Shock Video: Teen Boy Shot and Killed by Cop for Flashing Headlights and Flexing Rights

I can't side with the officer in this incident and i'll tell you why. The officer instigated the whole thing and was negligent. He clearly stated in the video that he was flashed by two other motorist that very same night and also pulled them over! His explanation was that it's a new cruiser and new lights, so therefore they are brighter. So that justifies him pulling motorist over for flashing him. Obviously the headlights are out of adjustment and blinding oncoming traffic. The officer at that point should of known something was wrong. So then it ended with a tragic confrontation. The police department wants you to believe it is a struggle and a justified shooting, but they don't want to take the responsibility for being the negligent party and causing that incident in the first place. Did the kid do the wrong thing? Yes! Did the officer do the wrong thing? Yes! If my vehicle headlights are blinding people and causing accidents then it would be my fault right??

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: Liquesence

He was a Sgt in the sheriffs dept. Not local police. Local police were called to assist but all were too far away. They also don't have badges so he was correct in saying he couldn't show it. He has a number like a badge number so that clears up the whole you said you wouldn't give it to me and no I didn't I said I couldn't show it to you business.
The autopsy shows only one prong of the teaser made contact and did not imbed which is why he yells ow but is not immobilized by the taser. The report says he jumped right up and started punching the officer in the face.

Ok.

Whether local police or sheriff's department is irrelevant (to me). And I never brought up ANY " he said versus he said " issue about the badge as ANY kind of point. Hell, I don't recall even mentioning the badge as relevant other than the kid thought he had some nonexistent rights he didn't have by refusing to provide said documents.

So, why are you responding to *me* regarding this?

a reply to: Meee32

He was a martial arts expert long before he ever got in front of the camera.
He even taught it.

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: Liquesence

Correct. He asked eight times for his ID. Devin didn't have it because he'd left his wallet at his girlfriend's house. She, after getting a call from Devin who then didn't speak to her because he was yelling at the officer to let him go, brought the wallet to the scene later.

Then Devin should have said that from the beginning instead of be a prick. Cop: "License and insurance." Kid: "Sorry officer, I left it at m GF's house..." Etc. NOT, Cop: "license and insurance." Kid: "show me your badge." That's a very stupid way to start the situation.

True, the cop didn't like being called a liar, but that kid messed with the bull of the law because of some Youtube videos he saw, and he got the horns. Pick your battles when you KNOW you're in the right, not when you think you are.

I've also been pulled over a couple times while not having my license on me (even when a rebellious teen). They asked my for my DL # and DOB, which I provided. I didn't cope an attitude like this kid. They ran me, I got my ticket, was on my way, and that was that. I didn't immediately start with a "show me your badge I'm not showing/providing you with my info" BS.

a reply to: conspiracy nut

Try this:
Kid charges, cop backpedals and slips on the ice and snow, falls backward where the kid then straddles his chest and starts pummeling the cops face.
That is what is reported and what the recordings, the marks in the snow, and the injuries sustained by the cop corroborate.
It's in the DAs report online at the sheriffs dept as a pdf download.

a reply to: Answer

Thanks. I've said this a couple of times myself but your transcript of the conversation makes it clear. What cannot be ascertained by this exchange is that he does not have a badge to show because the kid kept talking over him and he never did get it said.
I found this out at the sheriffs website.

a reply to: Meee32

You have the right to defend yourself yes. Absolutely.
You don't have the right to resist arrest. Which is why the cop used physical force to finally get him to comply.

What I find shocking is, that although people here don't condone the cop killing the kid, they seem to understand it. He shot him 7 times, that number right there should show that this guy is not cop material.

a reply to: Answer

Only one taser prong hit him which means the taser was not effective.

What were all those crispy sounds then, accompanying the 2 seconds long sparking in that video?
And the boy already laid with his naked underarms and hands and his now wet T-shirt in the wet snow, seemingly sprayed already with road-salt.
When one dart did miss, it surely ended up in that salty mush. And caused a big part of the current to run through the boy's body and nerves towards the snow bound other taser dart. As can be seen as all that "fire works" in the video.

a reply to: Meee32

He used Bruce Lee because the other member mentioned Bruce Lee in his signature.
The subject at the time revolved around an issue of weight so Answer used Bruce Lee who weighed about what this kid did as an illustration to make it relatable.

a reply to: LaBTop

Apparently that's not how a teaser works. It needs two to make a connection. The autopsy bears out this version of events.

a reply to: AutumnWitch657

Just try it out with some salted water on your kitchen floor, and a taser...
Don't ask your husband to operate the taser, your marriage will not be the same afterwards.

A safer bet is using a high voltage, high current measurement-capable multimeter instead of your own body and arms.
See if no current flows from one dart in the black fitting, through the meter to a salt water dipped piece of cloth touching the red fitting and leading to the other dart. If no current flows, I'm wrong...if however it does record a high voltage and current...

The reason a taser works so well to incapacitate an opponent, is the very high voltage accompanied by a just not deadly alternating current, which they tested in laboratories on pigs etc. No pun intended, btw.

You have not only a right to resist unlawful arrest, but the right to use deadly force.

Seems people are assuming the LEO had a justification in arrest. When in the video the cop practically admits sitting on the side of the road with brights, and pulling people over that flash him because of it, due to flashing brights at cops being a "misdemeanor" where ever this is. Sounds like an entrapment plan as an excuse to pull people over.

