video identifying the man who beat feet with it off the scene was turned in by a citizen who filmed it with her cell phone and didn't want another thug running around her neighborhood with a firearm. Just because it isn't on YouTube does not mean it did not happen. I took 2 big corn laden dumps today- just because the turds are not filmed being pinched off and posted to YouTube does not mean they do not exist at this moment floating around somewhere in my local sewage treatment plant.

Wait, what??? NUMEROUS???

Since when has the media said there is another video? Any time they bring up a video talking about the gun, they reference the YouTube video displaying the what appears to be a gun, in the low right corner of the screen, for a few seconds.

Where are sources showing this other video you claim? This video would be conveniently uploaded had it existed, and there would be no need for any of these protests or questioning the incident.

Suhr already told media that the video is on YouTube showing someone take a gun.

Suhr said video posted on YouTube shows a person picking up the gun after a crowd surrounded Harding’s body. is.gd...

Police said a man seen in a video took the pistol from the shooting scene. They said they've recovered the weapon but that he also took shell casings and a cellphone.www.kirotv.com...

Hmmmm I think I know which video they're referring to... www.youtube.com...

Now what?

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
It's been reported that someone, seen in the video, had taken the firearm, and shell casings, from the scene.

Isn't tampering with evidence a pretty serious offense?

No- not really in the grand scheme of things and especially in this case. The man who walked off with the firearm can say that he thought there was no connection to the shooting nearby and skate on a tampering charge even if he acted as his own attorney. Any attorney right out of law school would squash that charge in 15 minutes flat- assuming a judge would be dumb enough to find probable cause for the arrest in the first place.

Oh, please. So tampering with the KEY piece of evidence in this case is no big deal? Just gonna let this guy go without any issue simply for playing the 'dumb' card...

Pull your head out of the grass man.

Originally posted by SFA437
Also no bystander took shell casings from the scene. The police recovered shell casings from the scene which encompasses the area from 3rd Street to the spot where the suspect collapsed after being shot.

Again, you make claims, and offer no citations.

Numerous reports state that the casings were taken from the same guy who apparently took the firearm. Haven't seen anything stating police collected casings and that matched the firearm they've apparently recovered.

Let me repost this for you:

Police said a man seen in a video took the pistol from the shooting scene. They said they've recovered the weapon but that he also took shell casings and a cellphone.

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
What's this guys name who did this? Where are the reports for his charges on tampering with an investigation and/or evidence?

Or did they just let him go and keep him anonymous?

He was not charged in exchange for his cooperation therefore his name is not going to be released due to privacy laws. As for incident reports they are only generated when crimes have been committed and a suspect is sought and/or arrested.

Source?

Wouldn't the police be pretty pissed if someone was trying to keep evidence from them being able to prove their side of the story? Oh, right, he plays the dumb card, and they just let him off clean.

Is your head still in the grass?

Police received tips that led them to a parolee's house in the Bayview where they found a gun that "looks like the same firearm that was on the ground," police Chief Greg Suhr said Monday. www.foxreno.com...

Oh, and he was a parolee, according to reports.. Yup, totally gonna let him walk. Parolee's always get the special attention.

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
They mention that firearm and shell casings were taken by this person, but only a gun was recovered.

No "they" do not. The firearm was taken from the scene. The shell casings were found along the route the suspect took in his attempt to elude the police due to the murder warrant he generated when he shot a pregnant teenage girl to death.

I'll post it again... if you missed it twice already.

Police said a man seen in a video took the pistol from the shooting scene. They said they've recovered the weapon but that he also took shell casings and a cellphone.www.kirotv.com...

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Does it not seem the slightest bit fishy that someone would even think about taking shell casings from a scene?

No news source has reported this- no idea where you're getting this from...

Maybe if you read up?

Eh. You'll probably make some excuse that you can't find it in this post.

Police said a man seen in a video took the pistol from the shooting scene. They said they've recovered the weapon but that he also took shell casings and a cellphone.www.kirotv.com...

