posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 06:10 PM
Man Is Charged With Wounding Bystanders Shot by Police Near Times Square
An unarmed, emotionally disturbed man shot at by the police as he was lurching around traffic near Times Square in September has been charged with
assault, on the theory that he was responsible for bullet wounds suffered by two bystanders, according to an indictment unsealed in State Supreme
Court in Manhattan on Wednesday.
Now, we've heard and read about accomplices who were also charged with murder after their partner was the triggerperson in the commission of a felony,
but this is the first I have EVER heard of a man (who was unarmed) being charged with assault for the harm caused by the POLICE.
A curious crowd grew. Police officers arrived and tried to corral Mr. Broadnax, a 250-pound man. When he reached into his pants pocket, two
officers, who, the police said, thought he was pulling a gun, opened fire, missing Mr. Broadnax, but hitting two nearby women. Finally, a police
sergeant knocked Mr. Broadnax down with a Taser.
Why didn't they try the taser FIRST? It seemed to have worked, and two people wouldn't have been SHOT.
This man was UNARMED. While he might have been "lurching around traffic," the people who were shot were only put in danger by the RECKLESS DISCHARGE
of a firearm BY the cops. Sure, his lurching around in traffic might have put some pedestrians or motorists in jeopardy, but no one was harmed by
THAT action, they were harmed BY the cops' actions who MISTAKENLY
thought he had a gun, and FIRED THEIR WEAPONS WITHOUT BEING CERTAIN HE WAS
The man was mentally ill apparently, and this is once again cops not being trained or having the discretion or judgement to determine and deal with a
situation before shooting at the hip.
BUT, apparently the DA decided it was appropriate to brings charges or send this to the grand jury??? Anything to NOT hold public "servants"
responsible for their actions, eh?
Basically, what this says is that if you are suspected in ANY type of crime, real or imagined, and anyone gets hurt because of the actions of the
police (regardless if you're committing a crime because the police acted in due faith of their duties), you are responsible for damages to person and
property caused by the police. Sound precedent. I look forward to the outcome.
What say you, denizens of ATS?
edit on 11-1-2014 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)