Alton Sterling Arrest Record

a reply to: FamCore

why didn't you show the time stamp?, is it because that in the next three frames of the video also at the 05sec+ mark he has pulled his hand down and the cop didn't have control of that hand. at best we can only say at one point he had the guys hand, after that it's hard to say if he did or didn't.

here i'll show you, from the video in the search box, blown up to 300% in firefox.

hands are not seen

here hands are just coming into view five second+.

hands in full view five second+

hands out of view five second+

the next picture is at six second mark.

following frame at six+ second mark


here is a video i made from the 2 second mark to the 8+ mark



as i said after the six second mark you can't tell if the cop still had his arm under control, or he is moving it on his own.
your picture doesn't prove anything.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Thanks for pointing that out, and it does appear to be from the same video clip you are showing as well (not the 1st one at a crappier angle)

So based on this we are uncertain if the cops still had his right hand pinned down when the actual shooting took place.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Edumakated

Wait I never called for the officer's history. So I'm "not having it both ways". You just called for it then accused me of agreeing with you. I don't care about the officer's history either, unless it was a premeditated murder, which is HIGHLY unlikely. I just care about the facts of what happened in the moment. Was the police officer in danger of his life to warrant lethal force? From the video of Sterling being restrained that doesn't look like the case.

The question was the police officer in danger cannot be answered from the video alone which is why the victims background is pertinent. The video does not show everything. In trying to answer the question, you have to explore all possibilities. Again, anyone remotely neutral in this manner is going to want to know more about the victim. His background very well leave clues to if he was likely to be reaching for then gun. We simply don't know at this point, but what we do know is that Mr. Sterling was not a saint and it is not out of the realm of possibility that he could have attempted to go for a gun.

On the flip side, I also want to know more about the officers. Were they decorated? Did they have complaints filed?

You cannot sit hear and act like you are being objective and then at the same time try to reject bringing up the victim's background.

If you are being objective in the manner, then all this information is pertinent to piecing together what truly happened.

Three points:


White cops WILL NOT be convicted of killing a black man in America and especially the south.

Case closed


One thing is for sure.

This case is a perfect storm for the times. A writer couldn’t write such a story and be believable. This as if it is scripted to pour gasoline on this social fire.

The world seems to go between terror events, to killing black people on some kind of timetable.



Then all you see on the 3 stooge networks: CNN, MSNBC, and Fox are the same tired old commentators rambling on and on and on

a reply to: Edumakated

I'm sorry. I don't agree with character assassination to justify a guilty or not guilty verdict in a spur of the moment situation. The only way to truly get to the bottom of this as unbiased as possible is to collect evidence of the crime scene, interview witnesses, and review the video evidence. Calling into question someone's history is just going to sway them one way or the other emotionally when their history could very well have 0 to do with whether or not this guy got shot.

ETA: If this approach concludes with insufficient evidence to convict the cop, then so be it, but I'd rather that happen then an incorrect verdict be achieved because of emotional irrelevance being introduced into the case. Of course you are right and that both sides of the debate will be dredging up each other's history in court, but that doesn't make it right.

originally posted by: Willtell
Three points:


White cops WILL NOT be convicted of killing a black man in America and especially the south.

Case closed


One thing is for sure.

This case is a perfect storm for the times. A writer couldn’t write such a story and be believable. This as if it is scripted to pour gasoline on this social fire.

The world seems to go between terror events, to killing black people on some kind of timetable.



Then all you see on the 3 stooge networks: CNN, MSNBC, and Fox are the same tired old commentators rambling on and on and on

Black cops in the northern city of Baltimore did not get convicted of killing a black man. That in a city with blacks in many high ranking positions.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Black cops too murder people, no doubt and get away with it, no argument there.

a reply to: FamCore

yea there are a bunch of them that have a few seconds added or taken away, i looked for ones that were 34 to 36 seconds long and were clear. i settled on this one. that's why i left the video number showing.
there was one that is really close up that shows it better. but the times are off, you see the hands a 6 second mark.
here it is.

All I see is a man pin to the floor been assassinated by a police officer, what a way to go to the other side, in a violent death by those that are supposed to keep us safe.

I will say, I think the big mistake the officers made is drawing their weapons. I can't really see why it was necessary to draw their firearms in this circumstance. While I can't see what is happening with Mr. Sterlings right hand, I don't see the officer closest to the camera needed to draw his weapon and put it to Mr. Sterling's chest.

I've seen belligerent folks arrested and rarely if ever did the officers need to draw their weapons in this type of scenario where they have the guy fairly well subdued on the ground.

a reply to: Edumakated

did you not see the gun pulled out of his pocket?
the fact that his right arm was free and moving towards that pocket was reason enough to draw their weapons.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Edumakated

did you not see the gun pulled out of his pocket?
the fact that his right arm was free and moving towards that pocket was reason enough to draw their weapons.

I did see that part, but it seems the weapons were drawn PRIOR to them even knowing that was the case. In other words, they are struggling with this guy on ground, Officer pulls gun.... other officer realizes the guy has a gun in his pocket and freaks out and then next thing you know shots fired. If the weapons weren't drawn, they may not have needed to shoot him and still possibly could have recovered the weapon.

