Police shoot 13 year old carrying fake rifle.

Bedlam
The news is already saying he got at least one round in the ass, meaning they fired at him after he was down.

Not necessarily...

When a person is shot they don't just continue to remain in one static position until all the rounds enter them and then fall - Another TV fallacy at its finest. The body will twist / contort / etc... If a person is squeezing off rounds aiming center mass, as the bullets enter, the body reacts. The following rounds, while aimed center mass, are no longer going to hit center mass. Their entry points on the body will be in different areas, depending on distance / aim point / entry point / body reaction / gravity application / wind / forward motion etc etc etc.

If a person is shot, and the body begins to twist to one side or the other, it is possible to have entry wounds on the side and back, even though those areas were not the target when the bullet left the gun.

A forensic analysis of the body can determine entry / exit points. From there it can be determined at what angle those rounds entered / exited, which in turn will tell us what position the body was in when those rounds made contact.

An entry point in the center back with an exit point center front would indicate the person was shot in the back while standing or was shot in the back while on the ground with the shooter essentially standing directly over the body (90 degree angle).

So while the Coroner has determined cause of death and number of times hit, he has not touched on angles of entry or exit. That information should come next now that the coroner is done.

The other factors are going to be the recovery of rounds that were thru and thru, specifically the location of those rounds. If rounds are located in the ground where the body was found, then one could most likely and safely assume the shots came while the person was laying on the ground.

If the rounds are not located in the ground where the body was at, then there is a slim chance the person was shot while laying on the ground.

Food for thought..

roadgravel

It all happened very quickly. Santa Rosa police released a timeline - to the second - of the shooting:

3:14:15 - Dispatch creates report of suspicious person walking near Moorland and West Robles avenues.
3:14:19:- Deputies call for emergency asistance.
3:14:25 - Deputies notifiy dispatch that shots have been fired.
3:14:41 - Emergency crews asked to come to the scene.

4 to 10 seconds. Yet it is report "he was shot seven times - within 26 seconds". When did those other 16 or so seconds of shots happen? When he was down?

I think its referring to the total amount of time from dispatch creating the call to the emergency crew request.

3:14:15 to 3:14:41 is 26 seconds total.

Also, there is a discrepancy with total number of rounds fired.. Everything I have seen is 7-8 rounds total.

roadgravel

theres no evidence they shot him while he was down

Except for w witness who stated that. Was he correct?

No more correct than this witness -

Ismael Mondragon told NBC Bay Area that he saw Andy moments before he was killed with the gun in his hand. Mondragon said he warned the boy to get rid of such a real-looking weapon.

"I saw him with that rifle in his left hand," Mondgragon said. "And I said, 'Throw that thing away, the police are right behind you.' "

dragonridr

LittleBlackEagle
reply to post by Dav1d

 

yes four cops oh boy lets jump for joy the constitution has been restored. four cops out of hundreds of cases of police brutality everyday, most un reported, that's really reassuring i tell ya.

cops need to have their blue shield of death removed, no more immunity from any prosecution, personal responsibility and accountability, strangely the same thing that needs to be done to all govt. employees and elected scum bags. they all hide behind their govt. ID while committing crime after crime. lock them all up and start from scratch.

Excuse me do you have access to these hundreds of reports of police brutality daily? Id sure like to see that might change my mind and i to will believe officers are evil incarnate. Sounds to me you have issues with your government i would suggest becoming more active in your local government.Do you bother to attend the meetings they hold i doubt it but its there for you to voice your opinion. Then theres all ways helping local candidates win elections and they can help correcting problems pick a representative or for that matter run yourself. If enough people think like you do youll win. However what your doing is calling the system corrupt but take no action to correct it what does that make you? Theres an old saying if you arent part of the solution your part of the problem.

what i have access to is none of your business, but i'll tell you anyway, family members in law enforcement and they all tell me the same thing, the system is broke and will not be fixed anytime soon.

did you say voting??????????

yes voting has done us well hasn't it. problem is, people cannot be trusted in positions of power, it has never worked in the history of mankind and will not magically begin working now. positions of power need to be eliminated, we need to start over from scratch so this crap storm never happens again.

i am part of the solution, it's people like you who still believe the lies, that hinders progress, people that think this system we have can work, when it has been working well for the elite, it ain't broke, it's manufactured serfdom buddy and you can't fix that.

