Family declares war on off-duty cop in road rage shooting

originally posted by: Annee
Just one question.

Do we have at least 2 sides to this story?

I think we can now answer that with "not anymore" given the contents of the surveillance video grossly mismatching prior reports that supported the officer's actions.

I would like to remind ATS - remember the John Crawford shooting. Remember the initial reports by a 'witness' who called in that Crawford was pointing a gun at people. Remember there was a surveillance video (since it was in Wal-mart). Remember that a bit later, during the uproar following the Michael Brown shooting, it was revealed that the video disagreed with the 'witness.' Remember that it also disagreed with claims by the police in that shooting, as well; that bit we didn't find out until much later, when part of the video footage was released to the public.

I want to make this particular point for a reason: people tend to stick with the first thing they hear. Psychologists know this. Some liken it to a preference for early information; I wouldn't be surprised if this is because of how we store information in our brains.

Public relations also know this. If they tell the public some information, then later contradict it with other information, people are likely to reject the new information - even if it's right. With the information age, we've lost the editors - the filters that sought truth and accuracy. Remember that.

This is ATS: question everything, and seek the truth. I know, it's hard. Sometimes the truth is unclear; sometimes it never becomes much clearer. In a situation like this, where we know there is a video - we should wait until the video shows up before accepting such initial information as truth.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: Annee
Just one question.

Do we have at least 2 sides to this story?

I think we can now answer that with "not anymore" given the contents of the surveillance video grossly mismatching prior reports that supported the officer's actions.

Source of this info?

a reply to: Annee
On the previous page:

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Boadicea

So an off duty officer is attacked by a thug and it's the officers fault??

Yeah, about that...
Video surfaces of NYPD cop’s road-rage shooting
This is the New York Post, too. Not the most 'liberal' of papers.

An off-duty NYPD cop waited just one second before ­fatally gunning down another driver in a Brooklyn road-rage incident early Monday.

Exclusive video obtained by The Post shows the moment that Officer Wayne Isaacs fired two shots through his car window at Delrawn Small, who collapsed and died in the street.

The NYPD and the state Attorney General’s Office are investigating the shooting, which the victim’s family said was a clear case of excessive force.

The footage, from Atlantic Avenue and Bradford Street in East New York just after midnight, shows Small, 37, cross two lanes of traffic to reach Isaacs’ car.
Delrawn SmallPhoto: Facebook

He barely has time to look the cop in the eye or even utter a word before Isaacs opens fire, causing him to stagger back.

So much for the attacking him through the window claim...

Yeah, the NY Post reported the guy was attacking the off-duty cop through the window, alleging this was captured on video.
This, however, actually has a video. Pretty grainy, but viewer discretion advised.
A second or less after approaching the vehicle and he was shot and dying.

originally posted by: MarkOfTheV
a reply to: Boadicea

You guys are incredulous. Did ANYBODY here read the story?

A guy with 19 prior arrests that served THREE terms in prison for robbery, drug sale, and stabbing gets pissed when he thinks some guy cut him off. He chases the car around for several blocks and at a stop light, gets out of the car and starts throwing haymakers through the window at an off duty 3 year cop. The cop shot him.

Eye-witness and surveillance footage corroborates this.

Motorist punches cop before getting shot.

NYPD to Probe Off Duty Cop Involved In Road Rage Shooting

Gee i must be one of those guys then yeah.....here take a look greven posted this further on in this thread....

Your source says he punched the s**t out the cop before being shot....according to the footage that is a big fat lie...

Surveillance video shows an angry motorist “punching the s–t” out of an off-duty cop through a car window before the officer fatally shot him, the owner of a nearby building said Wednesday.

and this gem..

He added that Small “was wailing on [Isaacs’] face, like ‘pow, pow!’ He was looking to knock this guy out, punching and punching. Maybe four punches.

Neither of your sources are accurate.....

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Exactly!

I'll wait for a legitimate source.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Now, now - that's a bit unfair.

