Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Oct 15, 2015 9:17:34 GMT -5
... There isn't enough information when the camera went sort of blank. ... It is clear that the cop had the kid on the ground. It is my thought that he was wrong to have done that and that it doesn't matter what happened after. The police officer was at fault. What I could see from that video is that the kid was on the ground holding the cell phone. The officer kicked the cell phone away. The kid got upset and started saying "you can't do that". He was obviously agitated. I don't know what happened after that so I can't say who was at fault at that point because I can't see. If the officer just pointed his gun and shot him for screaming about the phone - obviously that was wrong. I kinda don't think that's what happened, tho. Do you? It absolutely does matter what happened next.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Oct 15, 2015 9:31:57 GMT -5
I get what you are saying. You don't think he should have been removed from the car and placed on the ground in the first place. We disagree. I think there was every reason to suspect something was up because of the way the kid was acting. However, I do agree with you, as stated earlier, that the officer should have waited for his back-up. It appears that back-up was only a minute away.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Oct 15, 2015 10:16:54 GMT -5
Interesting read and I wish I could link it but I don't know how. Summary:
So....legal traffic stop.
So....the kid was high. And no, I don't think being stoned is a death sentence. He was high.
So....the officer initially tried less than lethal force. He didn't just start firing away. You can hear the taser being fired in the video after the kid refused to put his hands behind his back.
So...the idiot is now fighting with the officer. Of course, this is the officer's account since the body cam was ripped off during the fight. You know - that fight with the kid.
So...now we have what appears to be proof of injury. Not just the officer's account.
So....now the kid gets shot. And NOT for doing nothing except being a good citizen.
So...now we have admissions that different choices could have been made - which I agree with - but this was not the officer's fault and it appears a Grand Jury agrees. While I think the officer should have waited for back-up, I wasn't there. Perhaps there were things going on that made the officer feel he needed to get the subject out of the car and cuffed as soon as possible rather than letting him sit in the car with access to weapons or whatever. I don't know. I wasn't there so I don't know why he decided not to wait, but he didn't.
From the video, it appears the officer called for back up. Suddenly, he opens the car door to get the kid out of the car. It appears as if the kid did something inside that vehicle that made the officer feel it was necessary to get him out of there now. There was a sudden change in the officer's demeanor from when he radioed for back up and when he opened that door. He was suddenly in an urgent hurry. My guess is that he thought the kid may have been reaching for something. I don't know.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Oct 15, 2015 11:48:16 GMT -5
I'm confused by some of the logic on this thread. It's not ok to shoot somebody because they flashed their lights but it is ok to shoot somebody because they brought it on to themselves by being an idiot and it is what it is? Wow! OMG!!! It's ok to shoot somebody and all that should be done for "cops that just get pissed off and do stupid things" should be punished?! I refuse to excuse people for their bad behavior on message boards when they say stuff like this. I'm wondering if I think they are an idiot does that mean they should be shot too because it is what it is? WTH?!!! (And no - I don't really think that but I was trying to make a point of how absurd it sounds) Very disappointing to read this stuff. Yes, POM. Punished. I don't know what you mean by "all that should be done". Punishment can mean incarceration...the death penalty...whatever the court deems appropriate. What more than appropriate punishment is there? Put them on a rocket to Mars? Get a grip here. I don't even understand the rest of your post, but you are being kind of argumentative for no apparent reason. Jeez. You can't believe I don't think more should happen than punishment? I guess you are right because I don't know what else there is.
Let's try it this way. If that officer is found to be guilty of doing the wrong thing, what more would you say should be done than punishment?
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,109
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Oct 15, 2015 12:56:36 GMT -5
Has anyone mentioned that the cop had a responsibility to pull him over after flashing his lights? That could have been a sign that he needed assistance or had something to report. Of course things went tragic after that.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,411
|
Post by thyme4change on Oct 15, 2015 13:01:26 GMT -5
One thing I have learned in my decades on earth is the phrase "I must have made a mistake - sorry." The officer was clearly being a dick - but if the kid had said "I'm sorry - I must have made a mistake, but I really thought your high beams were on because they were so bright. My bad." Then the kid can go home and say to his friends and family "His high beams were totally on - what a dick."
My husband is a master at diffusing dumb situations like this. He is teaching my kids to let some things go.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Oct 15, 2015 13:10:58 GMT -5
Kudos to your husband. His teachings may very well save the lives of his children some day.
I've had to say, "I'm sorry - my bad." so many times in my life and will have to do so many more times. It astounds me that some see that as a sign of weakness. If it's owed - do it. Sometimes, even when it's not owed, it's the wisest course.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,326
|
Post by swamp on Oct 15, 2015 13:11:24 GMT -5
One thing I have learned in my decades on earth is the phrase "I must have made a mistake - sorry." The officer was clearly being a dick - but if the kid had said "I'm sorry - I must have made a mistake, but I really thought your high beams were on because they were so bright. My bad." Then the kid can go home and say to his friends and family "His high beams were totally on - what a dick." My husband is a master at diffusing dumb situations like this. He is teaching my kids to let some things go.