Time Index Section
00:00 Overview and introduction - IDFIT

02:15 Myth #1 - Time is on the side of the good guys right? They are prepared for this kind of thing right?

03:44 Myth #2 - Why didn't the Police talk the Aggressor down?

05:14 Myth #3 - It was just a knife and the officer had a gun. Why didn't the officer just disarm the subject?

06:17 Myth #4 - Why weren't less lethal tools used?

07:13 Myth #5 - Why not shoot the knife / gun out of their hand / Why not shoot to wound.

08:46 Myth #6 - Why were they shot in the back / Why were they shot so many times?

11:29 What happens after an officer involved shooting?

Xcathdra

roadgravel

theres no evidence they shot him while he was down

Except for w witness who stated that. Was he correct?

No more correct than this witness -

Ismael Mondragon told NBC Bay Area that he saw Andy moments before he was killed with the gun in his hand. Mondragon said he warned the boy to get rid of such a real-looking weapon."I saw him with that rifle in his left hand," Mondgragon said. "And I said, 'Throw that thing away, the police are right behind you.' "

RE: www.abovetopsecret.com...
Responses such as these are classic examples of "lets put the blame where it really belongs - on the victim." That way we won't have to face up to the truth of our horrendous actions against the general population.

XionZap

Xcathdra

roadgravel

theres no evidence they shot him while he was down

Except for w witness who stated that. Was he correct?

No more correct than this witness -

Ismael Mondragon told NBC Bay Area that he saw Andy moments before he was killed with the gun in his hand. Mondragon said he warned the boy to get rid of such a real-looking weapon."I saw him with that rifle in his left hand," Mondgragon said. "And I said, 'Throw that thing away, the police are right behind you.' "

Responses such as these are classic examples of "lets put the blame where it really belongs - on the victim."

edit on 28-10-2013 by XionZap because: (no reason given)

The point you missed is this witness undermines the argument that the gun was easily discernible as a toy.

Xcathdra

XionZap

Xcathdra

roadgravel

theres no evidence they shot him while he was down

Except for w witness who stated that. Was he correct?

No more correct than this witness -

Ismael Mondragon told NBC Bay Area that he saw Andy moments before he was killed with the gun in his hand. Mondragon said he warned the boy to get rid of such a real-looking weapon."I saw him with that rifle in his left hand," Mondgragon said. "And I said, 'Throw that thing away, the police are right behind you.' "

Responses such as these are classic examples of "lets put the blame where it really belongs - on the victim."

edit on 28-10-2013 by XionZap because: (no reason given)

The point you missed is this witness undermines the argument that the gun was easily discernible as a toy.

Also, here is a novel concept.. How about you stop the personal attacks? All they do is reinforce the fact that you are not able to refute the information. When in doubt attack the poster right?

edit on 28-10-2013 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

he's probably just tired of cops making excuses for other cops. your mood say's depressed and you should be if you're a cop, i'd be embarrassed as well. cops are hired to harm people, lets be direct shall we. they don't prevent crime, they don't serve and protect anyone but themselves and they are a financial burden to society. from day one of being hired they are directed at how many busts they need to generate, to maintain employment. whether it's drug busts, parking tickets, traffic violations you name it they are directed to generate revenue.

they although are not subject to the same violations, since they have a badge, how sick is that, how sick are people like you who condone it. i know, if you're a cop, that you will never get flack from other cops, iv'e had a get out of jail free card, i know how it works.

reply to post by LittleBlackEagle


And your rant has what to do with the witness undermining the continual claim that the rifle was discernible as a toy?

If an independent witness sees it the same as law enforcement, then it must be taken into account.. Just like the witness who is claiming the officers shot the suspect while he was on the ground - right?

Xcathdra

Not necessarily...

