Australian Justine Damond shot dead by US police in Minneapolis

a reply to: Hypntick

So if the camera is damaged during a use of force situation, the officer should be held liable. Why is that, the officer cannot prevent the camera from getting damaged during an incident.

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing
a reply to: Xcathdra

They are not the accused, they are a police officer in the employ of the state. Just because I accuse - and millions more - doesn't remove that fundamental point. Surely debriefing at the very least is required in any case? Do they not explain why the use of their firearm, let alone why the lack of use of their non-lethal weapons?

I think you know where I believe these due process rights can be shoved and I don't mean to be offensive personally to you, but this is an outrage and I am white hot with rage over it. If you've noticed this sentiment in the media and from what you've seen anywhere, really, it would not be generous to assume you can add much, much more to that. This is going to go one way and one way only or there will truly be trouble.

I honestly do not give a good god damn about the law anymore, I'd take this guy out myself and show him how to really use a weapon if I has the chance. He's a filthy, rotten, dirty scumbag and a murderer and I'll accept one path for this to follow and to hell with his due process and him as well.

Yeah and just like an citizen of the US who is facing possible criminal charges he is still protected by the Constitution of the US, and by that he can utilize his right to remain silent. I have already stated professionally I would want him to give his situation of events sooner then later while they are still fresh in his mind.

Also there is no such thing as non-lethal weapons, they are LESS-LETHAL, because they still have a chance whether it be small to cause death.

So you are threatening to kill a cop over the internet, you must be really tough, clearly you don't know enough about the law or everything that is going on to even have a opinion in this matter, I find it appalling with how you are conducting yourself in this thread, I must ask if you some reason he is not found guilty of this what will you do ( I personally as a LEO believe he will be indicted and charged for this)

originally posted by: Timely
The "brothers" have closed ranks.

I see "due process" being bandied about by the PD sympathisers.

How was this Lady afforded "due process" .. regardless of county or Country.

Tell us how this could possibly be jusified as an action a Policeman should take .

The shooters silence is doing damage ... more damage to United States Police forces. As such, the cops involved in this thread are not helping.

Ie: No sympathy for the vicims family along with an acceptance of silence.

We are all agreeing that what happened to her was a terrible tragedy and she wasn't afforded due process, but we still have Laws in this country that will be followed in any type of investigation. He has every right to not give a statement just like if you were suspected or arrested for a crime, you have the right to not give a statement. The evidence I have seen so far there is no justification for what Officer Noor did, but at the end of the day it will come to a juries hands when and if he gets indicted.

originally posted by: elysiumfire
The silence is damming! The closing of ranks and colleagues a sickening travesty! The execution (and let's not be coy here, it was an execution) of Justine was simply barbaric. Yet the insult upon her continues, carried on and played out by the police department as they try to bring damage control to the atrocity.

Are we to actually believe that their cameras were not on? What if they were? What if the police department don't want to show the scenes because they think the reputation of the police department is more important? After all, Justine has been slaughtered, and nothing is going to bring her back, so they may think damage control and try to achieve the lightest sentence they can, because obviously, someone has to take a fall.

Clearly, things were said and stated between the officers about Justine which made Noor open fire on her. Noor didn't just start shooting right out the blue across the body of his partner and through the window at Justine. I think Noor's partner said something, a joke or jest, such as "She's got a gun!", or "She's carrying!" that made Noor believe she was an immediate threat and caused him to fire? The clues to this scenario are in the 'panic' after the shooting trying to revive Justine. The exchanges on the radio also give hints of lethal error and utter incredulous panic.

The police department already know full well what happened, because Noor's partner would've spilled the beans at the soonest moment he had to relate the event to his immediate boss. So damaging is this to the police department as whole, because it tars all the cops with the same brush, that they have resorted to the excuse of 'hearing a firework' (obviously coming from Justine's direction...perhaps she also had a lit sparkler?)! It shows nothing but utter contempt for Justine!

These are all baseless assumptions by you and you alone, nothing has come out to indict that Noors partner said "she had a gun" or any other type of weapon, as for the department creating damage control also baseless. Its an investigation, how about a little respect for her family who probably don't want to see this on the news every waking moment of their lives.

Let the investigation play out.

a reply to: dreamingawake

You did forget to add one thing. The police officer in question is the first Somali Muslim in the Minnesota police force, and they were/are proud of having this man, who has at least 3 other offenses against him in the two years he has been a police officer.