Maybe you need 10 of them?

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Weren't these shots fired WHILE in pursuit? Not where he lay to die, where media states these casings were picked up from, since they're claiming the same person took both the gun and the casings? Hard claim that the same person picked up both the gun and shell casings.

Yes. They were found along the route he took in an attempt to evade police and escape arrest for murder. The media stated that shell casings were found by the police. Nobody in the media has claimed the guy who took the gun went back and collected shell casings. That is fantasy. They have said that the police are going to test the weapon to see if the shell casings match those that were recovered.

Police said a man seen in a video took the pistol from the shooting scene. They said they've recovered the weapon but that he also took shell casings and a cellphone. Fantasy News

Fantasy News is my favorite source of news, btw.

Originally posted by SFA437
The scene by the way encompasses every inch the suspect stood on from first contact at the station until the ambulance picked him up and brought him to the hospital where he died 3 hours later.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Where are the prints from the shooter on this weapon? Or did he wear gloves, and the mob took those too?

Someone else has handled the weapon. External fingerprints on firearms are hard to isolate, especially after more than one person has handled the weapon- but they are recoverable. I would also imagine they will test unfired cartridges for fingerprints as they would be clearer, unmolested and proof that the suspect was in possession of the weapon.

Also keep in mind that this is reality and not an episode of CSI Miami. Prints take a while to be developed, fixed and recorded. Even with AFIS analysis takes a while.

But you've already made up your mind that this 'hood rat' is guilty. Surely, useless prints wouldn't change your decision.

Originally posted by SFA437
Then again I believe even if someone had video of the rapist shooting at the cops you'd say the whole thing was staged by the police and the guy shooting wasn't really the suspect

Assumptions seem to run deep in this brotherhood, as well as reading comprehension.

I keep being told to go back and read by those none other than the one's who show they cannot do so.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Im not retracting from the questions at all. They have been answered, and you would know this if you actually read the thread and the source material links. Simply ignoring the answers because you dont like them / doesnt support your argument doesnt change anything.

Quit being lazy and go read.

How about quit being so lazy, and post some citations?... since you claim they've all been answered.

An article on this incident at counterpunch today:
www.counterpunch.org...

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Source? Haven't seen any information relating to evidence of shots being fired in 2 directions, nor information claiming the accuracy of this technology, but the opposite (see below).

Making up your own stories again, are we?

While the technology is not precise enough to identify individual weapons, police say the information will help them reconstruct what happened during the shooting Saturday afternoon. blogs.sfweekly.com...

I'm used to Boomerang which identifies not only the location fired from down to under 25m and direction but caliber of weapon :

Boomerang 1

Boomerang 2

So while I have possibly confused the systems used and their capability the answer to your question is that no, unlike you, I did not delve into the realm of fantasy in order to present a point for my side of the debate.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Here we go with more assumptions. Way to change my perspective for me.

It's a matter of weighing opinions. There is obviously more weight on one side. Do the math.

And I've already made my point clear on testimony.

I simply switched the numbers and repeated exactly what you said. When you pull numbers out of your 4th point of contact and refer to them as fact we are supposed to take it as if it we gospel coming from the mouth of the gods but if I use your made up numbers it does the opposite?

Logic fail.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
As usual, you use his priors as justification for his death. He already served time for his other crime of promoting prostitution, 2 years, hence why he was on parole. He wasn't even an adult when he committed the crime. Or is your philosophy 'Once a convict, still a convict.'.

Harding's Criminal Investigation and Charges
Kenneth Harding, the 19-year-old killed by San Francisco police Saturday, was a pimp accused of making an underage girl perform oral sex on him and later convicted of demanding that girl to earn him “ho’ money” in Seattle, court documents show.

As usual for ATS the suspect is turned into a modern day Jesus like martyr figure while those of us who have a rational and logical thought process are able to apply both past behavior as well as current behavior of a suspect to look at the totality of circumstances and determine that the hood rat was most likely a hood rat.