When a person is shot they don't just continue to remain in one static position until all the rounds enter them and then fall - Another TV fallacy at its finest. The body will twist / contort / etc... If a person is squeezing off rounds aiming center mass, as the bullets enter, the body reacts. The following rounds, while aimed center mass, are no longer going to hit center mass. Their entry points on the body will be in different areas, depending on distance / aim point / entry point / body reaction / gravity application / wind / forward motion etc etc etc.

If a person is shot, and the body begins to twist to one side or the other, it is possible to have entry wounds on the side and back, even though those areas were not the target when the bullet left the gun.

Oh, x. I had thought better of you. First, my familiarity with shooting firearms at live people doesn't derive from TV or video games. Unless you are Judge Dredd or were in the military yourself, I'm pretty sure I've got you beat.

Yes, if I pop off a round with a Lapua at a middling good range, let's say 1000 meters, there will be a lag of about 0.4 seconds before it hits, after I fire. In that time, you might turn around halfway if you were already moving, or you might bend over suddenly and the round might miss. For a long long shot, you are right, unexpected motion of the target does become an issue.

At 10 feet, not so much.

A .40 Federal JHP standard round has a muzzle velocity of about 350 meters/sec. At 3.5 meters,it's going to get there in about 10msec. For the kid to turn around halfway between the time the cartridge fires and the bullet arrives in his butt, he's going to have to be spinning at 3000 rpm.

A forensic analysis of the body can determine entry / exit points. From there it can be determined at what angle those rounds entered / exited, which in turn will tell us what position the body was in when those rounds made contact.

And bees smell fear, and the human head weighs about eight pounds, but to be shot in the ass at 10-15 feet distance, you shot the guy in the back. He didn't spin around that far after you let fly, unless he's Superman or the Flash.

So while the Coroner has determined cause of death and number of times hit, he has not touched on angles of entry or exit. That information should come next now that the coroner is done.

The other factors are going to be the recovery of rounds that were thru and thru, specifically the location of those rounds. If rounds are located in the ground where the body was found, then one could most likely and safely assume the shots came while the person was laying on the ground.

If the rounds are not located in the ground where the body was at, then there is a slim chance the person was shot while laying on the ground.

That is true, and it will be interesting to see when or if the coroner makes it public. Eventually they'll have to, but I bet they string it out as long as the law allows.

Now, if you're making the assertion from the cop's pov that "The kid was facing me when I started whaling away, but had twisted and fallen to the prone position by the time I emptied the magazine into his ass, therefore some of the rounds went into his back", then yes, we agree, it's quite possible for the person to change positions several times over the course of the magazine.

But as with so many people who have been participating in vigils and marches in Santa Rosa since Tuesday, I'm also having a hard time understanding why the deputy felt so threatened that he had to pull the trigger — eight times. After all, it was not as if they had evidence that this suspicious person with his back to them presented a clear and present danger. He was not walking toward a crowd of people. The deputies were not responding to a report of a dangerous person firing an assault weapon in the area.
Source

As police described it, the deputy fired because, as Andy turned “the barrel of the assault rifle was rising up and turning in (the deputy's) direction.”

Was that enough to take a life? Why is it always “shoot-to-kill” anyway? Wouldn't this have been a good time to show force that was less than lethal?

Source

The person who can tell us the answers can't speak for himself, can tell us why he turned towards the cops, if indeed he did... Can't tell us if he heard the cops identify themselves as Law Enforcement. There is much that remains unknown... Far to much remains unknow if Law Enforcement has nothing to hide, truly wished to be transparent.

dragonridr
reply to post by Bedlam

 

See i was thinking about that we would get rookies into Afghanistan that would end up shot in the rear alot. Its natural when people drop down and think there on the ground to stick there but in the air. If the first shots missed hit the fence for example and the boy goes prone it would actually explain alot of the wounds. This also explains how the theory was that he laid on the gun. They started shooting and he did what anyone would do duck and cover.

But then it's pretty much an admission the cops sat there and emptied the mag in his back, right? Not exactly sans peur et sans reproche.

All ill say is dont be quick on trying to find ways to convict the officer unless you actually have been in a situation where shots are fired. Theres not alot of time to think you just react. And 20 seconds is a horrendously long time ive seen several people die in seconds.

