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

why did he run over a $2 bus fare he would might have been let off with a warning, the state isnt going to give someone a life sentence for a $2 bus fare,unless the guy was a known and dangerous fellon, Im not saying what they done was right, but then again what kinda idiot runs from the police over $2

reply to post by Lucifersjester


Linked further back is a news article that explains he was wanted for questioning over murder.

Including the murder of a pregnant woman.

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
SF police recover gun after police shooting


Investigators were able to find the gun after a member of the public provided video taken after the shooting, said Andraychak.

"I do not know the source, but it does appear to have been taken in the moments after the incident," said Andraychak.

Wonder if whoever took the video is gonna be charged for videotaping police?

reply to post by Klassified


reply to post by maryjo44


reply to post by fordrew


reply to post by DJLateralus


reply to post by cluckerspud


Just wondering...

How does it feel to rush to judgement in defense of a double murderer of an innocent woman and her unborn child by a gun wielding maniac who not only shot her and 3 other people but shot at the cops as well... and then see the weapon being picked up by "witnesses" on video? You know... the ones you all insisted were correct in that he never had a gun in the first place...

I've never hit that level of epic fail and really would like to hear a first-hand account.

Originally posted by Subjective Truth

Originally posted by Anunaki2012
COP BASTARD COP BASTARD COP BASTARD COP BASTARD COP BASTARD

So the guy runs from the police and also is shooting at them and you blame the cops?

I say this guy had it coming.

The 2 dollar crap is for the sheep to eat up.


When you run from the cops and are shooting at them you deserve lethal force. What if one of his bullets hit a kid or innocent bystander.

Your name is "Subjective Truth" and you automatically believe the officer who fired the shot? He made a mistake... there was about 20 witnesses and not a single one of them saw a gun, or for that matter him shoot at the cops... In fact, what they saw was... a young man running for his life who was promptly shot in the back for fleeing.

It's not self defense when the "Attacker" is trying to get away. It's "murder" then. That is the law by the letter when it comes to citizen/public fire arms. If some one breaks into my house shoots off a shot, then runs away as in to escape... if I then shoot him in the back, I go to prison.

This is all irrelevant, because there was no gun. If an officer made a mistake of "cold blood murder" do you honestly think he's going to own up on it?

Also, WTF gives with the officer with the Assault Rifle????

Originally posted by Laokin
Your name is "Subjective Truth" and you automatically believe the officer who fired the shot? He made a mistake... there was about 20 witnesses and not a single one of them saw a gun, or for that matter him shoot at the cops... In fact, what they saw was... a young man running for his life who was promptly shot in the back for fleeing.

When in actuality it was a double murderer who shot 3 other people prior and then took a shot at the police because he was fleeing a felony murder warrant.

Originally posted by Laokin
It's not self defense when the "Attacker" is trying to get away. It's "murder" then. That is the law by the letter when it comes to citizen/public fire arms. If some one breaks into my house shoots off a shot, then runs away as in to escape... if I then shoot him in the back, I go to prison.

Utterly, completely, totally false.

If the person in question is using, is about to use or is likely to use deadly force or force likely to cause serious physical injury to others then (s)he may be shot while fleeing. Please review the thousands upon thousands of case law reviews on this topic. Tennessee V. Garner would be a good place to start.

Originally posted by Laokin
This is all irrelevant, because there was no gun. If an officer made a mistake of "cold blood murder" do you honestly think he's going to own up on it?

There is VIDEO shot by a witness showing a man in the crowd picking up the discarded weapon and walking off with it. Please review posted videos and related discussion. It is best to remain silent and be thought a fool rather than speak and remove all doubt.

Originally posted by Laokin
Also, WTF gives with the officer with the Assault Rifle????

Most departments have surplus M16 and M14 rifles obtained through DRMO after the North Hollywood bank robbery. A teeny tiny bit of effort on your part in researching things you wish to whinge about would go a long way in making you appear quite a bit more able to engage in rational thought than you actually are.

Then again you couldn't be bothered to read the reports or view the video of the firearm being recovered by a bystander so you actually doing some research is most likely going to be a pipe dream on my part

reply to post by SFA437


yeah i can see how it would be possible, and it could of been a honest gaff not spotting the gun, but remember, that gun was likely used in a previous shooting where murder occured so it was evidence. so if we look at the gun as evidence they failed to secure it, it was picked up by somebody else which means the evidence was removed from the scene and any fingerprints could of been wiped or replaced with another persons prints.

so i stick by what i said originally, it was a fail, even though there might be a logical reason for it.

reply to post by lifeform11


Definitely screwed the pooch on that one for sure!

I was just pointing out why it happened and the reasons for it happening. I've gotten shot at for a living for 6 years- given the crowd, the suspect and everything else I'd probably have not retraced my steps either and worked off the premise the suspect was still in possession of it.

reply to post by DJLateralus


Horrifying.

I believe they(the police) planted the gun at the scene to save their own behinds. Any apologists in this thread need to chuck themselves in a river of fire.

reply to post by Lucifersjester


Easy for you to say. Ever been the victim of racism? Quit your gibberish.

reply to post by Zamini


Are you utterly deluded?