Harding Criminal Background

Oh wow look.... ARMED robbery. See the highlighted word armed? He was also wanted for the SHOOTING of 3 people and the MURDER of a teenage girl and her unborn child. See the highlighted word shooting? What does one shoot with? Slingshots? Arrows? Oh wait... a GUN.

Nice attempt at disinformation and misdirection though. It shows how pathetically weak your points are.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
The rest of it is moot. However you want to spin it, he was a person of interest in the other crimes, not a convict.

Well if one is trying to determine if someone was likely armed it would behoove one to look at prior behavior patterns. If a child is molested in a neighborhood the first people to look at is..... child molesters (like Harding). If one is trying to determine if someone was armed and shooting at police then one should look at behavior patterns including things like armed robbery and shooting at people.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception

Person Of Interest Met With Parole Officer Hours Before Shooting

www.kirotv.com...

I didn't know fleeing suspects check in with their parole officers.

They sure do- try looking up

Edward "Time" Romero of Devner- charge murder. Research fail.

He was also committing a crime simply by being in California which would have landed him right back in prison for parole violation. Logic and memory fail.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
How do we even know that Harding was aware he was wanted for questioning?

If you put 7 rounds into 4 people, all of whom know you personally, and kill a mother and her unborn baby most people would assume the local constabulary would be interested in you.

He also knew he was in violation of his parole for raping a 13 year old, kidnapping her and attempting to force her into prostitution so he knew he would be arrested if the officers found out who he was. (See below)

Harding's Criminal Investigation and Charges
Kenneth Harding, the 19-year-old killed by San Francisco police Saturday, was a pimp accused of making an underage girl perform oral sex on him and later convicted of demanding that girl to earn him “ho’ money” in Seattle, court documents show.

Logic and memory fail.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Oh, please. So tampering with the KEY piece of evidence in this case is no big deal? Just gonna let this guy go without any issue simply for playing the 'dumb' card...

Pull your head out of the grass man.

They gave Sammy the Bull a pass on 19 MURDERS in exchange for cooperation, Ray Lewis' MURDER charges were dropped in exchange for cooperation, Eli Sayler had MURDER, KIDNAPPING and CONSPIRACY charges dropped in exchange for cooperation but you refuse to believe that a guy was given a pass for evidence tampering- which we all know is SOOOOO much more serious than murder and kidnapping.

I suggest you pull yours out- either that or I want some of what you are smoking.

As for the video I admit making a mistake as I did not see the guy in the striped hoodie pick up the firearm- just a cellphone. In fact the guy in the hoodie, based on video posted (might not be the whole video being put up though), was 10 feet closer in to where the suspect was in relation to the firearm's location shown in another video.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Source?

Wouldn't the police be pretty pissed if someone was trying to keep evidence from them being able to prove their side of the story? Oh, right, he plays the dumb card, and they just let him off clean.

Is your head still in the grass?

Police procedure. You give small guys a pass in order to get bigger fish. Happens all day, every day.

You don't charge the guy with the 8 ball to get the guy moving kilos.

Is your head still in the grass?

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Oh, and he was a parolee, according to reports.. Yup, totally gonna let him walk. Parolee's always get the special attention.

Yes they did let him walk. Not only parolees get special attention but murders too-

They gave Sammy the Bull a pass on 19 MURDERS in exchange for cooperation, Ray Lewis' MURDER charges were dropped in exchange for cooperation, Eli Sayler had MURDER, KIDNAPPING and CONSPIRACY charges dropped in exchange for cooperation



Already addressed my mistake in regards to posted videos. Early articles stated police recovered shell casing but not the firearm and the video of the guy in the hoodie did not show him picking up a firearm but a cell phone.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception

Originally posted by SFA437Someone else has handled the weapon. External fingerprints on firearms are hard to isolate, especially after more than one person has handled the weapon- but they are recoverable. I would also imagine they will test unfired cartridges for fingerprints as they would be clearer, unmolested and proof that the suspect was in possession of the weapon.