Who Is Mohamed Noor? Officer Who Shot and Killed Australian Justine Damond Had Two Complaints Against Him

Not to mention, that Officer Mohamed Noor refusing to give an statement about what happened.



The cameras of both police officers "were off". So we can't corroborate what really happened. But the fact that Officer Noor is refusing to give a statement is fishy in itself.

a reply to: dreamingawake

I will get flamed for this by the gun people, but, reality needs to take hold in the U.S. The proliferation of fire arms in the U.S. has led to every police officer viewing every single person as a potential threat. If you have a fire arm on you, even if you announce it and show your conceal carry permit, you are for certain a threat. The police officer could shoot you, claim he was in fear of his life and essentially be acquitted. Oh that happened recently in MN...

Alternatively, if someone robs you, you are concealed carry, can't get to your gun in time and the armed robber becomes aware you are armed, what is likely to happen? He walks away allowing you to shoot him in the back of the head? He shoots you first? Its the latter obviously.

Effectively this is what is happening with the police force. They are afraid and that fear creates a certain percentage of very bad and lethal decisions. That fear is heightened by the sheer number of armed citizens in the U.S. I have heard the argument a million times the good guys need guns too. You can't disarm all the bad guys. OK, if we accept that as true, we are also going to have to accept that a higher percentage of innocent bystanders are going to be killed as a result of this mentality. Further, the argument that the good guys have training and it makes us all safer. Well, that is BS and the proof of that is when these police officers, who have much more training, make these types of fatal errors.

Flame away. But, my concern is that when everyone is armed, the country devolves into Mexico or Chechnia or worse. Are the movies the Purge that far fetched? I hope, but, I fear perhaps not.

a reply to: dougie6665

LOL... yeah OK. Not reality but nice try.

If you think a purge is on its way I suggest you arm yourself and become skilled so you can help all those evil law abiding gun owners put down the threat. If your worried about someone getting the jump on you i suggest you curl up in a ball while being attacked and carry a secondary (backup) in an ankle holster where you have access....and when the opportunity arrises you point the gun at the attacker and pull the trigger until empty.

your personal safety is your responsibility.

I carry at least 2 guns and over 50 rds of ammo because I always have my two infant sons with me and there is no "run away" option if something goes south. Also a 12 guage and mid range carbine in the trunk along with a "man purse" LOL with a personal defense weapon and over 100 rounds which is grabbed periodicly. All legal. God Bless America!

a reply to: agenda51

I was being a bit over the top with the purge comment...I assume that will never happen. I wasn't suggesting taking anyone's guns away. Rather, I am suggesting that the psychology arising from the widespread carrying of firearms is a contributing factor. It is impossible to tell how much, but, it is also not possible to state that behavior is not changed if you think the next guy is carrying. It just is.

BTW, I was a police officer for two years and was in enough situations to understand that the bravado you are touting is not going to help you in every conceivable situation. Most police work is boring and mundane. But, when stuff happens, it happens quickly and usually unexpectedly. I ended up in a situation where I had a gun put to my head and I thought I was going to die. I tried to work through that for several months. I worked desk duty and other non patrol situations for several months before resigning and getting into other work. I realized that my reaction to encountering any similar situation in the future was going to be to draw my weapon, fire and ask questions later. I went over that situation with my partner, psychologists other team members etc. 100s of times. I realized before something else bad happened that my post traumatic stress disorder as it is known now was going to create a danger to everyone around me. I also realized I just didn't want to do it anymore. There are not any perfect answers. Sometimes bad things happen. Also, if people with post traumatic stress disorder are carrying weapons, a lot of bad things can happen. A lot of those people can, will and are police officers.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: dreamingawake

You did forget to add one thing. The police officer in question is the first Somali Muslim in the Minnesota police force, and they were/are proud of having this man, who has at least 3 other offenses against him in the two years he has been a police officer.

Who Is Mohamed Noor? Officer Who Shot and Killed Australian Justine Damond Had Two Complaints Against Him

Not to mention, that Officer Mohamed Noor refusing to give an statement about what happened.

The cameras of both police officers "were off". So we can't corroborate what really happened. But the fact that Officer Noor is refusing to give a statement is fishy in itself.