The suspect is a double murderer who shot a pregnant woman killing her and her unborn child and also shot 3 other people.

Several videos show the weapon on the ground 75 feet behind where the officers shot the suspect.

A witness shot video of a bystander picking up the suspects gun and walking off with it.

They recovered a spent casing consistent with the firearm stolen by the bystander.

So your contention is the officers, in full view of the public shot the guy (you know the one who killed a woman and her unborn kid), walked a few hundred feet back, pulled out a throw down, cranked a round off down the street, went back to the suspect, put the weapon in his hand, walked back again, placed the weapon on the ground and then went back to cover the wounded suspect in full view of a scatological ton of video cameras and cell phones.

Put down the pipe- it's rotting your brain.

As for racism... this happened solely because he was black

Wrong, just pure wrongness, to even consider drawing a gun about such a trivial matter is pathetic. Surely these meat heads are given lessons on diplomacy and diffuzing situations without the need for violence. Im willing to wager he gets off with it, suspended on full pay until its dealt with and then pensioned off into early retirement.

reply to post by chaztekno


Did you miss the multiple FELONY WARRANTS FOR MURDER AND AGG. ASSAULT?

Did you miss the suspect SHOOTING AT THE POLICE ON A PUBLIC STREET?

Did you miss this guy SHOOTING 4 PEOPLE AND KILLING A WOMAN AND HER UNBORN BABY?

Someday maybe someone will shoot your wife and kill her and your unborn child and then we'll see how you rant on and on about how wrong it was for the perp to get shot. I'll be praying for it to happen

Haven't read this thread, just posting what I put into another one based on this same story. Time for bed.

- 1st Post -

Aftermath...



Immediately after shooting...



- 2nd Post -

I know this is covered in your link (Link In Response), but I want to clarify a bit more, since most people won't read this aspect. The YouTube video's annotations seem to claim quite a bit, but seem to be nothing more than a way to excite people.

This is the part that gets me:

As documented in a cell phone video of the shooting incident posted on YouTube, a witness to the shooting had retrieved the gun and ran off with it. Investigators tracked down the weapon several hours later.

www.ktvu.com...

At 1:16 you can clearly hear an object fall to the ground, and the guy in the striped hoody points it out and say's "Phone. Somebody's phone." He then picks it up to examine it, since the person who dropped it obviously didn't turn around.

There is ZERO evidence showing that:
A - Someone retrieved "the" gun
B - Ran off with "the" gun

Shortly after he grabs the cell phone, or whatever it was, he does appear to have 'disappeared' but if you look closely, you'll notice the friend takes his attention into the other direction. Why? Could be for a multitude of reasons. Maybe they saw the person who dropped the phone? Maybe they went to meet up with some friends? Doesn't matter.

There is no key evidence even showing the guy in striped hoody next to the "gun".

He's in standing in the 1st box. The supposed "gun" is in the 2nd.

Perspective Shot - Showing the gun clearly in 2nd box (from the chain)


Clearly showing guy in the hoody pick up rectangular object from 1st box - Note the round piece of grass

Police have yet to release details about the man's record, but the Seattle police said Sunday night that the suspect was considered a person of interest in a south Seattle shooting on Wednesday that killed a 19-year old woman and injured three others.

They say he was 'considered a person of interest' in the other case. Not 'confirmed as the shooter' as many people seem to be assuming.

The link below also states he was only a person of interest, not confirmed the shooter.

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

Chief Greg Suhr told KGO someone picked up the suspect's hand gun in the moments after the shooting and ran away. He credits multiple cell phone videos from the scene for helping police catch up with the person who look it. When asked if he was sure the firearm police obtained was the one used to shoot at police, Suhr said he was confident that it was the suspect's weapon.

www.nbcbayarea.com...

Wait, since when does 'confident' mean 'confirmed'?

Look forward to some actual evidence being thrown in this mix.

- 3rd Post -

What gets me most is why the supposed "gun" is about 25 feet or so in front of him. Since this is the gun they are all referencing to from the 'YouTube' video evidence. Of course, had it been closer to him (within a few feet) officer's wouldn't have to spend the next several hours investigating the location of said gun.

So...

A. Did he wait to be shot before throwing his gun 25 feet away?
What motive would be behind this? Also, seems like a difficult task after getting shot. He looks to be in pain.

B. While shooting at police, did he just decide "I'm gonna throw my gun over there."?
Had he done this, that'd automatically mean they shot an unarmed man.

He obviously didn't come from the parking lot. But from the street. Hence why police are behind him.

If the police in the second video are coming up from behind him, it's because they shot him in the back. I highly doubt there was any point in which this guy stopped to turn around and face police, then did A or B. Plus, nobody would take a bullet, and start crawling towards the police, you'd continue in whatever direction you were going, getting away from them, so it's no doubt at all which direction he was going in.

Just trying to put the pieces together here. Anyone's guess as to where it goes next.

reply to post by BeyondPerception


I was just going to link that SFA dude to your post. Good job on re-posting.

Anyone else notice how the usual tactics of damage control are applied? SFA get lost.