Also keep in mind that this is reality and not an episode of CSI Miami. Prints take a while to be developed, fixed and recorded. Even with AFIS analysis takes a while.

Assumptions seem to run deep in this brotherhood, as well as reading comprehension.

That is not assumption. Prints are impossible to get off the typically checkered grips of a firearm and methods of carriage typically smudge those on flat surfaces. Magazines and unfired cartridges are a much better source. Prints also do not come back in 15 seconds on a flashy plasma screen like on TV. That is fact.

Apparently the gun recovered, according to the SFgate.com (San Francisco Chronicle) was in the possession of the guy oin the video in the grey. Apparently the guy who took the gun is also on parole.

Also, apparently the residents are pissed at the Police because officers fired at the kid running. They said the police shouldnt do that because its a communal area and their were kids around.

Apparently their concern doesnt extend to criminals who indiscriminately fire at the police in the same area.

Originally posted by ghofer
An article on this incident at counterpunch today:
www.counterpunch.org...

They are leaving out some key facts, while inserting their opinions........

Were you posting this as a possible alternative for people to read, or as an actual news article?

Not being snotty, just asking.

Originally posted by SFA437
I simply switched the numbers and repeated exactly what you said. When you pull numbers out of your 4th point of contact and refer to them as fact we are supposed to take it as if it we gospel coming from the mouth of the gods but if I use your made up numbers it does the opposite?

Logic fail.

I think you're forgetting that I'm not just pulling numbers out of my ass. My numbers are fact. They are rough estimates, but fact. What do the numbers mean? Majority. But in your mind, majority means nothing, because it goes against your position that always sides with the system. Sorry, but your posts in other threads support this, no denying this fact, unless you're a little delusional, as it seems.

In your hypothetical scenario, I'd be more inclined to take the position of the majority, but you are insinuating that I wouldn't since it's unsupportive of the system. Hence why I said you are changing my perspective.

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
As usual, you use his priors as justification for his death. He already served time for his other crime of promoting prostitution, 2 years, hence why he was on parole. He wasn't even an adult when he committed the crime. Or is your philosophy 'Once a convict, still a convict.'.

Harding's Criminal Investigation and Charges
Kenneth Harding, the 19-year-old killed by San Francisco police Saturday, was a pimp accused of making an underage girl perform oral sex on him and later convicted of demanding that girl to earn him “ho’ money” in Seattle, court documents show.

As usual for ATS the suspect is turned into a modern day Jesus like martyr figure while those of us who have a rational and logical thought process are able to apply both past behavior as well as current behavior of a suspect to look at the totality of circumstances and determine that the hood rat was most likely a hood rat.

Harding Criminal Background

Oh wow look.... ARMED robbery. See the highlighted word armed? He was also wanted for the SHOOTING of 3 people and the MURDER of a teenage girl and her unborn child. See the highlighted word shooting? What does one shoot with? Slingshots? Arrows? Oh wait... a GUN.

Nice attempt at disinformation and misdirection though. It shows how pathetically weak your points are.

Thank you for clarifying to me, and every one else, just how pathetically slanted your viewpoint is. Cheers!

His priors are IRRELEVANT in PROVING whether or not:

A) He had a gun
B) He had a gun and shot at police

Nothing else is up for debate here besides these 2 facts, and neither have been proven.

Once one of them has been proven, we can move on with this case. Until then...

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by BeyondPerception

Person Of Interest Met With Parole Officer Hours Before Shooting

www.kirotv.com...

I didn't know fleeing suspects check in with their parole officers.

They sure do- try looking up

Edward "Time" Romero of Devner- charge murder. Research fail.

My point was that it's not everyday behavior, not an impossibility.

Do I have to spell everything out for you?

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
How do we even know that Harding was aware he was wanted for questioning?

If you put 7 rounds into 4 people, all of whom know you personally, and kill a mother and her unborn baby most people would assume the local constabulary would be interested in you.

What is this, Assumption Inception? Making an assumption, based on another assumption. Go on.