The media did report the wrong thing; in fact, it was also reporting by the NY Post - the same source I used once the video came out. MarkOfTheV's was the first reply to this new information, and immediately changed opinions on the matter.

Just remember that, when there's video footage of something happening, the truth will come out. We don't have to take the word of people who have everything to gain from misleading the public beforehand. We just have to wait a little bit.

a reply to: Greven

I would like to think the truth does come out but sadly it does not, i was blunt because of peoples conformation bias, the first story that gels with a persons mindset is generally the one they go with regardless of any new information presented...i'm somewhat pessimistic

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Ironically you are still guilty of not reading. I replied RIGHT after that thread you linked.

posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 11:47 PM - a reply to: Greven

Yep I stand corrected. I was vehemently in support of the officer but I'll eat my words. Looks like everyone was telling a different story than what the video showed.

I've had a guy come up to my car in more of a fit than he appeared to be and nobody got shot. I'm thinking the officer COULD have rolled up his window and drove away.

a reply to: MarkOfTheV

No offence ...sorry it was not a shot at you, just the information posted.....

It is an uphill battle when this kind of thing happens, the witnesses, the record all in public view which for the attention span of the average joe is enough to make them lean in a certain direction...i cant stand the left right division it makes me very cynical watching people marching to their own demise...

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Boadicea

Honest question;

If the video backs up the official story, does not the guy that attacked the off duty cop bear the majority of the blame for the incident?

Apparently, there is video that does NOT back up the official story -- Video surfaces of NYPD cop’s road-rage shooting -- and, hence, the outrage so many feel towards cops (on duty or off duty) that shoot first and ask questions later, who are then protected by their fellow officers and supervisors and unions.... which brings us to the real subject of my OP, which is what we do about it, before all hell breaks loose:

Brooklyn Assemblyman Charles Barron insisted “things can get out of control” if the attorney general doesn’t bring charges against the cop. “We won’t have any next steps to tell our people to even bother with this system,” he said.

“People will take matters into their own hands because they won’t have any other alternative.”

"When we make peaceful revolution impossible, we make violent revolution inevitable."

The Dallas Massacre started mere hours after I posted this... And more incidents since then.... and how many more to come??? So many people were sooooooooooo sure that this off duty cop was just protecting and defending his life from this awful thug pummeling him unmercilessly, and it's a big fat lie. We cannot just scream "comply" and think it will result in trust and respect -- especially when not everyone deserves that trust and respect!

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Boadicea

So an off duty officer is attacked by a thug and it's the officers fault??

And what proof did you have of that? None. Because a new video has been released that shows the dead man was NOT attacking the officer. And yet you were so damn sure that a murderer just had to be telling the truth that you would attack anyone who dared to disagree. And that's exactly the problem. Murderers with guns and badges are getting off scotfree.

What is wrong with you people this is beyond stupidity when you guys defend the felon because the guy he was attacking happened to be a police officer.

Good question? What is wrong with you people? This is beyond stupidity when you guys defend the murderer because he happens to be a police officer.

People are buying into a myth not...

Who's buying into a myth???

...all officers are bad on fact very few.

Very definitely. In depth analysis of police brutality complaints show that only a very few officers are usually the subject of the majority of complaints -- and settlements. However, they do exist, and protecting them from their own bad behavior is what has gotten us to where we are today.

How many officers have been shot/attacked in the last few days???

These people pit there lives on the line to try to keep the public safe...

The vast majority -- yes. NOT ALL! And while the good cops are worth their weight in gold, the bad cops do more damage to society and individuals than can be quanitified. Protecting them doesn't help. It creates exactly the problems we're seeing now.

All Ill say to this is let us hope the day doesn't come where you need the police as someone decides to start beating you senseless in your car. And let's remember blue lives matter shall we. These people are humans too.

And I shall hope that the day doesn't come where an officer decides to start beating you senseless in your car (or worse), and no one believes you because... thin blue line. Let's remember that anyone can be a thug... and that ALL lives matter.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

but when they are found not guilty with facts that are presented, they piss and moan about that.