I have been, more than once. I ETSd right after GW1 got going good. But there were a lot of 'exciting' bits before that.

Bedlam

Oh, x. I had thought better of you. First, my familiarity with shooting firearms at live people doesn't derive from TV or video games. Unless you are Judge Dredd or were in the military yourself, I'm pretty sure I've got you beat.

The tv comment was not directed at you. It was to highlight my point that a person does not respond to being shot as tv portrays it.

Bedlam
And bees smell fear, and the human head weighs about eight pounds, but to be shot in the ass at 10-15 feet distance, you shot the guy in the back. He didn't spin around that far after you let fly, unless he's Superman or the Flash.

We don't know this to be a fact and I was not stating my response as a fact. I was pointing out how it could be possible for a person, who is facing forward, could have entry wounds that don't appear to be inline with a person who was shot while facing front

Even the reports state the suspect was turning towards the officers. That means his body was already in motion at the time of the officer discharging his gun. Others have used the term scrawny to describe the suspect, which will impact body response.

The info released thus far from the autopsy have injuries in areas not normally targeted by law enforcement - IE wrist / arm etc. Unless we are going to drag out the Kennedy magic bullet theory we need to wait for the forensic analysis.

Bedlam
That is true, and it will be interesting to see when or if the coroner makes it public. Eventually they'll have to, but I bet they string it out as long as the law allows.

The information from the autopsy is going to be evidence, so I don't see all of it coming out anytime soon. Police reports / evidence are not always going to be a matter of public record from the outset. Generally speaking police reports will become a full matter (to an extent and based on the situation) until the courts are completed with the process.

Public interest verse Due Process.

ETA - I saw you added more after my response -

Bedlam
Now, if you're making the assertion from the cop's pov that "The kid was facing me when I started whaling away, but had twisted and fallen to the prone position by the time I emptied the magazine into his ass, therefore some of the rounds went into his back", then yes, we agree, it's quite possible for the person to change positions several times over the course of the magazine.

Yes - that is what I am saying. You shoot to stop the threat, which means you track the threat.

Xcathdra
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

 

And your rant has what to do with the witness undermining the continual claim that the rifle was discernible as a toy?

If an independent witness sees it the same as law enforcement, then it must be taken into account.. Just like the witness who is claiming the officers shot the suspect while he was on the ground - right?

witness testimony means nothing for either side, if you really want to go there. cops shouldn't have guns any longer, they cannot handle it. you shouldn't put a gun in the hands of an incompetent, over zealous douche bag who passed the cop test, most of which have distinguishing mental issues.

what's the average IQ of a cop - 90-100? i bet that won't surprise anyone. and the kicker, they don't want intelligent critical thinking cops, they want mindless drones to the the dirty deeds.

his is not the first time I’ve seen a story like this, it is apparently typical hiring policy for police in many areas. Let’s face it, they want a dumbed-down police force that’s just smart enough to follow orders. We just can’t have our police thinking too much or questioning procedure! This story says that the average I.Q. for a cop is 104, if that is accurate it means there are thousands of police with I.Q.’s in the 80-100 range. Is it any surprise then that incidents of police brutality and abuses upon citizens (as well as the Constitution) are now so frequent? nyletterpress.wordpress.com...

www.topix.com...

Dav1d
Far to much remains unknow if Law Enforcement has nothing to hide, truly wished to be transparent.

Its an ongoing investigation so they are not going to have all of the answers right from the gate and they certainly cannot share everything either. The officers gave their side of the story... The witnesses' gave theirs.. The evidence will decide how much truth is in either sides claims.

Remember - the agency the deputies work for are not the ones conducting the investigation. So to assume they are not being transparent is a bit of a stretch don't you think? Secondly release of information from the deputies agency could fubar the investigations by the other agencies.

A question -

Would you want a total release of all information knowing if that occurred the deputies could walk away should criminal conduct be verified?

Sometimes a rush to judgment / answers can cause way more damage than a person being killed. It could result in a person being killed and the people responsible walking away without charge because of a tainted investigation.

Xcathdra
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

 

And your rant has what to do with the witness undermining the continual claim that the rifle was discernible as a toy?