Originally posted by SFA437
He also knew he was in violation of his parole for raping a 13 year old, kidnapping her and attempting to force her into prostitution so he knew he would be arrested if the officers found out who he was. (See below)

Harding's Criminal Investigation and Charges
Kenneth Harding, the 19-year-old killed by San Francisco police Saturday, was a pimp accused of making an underage girl perform oral sex on him and later convicted of demanding that girl to earn him “ho’ money” in Seattle, court documents show.

Logic and memory fail.

All you had to say was 'He also knew he was in violation of his parole'.. Why must you continue rambling with sensationalism?

And my question was, how do we know he was wanted for questioning, in that particular case, since there was no proof of contact reported anywhere.

And yes, based on new reports, it seems he was the only person of interest in that case, so it's evident he knew full-well what was going on, which is unfortunate, and police are not looking at any other suspects. I guess that draws nearer to the point where maybe he probably did deserve to die, afterall. But that doesn't change where we are in this particular case, in which we're trying to provide evidence of the gun, and the shooting that took place. Had he actually killed a girl, and her unborn child, and is pronounced innocent in this case, I'd say he got off pretty easy.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Oh, please. So tampering with the KEY piece of evidence in this case is no big deal? Just gonna let this guy go without any issue simply for playing the 'dumb' card...

Pull your head out of the grass man.

Originally posted by SFA437
They gave Sammy the Bull a pass on 19 MURDERS in exchange for cooperation, Ray Lewis' MURDER charges were dropped in exchange for cooperation, Eli Sayler had MURDER, KIDNAPPING and CONSPIRACY charges dropped in exchange for cooperation but you refuse to believe that a guy was given a pass for evidence tampering- which we all know is SOOOOO much more serious than murder and kidnapping.

I suggest you pull yours out- either that or I want some of what you are smoking.

Consider the amount of time involved in these negotiations, and the situation.

How is it, that the police had enough dirt ["We can make your life hell"] and evidence ["We guarantee it."], to be in a situation where they had this Mystery Gun Thief begging for his life, in trade for the gun?

How did police gain such an edge in this matter, so quickly. Less than 6 hours.

Remember, their basis for knowing who took the gun, comes from the footage I referenced earlier, which provides no evidence of anyone removing a gun from this scene.

The examples you reference, show that the person who cooperated in the case, had dirt on them, and enough evidence in order to get an edge on them. People don't just turn over simply because someone asks. There needs to be a bargaining chip involved, in which the person in question is at a disadvantage.

This guy who 'supposedly' took the gun from the scene, would do so for a reason of making evidence disappear, so he wouldn't want to just hand it over as a mere convenience. Unless, of course, police had enough of an edge on him to turn him over. Which again, leads me to the questions above.

If you're going to use examples, at least use examples relative to the situation at hand.

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by BeyondPerception

Originally posted by SFA437Someone else has handled the weapon. External fingerprints on firearms are hard to isolate, especially after more than one person has handled the weapon- but they are recoverable. I would also imagine they will test unfired cartridges for fingerprints as they would be clearer, unmolested and proof that the suspect was in possession of the weapon.

Also keep in mind that this is reality and not an episode of CSI Miami. Prints take a while to be developed, fixed and recorded. Even with AFIS analysis takes a while.

Assumptions seem to run deep in this brotherhood, as well as reading comprehension.

That is not assumption. Prints are impossible to get off the typically checkered grips of a firearm and methods of carriage typically smudge those on flat surfaces. Magazines and unfired cartridges are a much better source. Prints also do not come back in 15 seconds on a flashy plasma screen like on TV. That is fact.

No idea what you're on about here. You have completely taken my statement out of context.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
I think you're forgetting that I'm not just pulling numbers out of my ass. My numbers are fact. They are rough estimates, but fact.

So you are saying you either know someone on SFPD or conducted your own canvass of the neighborhood to come up the 2% versus 98% ratio?

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Thank you for clarifying to me, and every one else, just how pathetically slanted your viewpoint is. Cheers!