Ever heard the phrase "throwing a case"? Or "kangaroo court"? Or how about "color of law"?

Just because a case is brought to trial -- or even a grand jury -- doesn't mean it was a fair trial/hearing.

originally posted by: Greven
Video surfaces of NYPD cop’s road-rage shooting
This is the New York Post, too. Not the most 'liberal' of papers.

An off-duty NYPD cop waited just one second before ­fatally gunning down another driver in a Brooklyn road-rage incident early Monday.

Exclusive video obtained by The Post shows the moment that Officer Wayne Isaacs fired two shots through his car window at Delrawn Small, who collapsed and died in the street.

The NYPD and the state Attorney General’s Office are investigating the shooting, which the victim’s family said was a clear case of excessive force.

The footage, from Atlantic Avenue and Bradford Street in East New York just after midnight, shows Small, 37, cross two lanes of traffic to reach Isaacs’ car.
Delrawn SmallPhoto: Facebook

He barely has time to look the cop in the eye or even utter a word before Isaacs opens fire, causing him to stagger back.

So much for the attacking him through the window claim...

Thank you sooooooo much for posting this!

Perhaps now folks will understand what we're up against, and why so many folks are at the breaking point, and actually focus on the real topic of the OP: What can we do about it???
A second or less after approaching the vehicle and he was shot and dying.

originally posted by: MarkOfTheV
a reply to: Greven

Yep I stand corrected.

Good for you for stepping up to the plate. I appreciate that

Looks like everyone was telling a different story than what the video showed.

And this is exactly what the problem is. What if there had been no video though? What if there had been nothing to prove the victim was not threatening this officer's life? This is exactly what so many of the loved ones left behind have to go through and try to come to grips with. And every officer who kills a civilian is portrayed as a saint, the victims are portrayed as the worst dregs of humanity.

How do we do better???

a reply to: Shamrock6

In order to not confuse myself, I had to match your responses to my post! I'm also going to break it up a bit so that we can give each point the attention it deserves.

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

Better defensive training for all LEOs, starting with how NOT to create a volatile situation, and how to de-escalate volatile situations, etc., but most of all stop training LEOs that we are their enemy!!!

- costs money
-------------------------

Provide best defensive equipment impossible, such as bulletproof vests/body armor -- what else?

- costs money
------------------------------

Improved ongoing psychological counseling for possible depression, PTSD, and other mental/emotional hazards of the job

- costs money
------------------

Yes, money is -- unfortunately -- always an issue. So I guess it's a matter of prioritizing? Deciding what is cost effective? As well as what is most effective at protecting an officer's life?

I've heard that officers have to pay for any vests or armor out of their own pocket... do you know if this is standard? Or depends on the department? Is it at least tax deductible?

I gotta say that really bothers me that officers have to pay for protection from their salary. Especially knowing it could save not just the life of an officer from an ambush, but also the lives of civilians if it helps an officer feel less threatened. (I know it's not foolproof... but every little bit helps).

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Boadicea

Blame the dead guy all you want.

damn right, if he's stupid enough to lean into a car and start punching, without knowing if someone in that car has a gun, cop or not he got what was coming to him.

cops aren't the only ones in new york that carry a gun.

And what if he wasn't that stupid?

Video surfaces of NYPD cop’s road-rage shooting

But what if others were stupid enough to blindly blame the victim while lauding the big fat lying murderer? And what if that murderer... and other murderers just like him... were never brought to trial for that reason... again and again and AGAIN???

Brooklyn Assemblyman Charles Barron insisted “things can get out of control” if the attorney general doesn’t bring charges against the cop. “We won’t have any next steps to tell our people to even bother with this system,” he said.

“People will take matters into their own hands because they won’t have any other alternative.”

We would have exactly what we have now -- ALL officers with a target on their back.