Not defending what he did because it seems reckless and senseless

However so what? He didn't make a statement? Any decent lawyer would advise this until trial

The hell is wrong w some of you? Much of this is common sense , be he guilty or not ( me thinks he will go up river) still some of you have lost your damn common sense

originally posted by: caf1550

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing
a reply to: Xcathdra

They are not the accused, they are a police officer in the employ of the state. Just because I accuse - and millions more - doesn't remove that fundamental point. Surely debriefing at the very least is required in any case? Do they not explain why the use of their firearm, let alone why the lack of use of their non-lethal weapons?

I think you know where I believe these due process rights can be shoved and I don't mean to be offensive personally to you, but this is an outrage and I am white hot with rage over it. If you've noticed this sentiment in the media and from what you've seen anywhere, really, it would not be generous to assume you can add much, much more to that. This is going to go one way and one way only or there will truly be trouble.

I honestly do not give a good god damn about the law anymore, I'd take this guy out myself and show him how to really use a weapon if I has the chance. He's a filthy, rotten, dirty scumbag and a murderer and I'll accept one path for this to follow and to hell with his due process and him as well.

Yeah and just like an citizen of the US who is facing possible criminal charges he is still protected by the Constitution of the US, and by that he can utilize his right to remain silent. I have already stated professionally I would want him to give his situation of events sooner then later while they are still fresh in his mind.

Also there is no such thing as non-lethal weapons, they are LESS-LETHAL, because they still have a chance whether it be small to cause death.

So you are threatening to kill a cop over the internet, you must be really tough, clearly you don't know enough about the law or everything that is going on to even have a opinion in this matter, I find it appalling with how you are conducting yourself in this thread, I must ask if you some reason he is not found guilty of this what will you do ( I personally as a LEO believe he will be indicted and charged for this)

What I am saying is that I am angry and I am voicing my position which is that if my path were to cross this man's, the result would be him leaving this earthly plane. I am not embarrassed by this and you can not in any way or attempt cause me to be.

I am not claiming to be tough, although to look at me you might think that I was. I am, however, quite capable of doing what I have spoken of and I'm surprised that you as a fellow human being are somehow surprised at my response to this. A point comes, unless you're a little btch, where you simply refuse to take any more of the utter bullpuckey and my point has been reached. Too bad if you're mind is unable to wrap itself around that.

How can he be found not guilty of killing this woman in cold blood? The simple answer is that he can not be, but to indulge your hypothetical, the result would be a disaster in relations in many ways between two countries - I do not think you realize how furious Australians are over this. They are white hot with rage, I cannot make this more clear to you how angry they are. This has gone global, even, but not only that it has enraged an entire once-friendly country. If you think my attitude is strange then you do not know Australians and let me introduce you to the concept of do not # with us or there will be trouble. But, go ahead and pretend what I'm saying is somehow unfounded and shocking to your precious little bubble. I really don't care.

Double Post

a reply to: dougie6665

Your reality , no offense, on what happens in violent crimes is way off , your whole post is full of hypotheticals and huge holes at that....

As a potential victim of violent crime and a vet , your brainstorming doesn't pan out close to reality....

a reply to: dougie6665

Honestly if you were a LEO those hypotheticals you came up with would have been clearly flawed before you even spat them out bud....

Not buying it....

I'm a combat marine, a volunteer firefighter and worked as an EMT for many years, other than being an actual police officer I've come upon a LOT of situations (control in Iraq we were basically police officers in a war zone)

Your hypotheticals don't hold water. Sorry don't believe you were at all... not w that mindset

a reply to: GusMcDangerthing

What I am saying is that I am angry and I am voicing my position which is that if my path were to cross this man's, the result would be him leaving this earthly plane.

Without due process? Only knowing what the news shows you? Then you are no better than he is.....and you should be evaluated for psychological stability....

I am not claiming to be tough, although to look at me you might think that I was. I am, however, quite capable of doing what I have spoken of and I'm surprised that you as a fellow human being are somehow surprised at my response to this. A point comes, unlessyou're a little btch, where you simply refuse to take any more of the utter bullpuckey and my point has been reached. Too bad if you're mind is unable to wrap itself around that.

So then youre only a "little bitch" when you fail to let all the facts come out and you react emotionally to situations?...thats terribly BETA male......

How can he be found not guilty of killing this woman in cold blood?

Was just a few days ago,we know NOTHING other than the initial report, nothing has happened yet, nor has all the facts arraignment , or trial.....people like you are the reason the court of OPINION wins over facts and condemns people......

The simple answer is that he can not be, but to indulge your hypothetical, the result would be a disaster in relations in many ways between two countries - I do not think you realize how furious Australians are over this. They are white hot with rage, I cannot make this more clear to you how angry they are. This has gone global, even, but not only that it has enraged an entire once-friendly country.