Originally posted by LDragonFire
Tended to the suspect is a complete lie....!

Yes it is. They deliberately let him bleed to death and stopped anyone else from helping him too.

So it is more than fair to assume they were lying about him having a gun too.

Police said witnesses could have taken the victim's weapon when the man collapsed...

And the police didn't notice? If someone had picked up his weapon from him lying on the ground, they would certainly have been shot too.

The crowds reaction says a lot about the truth behind this. Those officers are lucky they weren't overrun.

reply to post by BeyondPerception


Does the street run east-west or north-south? Which direction was the suspect running? At what point did the officers fire? How much ground did the wounded man cover?

Oh wait you can't answer that so your suppositions on weapon placement are based on what?

I never stated the guy in stripes picked up the gun- nice attempt at disinfo and misdirection though

I have no clue why he ditched the weapon but the make of the firearm is notoriously unreliable. Also felons will ditch weapons/dope in thinking that it won't be tied to them. He could have dropped it after being shot and continued to run until he collapsed.

As for shooting him in the back- perfectly legal and a good shoot. The suspect had shot at the police and as such presents an immediate threat by his use of deadly force which was responded to in kind. Also one may shoot as they run away. A finger pressing a trigger does not mean the weapon and the persons body is facing in the same direction.

As for the direction the police were coming from the suspect could have ran a considerable distance after being shot. He was moving arms and legs therefore there was no paralytic spinal injury. If you've ever hunted you know that game will often travel several hundred yards even if shot through the heart and/or lungs. Officers may also have come form other streets to head the suspect off (it's called cordoning).

Bottom line is a murdering thug got shot because he didn't want the police to run his name knowing he had multiple warrants out for murder and agg assault so he ran and took a shot at the cops.

Originally posted by Zamini
reply to post by BeyondPerception

 

I was just going to link that SFA dude to your post. Good job on re-posting.

Anyone else notice how the usual tactics of damage control are applied? SFA get lost.

Was this guy your cousin or something? For anyone to defend the POS who got shot is beyond comprehension.

I am going to be saying some serious prayers that you someday wind up dealing with the same situation that resulted in this piece of street trash winding up with a murder warrant.

Even better zamini- I'll get lost when you stop hitting the pipe. Funny how street trash stick together.

ETA: This piece of gutter slime was out on parole after being convicted of sex offenses as well.

I say the girl who got killed was the one that he raped. She must have filed paternity papers on him and when he got paroled he went a bought a gat off his homies so she didn't cut into his rock selling funds... gotta have bling ya know. Once he found out the po-po knew he did it he drew down on the cops knowing he'd get shot by the cops and then his worthless, welfare and food stamp collecting family could sue the city and finally be able to afford the dubs on their hoopty and move out of the hood.

Originally posted by SFA437
reply to post by BeyondPerception

 

Does the street run east-west or north-south? Which direction was the suspect running? At what point did the officers fire? How much ground did the wounded man cover?

What does East-West North-South have to do with anything?

He was running forward. Most likely towards the parking lot area, since police are behind him.

Again, what does this have to do with anything? They probably fired just before he hit the ground.

I take it you are trying to imply that he crawled backwards after being shot? Look at the blood. He moved forward a couple of feet, at most.

I never stated the guy in stripes picked up the gun- nice attempt at disinfo and misdirection though

What the hell are you talking about? I clearly stated that I didn't even read this thread before I posted, yet you are under some influence that I am responding to whatever your previous arguments were.

reply to post by SFA437

Was this guy your cousin or something?

No, just a fellow human.

For anyone to defend the POS who got shot is beyond comprehension.

So you find the justice system beyond comprehension. Well, that was to be expected from a xenophobic mind like yours.

I am going to be saying some serious prayers that you someday wind up dealing with the same situation that resulted in this piece of street trash winding up with a murder warrant.

Are you a cop? You are going to pray for me to wind up with a murder warrant? This is not a veiled threat? Hmmm, you're sounding like a racist to me here. Let me take a closer look and analyze your post history shall I?

Even better zamini- I'll get lost when you stop hitting the pipe.

Oh, some more insults.

Funny how street trash stick together.

And some more insults!

I see humans while you see things.

You are of course free to practice this internet bravado of yours elsewhere, because you are talking to the wrong person if you want to demean or insult me. Some of us have not been raised in suburbs, sheltered from the real world, so we are not easily offended by mere words.

We also know how cops like to twist and turn like maggots when they are caught doing something they should not. Such as killing a person with his hands up(regardless of whatever warrant was out - you do not just shoot a person who has his hands up - that is not a democracy that is a dictatorship and a police state).

Pigs...

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
He was running forward. Most likely towards the parking lot area, since police are behind him.

Again, what does this have to do with anything? They probably fired just before he hit the ground.

I take it you are trying to imply that he crawled backwards after being shot? Look at the blood. He moved forward a couple of feet, at most.

You state the weapon was "behind" him. You assume he ran in a straight line the entire time and his final resting position was the direction in which he was traveling. Sometimes people twist around when shot and fall in directions other than that of their original travel.

The police also were not behind him but coming from the suspect's left.