The cop was obviously frustrated because... everyone else from this sit with brights and wait for a flash has been compliant. If you do not think, the cop admitted to this practice? Go back and just listen to the audio again closely. If tazing someone was not a deterrent or disabling or disorienting it wouldn't be issued as such. Feel free to go youtubing tazer demonstrations... size of a person doesn't matter, 50,000 plus volts is 50,000 volts.

It's more likely, the cop took some taze too irritating him further... to the point of turning off/hiding the camera and taking out his frustration by taking a life.

Sure the kid was not very compliant but did comply; it wasn't out of defiance, it was out of reluctance. Public servants, not authorities. If a cop tells you to do something... you have a right where they have to explain why, gung ho over reactors with superiority complexes don't like to be questioned what gives them the right. They think they just have the right, to order and expect people to comply no questions asked.

Well, no freedom loving individual is going to comply unless they know they were wrong, or are scared of the consequences if they don't. No one respects fear based law enforcement. If LEO's don't understand why some people are not "compliant" to you ordering them around? It's your job to explain to them why you are doing so, restating the order until compliance is not doing your job.

Somewhere this officer is sitting possibly telling himself and hearing many things; to feel justified in his assault and murder of this child during an unlawful arrest. That being the case... is also part of the root to the problem. Officers breaking the law in order to enforce it... starts becoming the norm because of such justifications. After awhile? They don't give any justification for their actions... they just act. In a job such as law enforcement... every interaction and action in public and to the public, must have just cause. Saying you feared for your life after a body camera goes offline? During an unlawful arrest... Invalid.

If body cameras are to be properly enforced... they must never be turned off or obscured in anyway. If they are interfered with in any manner, it should warrant a further investigation with an assumption a crime by law enforcement was committed and the disabling/obfuscation of the camera is/was an attempt to hide the criminal actions... the same as when the police started demoing all video evidence in the dispensary video in another thread.

It is important to note... officers that actually do get fired? Just rotate in the system; from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, they are not banned from a career in law enforcement.

a reply to: LaBTop

An interesting thought just came up. This tasering happened close to the left side of the boys car, with the front door still open.
I see the officer kneel over and with his knees beside the belly-down laying boy.
In that same salty snow, so his knees are wetted with the same salty wet snow the boy is laying in. And he holds one wet wrist of the boy...

And then his taser misfires one dart into that salty snow and one in the boy´s torso.
I think he tasered himself too, got half of the current its load through his body too, which was his trigger to start shooting in a rage he already expressed vocally before he tried to taser the boy.

And he probably got his forehead scratch-wounded when he knocked his forehead in a spastic stupor against that open front door or the side of the car, in reaction on that unpleasant current part.

EDIT :
How Stun Guns Work, flying tasers :
electronics.howstuffworks.com...

originally posted by: mymymyHe shot him 7 times, that number right there should show that this guy is not cop material.

I imagine you'd find it's the first time Mr Cop has shot someone. He probably had it in his mind that shooting a 'perp' was a lot cooler and more studly than the actuality, when you shoot someone and they start screaming and dying hard, with some blood and maybe a few loops of gut or an eyeball dangling out for spice.

So he freaks out and starts blazing away to make the screaming stop.

The logic of learning how to react with police in a traffic stop by watching idiots in youtube videos may be some what flawed.

originally posted by: roadgravel
The logic of learning how to react with police in a traffic stop by watching idiots in youtube videos may be some what flawed.

Yes.
Don't give them any reason at all to ruin your day. They can and are more than willing to hurt you.
Look at recent threads in the past two days where cops kill their wives. They really don't mind beating you, a stranger, when they will kill their own family members.

a reply to: LaBTop

The more I contemplate about this officer, the more I mistrust his side of the story.

He used a Taser gun, the one with the wires. These things are meant for safe distances, min 5 m away from an unruly suspect.
He kneeled over the boy, then tasered him, from less than 1 meter....I have never seen a more stupid use of a defensive weapon like this. In wet salty snow, while he is wetted with the same salty snow and trying to force the wet arm of the boy behind his back, with his right hand. While his left hand held the taser gun.

He was forming the ideal circuitry for that incapacitating electric current weapon....through both their WET body parts and WET clothing.!

I think one of our American members with a conscience should tell the boy's family lawyers to read this thread...

EDIT : en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: butcherguy

Understanding the law that requires showing DL, insurance, etc when stopped by police should be taught/learned when receiving a DL. It's hard to practice the finer points of rights when a person starts off wrong.

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: butcherguy

Understanding the law that requires showing DL, insurance, etc when stopped by police should be taught/learned when receiving a DL. It's hard to practice the finer points of rights when a person starts off wrong.

True. I don't know where people are getting the idea you can avoid this part. Any time a cop pulls you over whilst driving, they have the absolute right to ask for ID, insurance, and registration. And there's really no point to not rolling down the window, especially if you're recording, because if they reach into your car and grab things without your consent, there's higher court precedent that they can't use that evidence anyway. If they tell you to get out of the car, unless they're telling you to stand in traffic or on a live wire or something, you have to do that too. No point in being abrasive over those things.

OTOH, the cop is evidently an idiot, because he's had this happen all night long. That should tell him to tone down the Deputy Dog crap and have his lights fixed. It's not like this should be a surprise to him, or an affront. If he has no more flexibility of behavior than to realize his lights are too bright, the vehicle is nose-up or the lights are mis-aimed and then still persist in pulling over people, he's either profoundly stupid or doing it intentionally. Either way, he's a jerk.