Now, can we please discuss the REAL topic of the OP: How do we protect officers from the bad guys, while also protecting civilians from bad cops???

a reply to: Boadicea

Ok maybe you can explain something for me...

So cops in other parts of the country do something bad... so you shoot up cops in dallas?

how does this help?

The more cops getting ambushed the more they will arm up and armor up and become even more heavy handed in their dealings with the people... this is causing an exact opposite response to making things better.... I dont understand how anyone could reach this conclusion... and I understand even less how reasonably intelligent people can support it!

a reply to: lordcomac

If the story is accurate and this guy chased down and started beating the crap out of another driver, he deserved what he got.

But the story is not accurate and this guy didn't deserve what he got:

Video surfaces of NYPD cop’s road-rage shooting

I'm not generally going to defend the actions of the police- but it sounds like this guy was legitimately just defending himself, as anyone else in his situation would.

Murderers have every reason to lie. His criminal culpability should not be based on yours or my opinion, but on facts.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Boadicea

Ok maybe you can explain something for me...

So cops in other parts of the country do something bad... so you shoot up cops in dallas?

how does this help?

First, just to be clear, I am not shooting up anyone, much less cops, in Dallas or elsewhere.

Second, it doesn't help. It only makes matters worse. Obviously. That's why I wrote the post. To try and stop this vicious murderous cycle on ALL sides.

The more cops getting ambushed the more they will arm up and armor up and become even more heavy handed in their dealings with the people... this is causing an exact opposite response to making things better.... I dont understand how anyone could reach this conclusion...

Well, of course. [[ Big Sigh ]] But that goes both ways. The more civilians getting killed by rogue cops and being protected by the system, the more civilians will arm up and become even more distrustful and hateful of law enforcement... this is causing an exact opposite response to making things better... I don't understand how anyone could reach this conclusion.

and I understand even less how reasonably intelligent people can support it!

And I understand even less how reasonably intelligent people can support murderous cops and a corrupt system of justice.

There is a problem.... a HUGE problem... with bad cops killing people for no good reason. There is no excuse for protecting the bad apples in the name of the good apples.

ETA: As I stated in the OP, I am not in any way, shape or form supporting retaliation. Not. At. All. But I do recognize that this is human nature to fight back when cornered and under attack. I do understand that many folks -- especially, but not limited to, Black folks -- feel that law enforcement put a target on their backs long ago. I understand that when peaceful revolution is impossible, violent revolution is inevitable. This is the reality. Not what I want, but what is.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Continued:

Dash and body cams with audio -- automatically activated, and preferably live streaming for public viewing and download (which protects the LEOs at least as much as the public)

- live stream body/dash cams can be, and would be, a massive privacy invasion for victims of crime. You have absolutely zero right to see the initial response to a child rape call. Sorry, but them's the breaks.

Wow. Excellent point -- and obviously one that I didn't even consider, so thank you. (and no apology necessary)

I should probably also note that body/dash cams are not the end-all-be-all. They have their limitations just like anything.

From a public and/or evidentiary perspective, cameras are worthless if rogue cops can turn them on and off at will. Pretty much defeats their purpose. But as you well noted, there are situations in which those cameras/film can and will violate the privacy of the innocent, and their needs must be considered and respected too.

I'm stuck.

What would you recommend?
------------------------------------

Steroid testing -- not random testing, but at supervisor's discretion with probable cause, and especially after an officer-involved shooting

- costs money, but shouldn't be limited to just steroids, and shouldn't be left to a supervisor's discretion. Period.

If not the supervisor's discretion, then whose? Or are you recommending random testing over testing with cause? (I have a problem in general with random testing of anyone -- and including officers, who shouldn't have to give up their rights to serve the public.)

And is it fair to say we're in agreement about mandatory testing after an officer involved shooting?
-------------------------------------

Immediate removal of officer from scene

- officer's aren't supposed to be kept at the scene any longer than necessary already

Good to know. I once thought that was the case, then heard different. But it makes a whole lot more sense to remove them as quickly as possible.
-------------------------------