I'd rather be wrong and alive than right and dead.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Oct 15, 2015 13:17:24 GMT -5
One thing I have learned in my decades on earth is the phrase "I must have made a mistake - sorry." The officer was clearly being a dick - but if the kid had said "I'm sorry - I must have made a mistake, but I really thought your high beams were on because they were so bright. My bad." Then the kid can go home and say to his friends and family "His high beams were totally on - what a dick." My husband is a master at diffusing dumb situations like this. He is teaching my kids to let some things go.
I'd rather be wrong and alive than right and dead.
Exactly. If you suspect the cops in your area of being overzealous and trigger happy, I would go out of my way to ensure that I complied with whatever they wanted, even if legally I didn't have to comply. It's not "right" but I would rather be alive to bring a lawsuit than dead in a ditch.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,411
|
Post by thyme4change on Oct 15, 2015 13:22:50 GMT -5
If he did had complied a little better, he could have complained later about the obnoxious behavior of the cop.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Oct 15, 2015 13:24:29 GMT -5
I guess the kid was more inclined to believe IN THE PRINCIPAL OF THE THING, A stop, because of a highbeam flip to another car?
rather than better safe than dead. My God people, it is not like he was in the middle of a personal crime spree. I have to go with he did not deserve this. Arrested? SURE Dead? NO WAY
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,411
|
Post by thyme4change on Oct 15, 2015 13:33:44 GMT -5
The officer was also being principled. He really believed that he was doing the right thing by pulling people over to tell them his brights were not on. (For some unholy reason.) When two opposite principles collide, someone is going to lose. In that situation - it was not going to be the police officer. Recognizing that is key to someone who wants to battle. Did he really believe he was going to say "I don't need to give you my license" and the officer, who has been a dick for the last 5 minutes was going to say "Oh, okay - have a nice night." At some point, you have to say 'What is really going to happen here?' and follow up with 'What is the best way to fight it?' The best way to fight this cop was to do what he asked, and document the incident at a later time. The minute that cop started being a jerk, there was only a few possibilities on how it would end. That kid was going to comply, get taken in peacefully or have force used on him. I am not saying it is right - but this is how people work. The guy with a gun and an inflated sense of authority was not going to back down.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Oct 15, 2015 13:50:21 GMT -5
Of course he didn't deserve it. The use of deadly force on people that are unarmed is ridiculous and totally out of hand. However, when someone with a gun, and the legal right to shoot me, is telling me to do something, I am damn well going to do it. I think there does need to be some serious reform on how police actually police in this country, but there doesn't seem to be much willingness for the public to actually hold them accountable. If they are ever actually brought to trial, they are almost never convicted. I was reading the other day about this story....If the cop in the above is not fired then there is something seriously wrong.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,326
|
Post by swamp on Oct 15, 2015 15:04:30 GMT -5
The officer was also being principled. He really believed that he was doing the right thing by pulling people over to tell them his brights were not on. (For some unholy reason.) When two opposite principles collide, someone is going to lose. In that situation - it was not going to be the police officer. Recognizing that is key to someone who wants to battle. Did he really believe he was going to say "I don't need to give you my license" and the officer, who has been a dick for the last 5 minutes was going to say "Oh, okay - have a nice night." At some point, you have to say 'What is really going to happen here?' and follow up with 'What is the best way to fight it?' The best way to fight this cop was to do what he asked, and document the incident at a later time. The minute that cop started being a jerk, there was only a few possibilities on how it would end. That kid was going to comply, get taken in peacefully or have force used on him. I am not saying it is right - but this is how people work. The guy with a gun and an inflated sense of authority was not going to back down.
Don't pick a fight with the guy with the gun, taser, pepper spray, and baton. You will lose.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 2:17:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2015 16:42:47 GMT -5
One thing I have learned in my decades on earth is the phrase "I must have made a mistake - sorry." The officer was clearly being a dick - but if the kid had said "I'm sorry - I must have made a mistake, but I really thought your high beams were on because they were so bright. My bad." Then the kid can go home and say to his friends and family "His high beams were totally on - what a dick." My husband is a master at diffusing dumb situations like this. He is teaching my kids to let some things go.
I'd rather be wrong and alive than right and dead.
that should not be the choice. If more police were held responsible for their actions that choice would be rarer.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,411
|
Post by thyme4change on Oct 15, 2015 19:44:14 GMT -5
I'd rather be wrong and alive than right and dead.
that should not be the choice. If more police were held responsible for their actions that choice would be rarer. Absolutely. But I can't single handedly fix all the a-hole police guys before my son is a stupid teenager/stupid 20-something (which he will be - as were both his parents) so I am not going to take a chance and encourage him to argue with any policeman, especially one who is a dick.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 2:17:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2015 19:50:00 GMT -5
I'd rather be wrong and alive than right and dead.