If an independent witness sees it the same as law enforcement, then it must be taken into account.. Just like the witness who is claiming the officers shot the suspect while he was on the ground - right?

The LEO was a lot closer. You don't have to be 15 feet away to see the LEO shoot the suspect prone on the ground. However, at 15 feet, I'd expect the LEO to be able to see the "weapon" in more detail than a witness at 100 feet. Also facial expression, body language, and anything the suspect said.

Bedlam
The LEO was a lot closer. You don't have to be 15 feet away to see the LEO shoot the suspect prone on the ground.

And at less than 15 feet its possible the officers saw something the person 15 feet away couldn't see.

Bedlam
However, at 15 feet, I'd expect the LEO to be able to see the "weapon" in more detail than a witness at 100 feet. Also facial expression, body language, and anything the suspect said.

The officer saw the gun at more than 15 feet. He saw the gun when he discharged his weapon. It does not change the fact the gun was real at the time of contact and only afterwards was it determined to be a pellet gun.



Did the officer in this video shoot and kill an unarmed black man in the back for no reason?



Now watch this second video, taken by the second cars dash cam.

Xcathdra

We don't know this to be a fact and I was not stating my response as a fact. I was pointing out how it could be possible for a person, who is facing forward, could have entry wounds that don't appear to be inline with a person who was shot while facing front

Even the reports state the suspect was turning towards the officers. That means his body was already in motion at the time of the officer discharging his gun. Others have used the term scrawny to describe the suspect, which will impact body response.

There's still no physics that allows the kid to spin 90 degrees in 10 msec, wormy or no. If you rule out IEDs, that is.

The info released thus far from the autopsy have injuries in areas not normally targeted by law enforcement - IE wrist / arm etc. Unless we are going to drag out the Kennedy magic bullet theory we need to wait for the forensic analysis.

It will be interesting. I don't expect that they will make it public until the trial, especially if it's sort of negative in nature.

The injuries to the wrist and such aren't that odd, while this isn't exactly ATS public fodder for discussion, I'll say you can get popped in odd places if you spook me badly enough at close quarters. If you're holding a rifle across your chest (I assume from the various descriptions this is likely) then if I'm firing center mass, your arm might easily be in the way. Or if I hit you and you reflexively reach for the wound, the next shot might hit your hand or arm. THAT's not so surprising, actually, neither are the shots to the hip, thigh etc, because I'm assuming the Deputy might not exactly be grouping his shots in the adrenalin rush, which could also explain lofting a few rounds into the neighbors'. Actually, to his credit, I'm impressed he put as many rounds on target as he did in a strictly technical sense, unless he did it into the kid's back at point blank range. We'll see from the coroner's report.

Yes - that is what I am saying. You shoot to stop the threat, which means you track the threat

Yeah, but you should also use critical judgement - if it's a wormy kid that's face down, you can stop now. I get the impression they teach LEOs to always empty the mag into the threat once they start firing?

Xcathdra

Bedlam
The LEO was a lot closer. You don't have to be 15 feet away to see the LEO shoot the suspect prone on the ground.

And at less than 15 feet its possible the officers saw something the person 15 feet away couldn't see.

However, given the ultimate truth that it wasn't a weapon and the kid wasn't armed at all, then that's not much of an argument. You might say the LEO saw something that wasn't there to begin with, which isn't exactly a shining achievement, but it's hard to argue at this point the kid had a holdout only obvious to the LEO.

ETA: off to death by slides as we resume work here, it'll be my only day shift shift until Christmas.

Ex - in a weird sense, for the four years previous to this one, I was technically a sort of LEO myself, as a CSSO/FSO I get to play a US Marshal, at least on the grounds of the facility. Now, I'm away too much and we spun the bottle and appointed someone else. I always wanted one of you guys to try forcing your way onto the grounds so I could strip search you at gun point, but none of you ever tried. Except for maybe that fire inspector that finally got the message he couldn't go into the secure areas. Alas.

Bedlam
There's still no physics that allows the kid to spin 90 degrees in 10 msec, wormy or no. If you rule out IEDs, that is.