And thank you for clarifying how slanted yours is. If there is a house of skinheads in the neighborhood and a black guy gets beat up by guys in boots & braces and called a ni**er you don't go looking for another brother.

Past history is indicative of future behavior.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
My point was that it's not everyday behavior, not an impossibility.

You stated you were unaware that people do not check in with POs prior to fleeing or committing crimes. Now you are aware that they do. Most people when they state they are not aware of something either wish to be educated on the subject or are just blowing smoke up someone else's ass.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
What is this, Assumption Inception? Making an assumption, based on another assumption. Go on.

Not really an assumption but a life lesson. I know if I put a ball through my neighbors window my parents would hear about it and I would beat feet- not that it did me any good as I had to come home at some point

If I were to murder one person and shoot three others who were familiar with me I would make myself scarce. If I was stopped by the cops afterwards I'd run my skinny ass off.

I am assuming the sun will rise in the east tomorrow. Does this mean that the prior history of the sun rising in the east has no bearing on future performance or is taking into account the behavior of the solar system for it's entire observable existence lead one to make the assumption with relative certainty of outcome?

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
All you had to say was 'He also knew he was in violation of his parole'.. Why must you continue rambling with sensationalism?

Because you attempted to downplay his viciousness and evil that he spread everywhere he went. Also it is not sensationalism- it is fact.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
And my question was, how do we know he was wanted for questioning, in that particular case, since there was no proof of contact reported anywhere.

Once again- If I were to murder one person and shoot three others who were familiar with me I would make myself scarce.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
Consider the amount of time involved in these negotiations, and the situation.

How is it, that the police had enough dirt ["We can make your life hell"] and evidence ["We guarantee it."], to be in a situation where they had this Mystery Gun Thief begging for his life, in trade for the gun?

How did police gain such an edge in this matter, so quickly. Less than 6 hours.

Remember, their basis for knowing who took the gun, comes from the footage I referenced earlier, which provides no evidence of anyone removing a gun from this scene.



This guy who 'supposedly' took the gun from the scene, would do so for a reason of making evidence disappear, so he wouldn't want to just hand it over as a mere convenience. Unless, of course, police had enough of an edge on him to turn him over.

I've let guys go who had coc aine on them, guys who were part of a burglary ring operating in my town and numerous others- right on the side of the road- if they agreed to cooperate.

An officer in NC has 3 years to file misdemeanors and 5 years to file felonies. Most states are similar. Being the guy who had it (and based on that video alone I do not see how he could have TBH) was on parole the threat is a return to prison should the police take action. That threat forces cooperation.

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
No idea what you're on about here. You have completely taken my statement out of context.

You asked "Where are the guy's prints on the weapon". How is replying to a direct inquiry taking something out of context?

I then answered your question in detail and explained why they are problematic to lift from a weapon's exterior and better sources for locating and lifting a 10 point or better print. I also explained why it takes time to check and verify them.

Been enjoying the debate BTW. Seriously- I mean it, Keeps my brain exercised

SFPD Says Man Killed In Bayview Shot Himself

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) – A man who was thought to have died from an officer-involved shooting in San Francisco last weekend appears instead to have been killed by a self-inflicted gunshot wound, investigators revealed Thursday.

sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com...

Video in article.

I saw this earlier on the local news. Seems the bullet taken from the fatal wound to his head does not match police bullets.

Originally posted by berkeleygal

SFPD Says Man Killed In Bayview Shot Himself

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) – A man who was thought to have died from an officer-involved shooting in San Francisco last weekend appears instead to have been killed by a self-inflicted gunshot wound, investigators revealed Thursday.

sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com...

Video in article.

I saw this earlier on the local news. Seems the bullet taken from the fatal wound to his head does not match police bullets.

Seems my earlier assertion that the firearm was a POS of Bryco/Jennings/Raven manufacture was correct. The one I saw in the video was WAY too small to be a .45. The junk gun also fits in with the subjects history as they're referred to as 7-11 Specials for a reason

Now the question is raised where did the .45 shell casing come from?