I can assure you, through world wars, trade issues, and global events, this one incident isnt going to ruin relations with the US and Australia, I use to go there quite frequently............Apparently judging by your attitude its good youre not the judge, jury and executioner because you would be woefully inept and too emotional......

If you think my attitude is strange then you do not know Australians and let me introduce you to the concept of do not # with us or there will be trouble. But, go ahead and pretend what I'm saying is somehow unfounded and shocking to your precious little bubble. I really don't care.

Spent a lot of time in Australia, 2yrs at one point.....Lived in Brisbane in the New Market area, Gold Coast, Beerwah, Toowoomba......your bravado is BS.....youre way too emotional....

yes this man did wrong, yes he should be punished......but we do not have all the facts..and until we do he JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER CITIZEN deserves the right of due process......I PRAY the system does as it should and punishes him to the highest extent of the law if the evidence shows so....

Other than that......youre being over emotional, and need to let reason, facts, and justice take her course, if it doesnt, BY ALL MEANS be outraged..

But to do this beforehand? I dont know a single Alpha personality that lets their emotions over ride their logic.......

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

What you consider to be an emotional basket case is simply emotional and a completely normal and natural human reaction, but go ahead with your lay analysis of someone on the internet that you don't know as I'd be keen to hear it. You seem to be rather intent on defending a murderer and not too friendly towards me so I could offer the same to you about your own self - should I? Of course not because that isn't the point of this.

I'm not intent on proving my manhood to anyone at all, you are simply intent on trying to fit me into the scale that you've created for yourself and place me somewhere according to where you think you are on it yourself. For all you know I could be a woman.

I also never said you were the or a problem. You are really creating something out of nothing merely because you are unable to cope with someone having taken the position I have. It's completely alright, you don't actually need to.

a reply to: GusMcDangerthing

What you consider to be an emotional basket case is simply emotional and a completely normal and natural human reaction, but go ahead with your lay analysis of someone on the internet that you don't know as I'd be keen to hear it. You seem to be rather intent on defending a murderer and not too friendly towards me so I could offer the same to you about your own self - should I? Of course not because that isn't the point of this.

Where did I defend him? I said, let the facts come out and let the process take its place and if it is what it is and justice is not done BE OUTRAGED......
On the other hand youre the one that is passing complete judgement to the point of DEATH on even seeing him, without any facts....

So who is in the wrong here?

I'm not intent on proving my manhood to anyone at all, you are simply intent on trying to fit me into the scale that you've created for yourself and place me somewhere according to where you think you are on it yourself. For all you know I could be a woman.

Who said anything on manhood or gender? This has nothing to do with it other than you being the one thats dead set on murder of someone before trial........

also never said you were the or a problem. You are really creating something out of nothing merely because you are unable to cope with someone having taken the position I have. It's completely alright, you don't actually need to.

LoL that it doesnt work on me, im perfectly fine with your position because its absolutely lawless, crazy , and contemptuous therefore invalid...and when people like you spring up its clear they are out of their heads and on the wrong side of whats right.......

Contrary, its YOU that has the problem with ME because I still advocate the rule of law, and dont let my emotions get to me, even when I despise the person that could potentially benefit from exploiting it....

Nice projection though......

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I think you think this is about me being wrong and you being right and very little else. You've tried to play games with me and they haven't worked and now you're trying to twist it back around as though I were doing it to you. Just take a deep breath and think to yourself that there is nothing you can say that will change my mind and that it's okay that this is the case. You're quite welcome to think however and whatever you wish to and you don't need to understand or deal with how and what I think.

Justine Damond's Family Copes With Painful Silence From Cop Who Shot Her

The Chief of Police, the Mayor, the Prime Minister of Australia and the family can demand the officer give a statement all they want. He doesnt have to provide one and if this were the other way around, where the officers were killed, people in this thread would be making the same comments about the shooter not having to provide information.

The officers career in law enforcement is most likely finished, regardless if he is charged / found guilty / not guilty. Since it appears policy was violated thats grounds enough to terminate his employment (although I still think the way the policy is worded is going to be problematic for the department).

For those running their mouths on what they would do if they come across this officer - save it. I get tired of hearing about your false cyber courage. The fact of the matter is not a single one of you (with a very small exception) would know what to do, intelligently, if placed into a random situation where you have to make a snap decision on whether to shoot or not shoot someone.