Those physics are based on all of the factors, including the suspect turning towards the officers. The movement was already in progress when the suspect was shot.

Bedlam
It will be interesting. I don't expect that they will make it public until the trial, especially if it's sort of negative in nature.

I would rather have people speculate and make accusations than release the info, resulting in no prosecution.

Bedlam
The injuries to the wrist and such aren't that odd, while this isn't exactly ATS public fodder for discussion, I'll say you can get popped in odd places if you spook me badly enough at close quarters. If you're holding a rifle across your chest (I assume from the various descriptions this is likely) then if I'm firing center mass, your arm might easily be in the way. Or if I hit you and you reflexively reach for the wound, the next shot might hit your hand or arm. THAT's not so surprising, actually, neither are the shots to the hip, thigh etc, because I'm assuming the Deputy might not exactly be grouping his shots in the adrenalin rush, which could also explain lofting a few rounds into the neighbors'. Actually, to his credit, I'm impressed he put as many rounds on target as he did in a strictly technical sense, unless he did it into the kid's back at point blank range. We'll see from the coroner's report.

Unlike military philosophy, law enforcement cannot accept intentional collateral damage. When we qualify, if we miss a target we get yelled at. They do that to reinforce the possibility that the bullet that misses could kill someone beyond the threat. The result forces officers to constantly take that into account.

Bedlam
Yeah, but you should also use critical judgement - if it's a wormy kid that's face down, you can stop now. I get the impression they teach LEOs to always empty the mag into the threat once they start firing?

Critical judgment is used.. The issue comes in when people substitute their own critical judgment in place of the officers.

We don't know for sure if he was shot while on the ground... If we are going to accept one witnesses statements then me must accept them all. We don't get to pick and choose witness accounts based on personal preference.

No, we are not trained to empty our mags. An individual in a stress situation undergoes the fight or flight response. I am pretty confident you know what it is, so for others -

Fight or Flight Response - Wiki is a built in defense mechanism in humans.

Reaction[edit]

The reaction begins in the amygdala, which triggers a neural response in the hypothalamus. The initial reaction is followed by activation of the pituitary gland and secretion of the hormone ACTH.[8] The adrenal gland is activated almost simultaneously and releases the neurotransmitter epinephrine. The release of chemical messengers results in the production of the hormone cortisol, which increases blood pressure, blood sugar, and suppresses the immune system.[9] The initial response and subsequent reactions are triggered in an effort to create a boost of energy. This boost of energy is activated by epinephrine binding to liver cells and the subsequent production of glucose.[10] Additionally, the circulation of cortisol functions to turn fatty acids into available energy, which prepares muscles throughout the body for response.[11] Catecholamine hormones, such as adrenaline (epinephrine) or noradrenaline (norepinephrine), facilitate immediate physical reactions associated with a preparation for violent muscular action. These include the following:[12]
Acceleration of heart and lung action
Paling or flushing, or alternating between both
Inhibition of stomach and upper-intestinal action to the point where digestion slows down or stops
General effect on the sphincters of the body
Constriction of blood vessels in many parts of the body
Liberation of metabolic energy sources (particularly fat and glycogen) for muscular action
Dilation of blood vessels for muscles
Inhibition of the lacrimal gland (responsible for tear production) and salivation
Dilation of pupil (mydriasis)
Relaxation of bladder
Inhibition of erection
Auditory exclusion (loss of hearing)
Tunnel vision (loss of peripheral vision)
Disinhibition of spinal reflexes
Shaking

Function of physiological changes[edit]

The physiological changes that occur during the fight or flight response are activated in order to give the body increased strength and speed in anticipation of fighting or running. Some of the specific physiological changes and their functions include:[13][14]
Increased blood flow to the muscles activated by diverting blood flow from other parts of the body.
Increased blood pressure, heart rate, blood sugars, and fats in order to supply the body with extra energy.
The blood clotting function of the body speeds up in order to prevent excessive blood loss in the event of an injury sustained during the response.
Increased muscle tension in order to provide the body with extra speed and strength.
The pupils dilate to help see with increased clarity.
Increased perspiration to prevent over-heating due to the increased metabolic rate.

Lots of complexities to be considered.