I'm just trying to deduce what happened and what might have gone wrong.

a reply to: Edumakated

that's why they were called to the store a man waving a gun.
he was reported as the man.

when they confronted him he resisted and fought with them. dumb move.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Edumakated

that's why they were called to the store a man waving a gun.
he was reported as the man.

when they confronted him he resisted and fought with them. dumb move.

I don't disagree as I have pointed out in previous posts in this thread. The common denominator is resisting arrest.

With that said, in the video you posted, you see the officer pull his weapon while they are on the ground. If they knew he was the one waving the gun around, you'd think they would have drawn on him earlier. It looks like the officer drew his weapon out of frustration and when the firearm was discovered, they freaked out and shot him.

I don't know what happened and not saying the officers are wrong or right. This is just what it looks like to me watching the video.

a reply to: iTruthSeeker

Right so he was a scum bag but that doen NOT justify a summery execution like this and never will.

If your argument carried weight then NO one would be safe from police hit squad's, have you thought about that.

The Police would not be the Police they would be death squad's which it seem's that some in the US are actually acting as in such cases as this.

No I have to ask what your motivation for using the guy's past to justify a summery execution is as genuinely they had him under control already and a Taser would have been far more than sufficient.

A police officer is NOT a Jury or a Judge and is most certainly not intended as an executioner except when there is no other way to save a life (I will never understand the American concept that property is worth more than life either).

The truth is that this was an act of cold blooded murder, yes maybe the police officer was fed up with him if he has a long history of criminality but that is not and never will be his right to act upon it is the duty of a Court to reach the appropriate decision on any given case unless that is that there is simply NO law and order in the state's in which case the Police are not police they are militia and acting out of control.

Now conversely if I thought that the officer was justified I would be on his side but in this case he was definitely not justified and indeed it WAS murder, a cold blooded unjustified execution and putting down of another human being as if they were an animal and what is more I suspect there are many in the US police department's whom feel just that way about the matter though they obviously can not break rank's as being in the police is like being in a family and you have to watch out for one another even if some officers are scum bag's as well.

Now let me ask you this, Do you believe that a person's previous criminal history justifies executing them when they are restrained on the ground and they are begging you to not shoot when other option's are available and indeed not even needed?.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Who reached for a gun first and was there even a gun on his person?.

a reply to: iTruthSeeker

"Violent thug child molester"

"He was reaching" (for his ID)

"Career criminals"

It is pathetic that you can, in complete ignorance of this man's life, blame the victim and feel comfortable about it. If we only judged you by your arrest record you would look like a criminal too.

a reply to: Edumakated

According to previous posts the LEO didn't know anything about the criminal background of the person they killed, apart from a phoned in report that he was armed with a gun. The background of the person who was shot and killed by LEO is not pertinent. It may have become pertinent during the sentencing stage of a trial, if the person was brought before a judge and a jury of his peers and found guilty of a crime You may want to read the brilliant US Constitution and the legislation derived from that before you respond.
All the responding LEO knew was that when they arrived he was black and he was a men. They shot and killed him for no other reasons.
I live in Australia so our difference between left and right wing is pretty narrow, apart from the usual extremists on both sides. Get the same left/right nuts in any country. But you right-ish people in the USA seem to be accepting of LEO using lethal force against black Americans way too often to be considered none racist, and way too often to be saying that you live in the land of the free. The rest of the world is jealous about how great your constitution is, but you are really beginning to mess it up
On face value, this seems to be a murder by men with a uniform and a badge. Prosecute them to the full limits of the law, if that means anything to you anymore.

I think there are 2 issues that you need to address in the US.

1) Police officers all carry guns, but perhaps some of them are not really psychologically suited to being armed. In the UK you have to go through rigorous training and psychological evaluation to be able to be a firearms officer, there aren't that many of them.

The weapons are kept locked in the boot of the car, you need authorisation to take them out from a senior officer, and authorisation to use them - it has to be something really serious for this to happen.

The upside of this is you end up with really highly trained, highly disciplined, well balanced people in that role, rather than every tom, dick, and harry, and it results in outcomes like the one in the video below:



I think if that were the States, that kid would be dead.

2) If the cops approach you do as you're told, like it, don't like it, be offended, whatever, but comply with their commands.

They are doing a dangerous job and they don't know you from Adam, so it's not really unreasonable that they out their own safety ahead of yours, especially if they've been called to you because you're doing something illegal or dumb or both, like you know, threatening people with a gun.

Of course some people don't like to be "disrespected by da man" or whatever doesn't go on in their thick skulls, so they decide to be difficult and fight the Police.

Really if you do that you have no one to blame but yourself when something bad happens.

In summary the fault is caused by 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

This Anton guy - what happened to him was his fault. On the other hand the guy who was shot in his car - that appears to be the cops fault - he's either an idiot or someone who is psychologically on edge, so not the right person to be stopping people while armed - but I don't think he shot the guy "because he was black", he just shouldn't have been in that job in the first place.

a reply to: iTruthSeeker
Innocent Until Proven Guilty and That also Stands for the Police Officers
Involved.
I or any of You on ATS are Not The Judge.
Jury or Executioner.

Our Justice System needs a Total Makeover.
It Is Not Perfect but For Now it's all We Have.
If All the People in this Country Could Pull Together as
A United States of America.
We Could and Can fix this Problem.