that should not be the choice. If more police were held responsible for their actions that choice would be rarer. If more people made the right choices when confronted by cops they might be rarer still.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,477
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 15, 2015 20:46:29 GMT -5
Has anyone mentioned that the cop had a responsibility to pull him over after flashing his lights? That could have been a sign that he needed assistance or had something to report. Of course things went tragic after that. Did you watch the video? It seems to me that the words, "Do you need assistance or do you have something to report?" would have come out of the police officer's mouth if that were his reason for pulling him over. The words were not said.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,477
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 15, 2015 20:50:39 GMT -5
The officer was also being principled. He really believed that he was doing the right thing by pulling people over to tell them his brights were not on. (For some unholy reason.) When two opposite principles collide, someone is going to lose. In that situation - it was not going to be the police officer. Recognizing that is key to someone who wants to battle. Did he really believe he was going to say "I don't need to give you my license" and the officer, who has been a dick for the last 5 minutes was going to say "Oh, okay - have a nice night." At some point, you have to say 'What is really going to happen here?' and follow up with 'What is the best way to fight it?' The best way to fight this cop was to do what he asked, and document the incident at a later time. The minute that cop started being a jerk, there was only a few possibilities on how it would end. That kid was going to comply, get taken in peacefully or have force used on him. I am not saying it is right - but this is how people work. The guy with a gun and an inflated sense of authority was not going to back down. And the fact that he got away with killing the kid seems a clear signal that we had all better bow down to dicks with a gun.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,477
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 15, 2015 20:54:37 GMT -5
The officer was also being principled. He really believed that he was doing the right thing by pulling people over to tell them his brights were not on. (For some unholy reason.) When two opposite principles collide, someone is going to lose. In that situation - it was not going to be the police officer. Recognizing that is key to someone who wants to battle. Did he really believe he was going to say "I don't need to give you my license" and the officer, who has been a dick for the last 5 minutes was going to say "Oh, okay - have a nice night." At some point, you have to say 'What is really going to happen here?' and follow up with 'What is the best way to fight it?' The best way to fight this cop was to do what he asked, and document the incident at a later time. The minute that cop started being a jerk, there was only a few possibilities on how it would end. That kid was going to comply, get taken in peacefully or have force used on him. I am not saying it is right - but this is how people work. The guy with a gun and an inflated sense of authority was not going to back down.
Don't pick a fight with the guy with the gun, taser, pepper spray, and baton. You will lose.
Not just "a guy" but a professional police officer. And not just lose, but site.
|
|
fishy999
Familiar Member
Joined: Aug 9, 2015 20:40:43 GMT -5
Posts: 629
|
Post by fishy999 on Oct 15, 2015 21:23:24 GMT -5
Has anyone mentioned that the cop had a responsibility to pull him over after flashing his lights? That could have been a sign that he needed assistance or had something to report. Of course things went tragic after that. Did you watch the video? It seems to me that the words, "Do you need assistance or do you have something to report?" would have come out of the police officer's mouth if that were his reason for pulling him over. The words were not said. Also- the officer admitted he had been flashed several times over his bright lights so he knew exactly what was going on- anyone with a brain knows that is the universal signal for 'your brights are on'. That's the whole basis for the lawsuit is that he had no right to stop the kid in the first place. Not illegal to flash headlights in that state. We went from license and registration to dead unarmed kid in 5 minutes- no excuse for it- could have waited one more minute for backup.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Oct 16, 2015 8:07:29 GMT -5
Except that he did have the right. Apparently, flashing your lights at an oncoming vehicle closer than 500 feet is a "civil infraction" in that state. So he did have a right to stop the kid.
He could have waited one more minute....maybe. I did agree with that part until I watched the video again and saw the officer's sudden change in demeanor. The kid was doing something in that car while waiting that caused the officer to be concerned enough to get him out of the car. Officers don't like to do that one on one. It's dangerous. That kid was doing something in that car that led that officer to believe he was more dangerous in the car than out of it.
So yes...there is an excuse. Just not one people want to hear because it blows the shit out of the "trigger happy cop out to shoot poor sweet choir boys" theory.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 2:17:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2015 8:44:42 GMT -5
that should not be the choice. If more police were held responsible for their actions that choice would be rarer. If more people made the right choices when confronted by cops they might be rarer still. cops serve the public not the public serve the cops, if they want uncontested deference, I say ---- them.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,477
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 16, 2015 10:14:44 GMT -5
Except that he did have the right. Apparently, flashing your lights at an oncoming vehicle closer than 500 feet is a "civil infraction" in that state. So he did have a right to stop the kid.
He could have waited one more minute....maybe. I did agree with that part until I watched the video again and saw the officer's sudden change in demeanor. The kid was doing something in that car while waiting that caused the officer to be concerned enough to get him out of the car. Officers don't like to do that one on one. It's dangerous. That kid was doing something in that car that led that officer to believe he was more dangerous in the car than out of it.
So yes...there is an excuse. Just not one people want to hear because it blows the shit out of the "trigger happy cop out to shoot poor sweet choir boys" theory.
When I shut down all aspects of my humanity and view the video using only the logical part of my brain, I fully get this perspective. When I view it from my soul, I am sickened.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Oct 16, 2015 10:55:48 GMT -5
Except that he did have the right. Apparently, flashing your lights at an oncoming vehicle closer than 500 feet is a "civil infraction" in that state. So he did have a right to stop the kid.
He could have waited one more minute....maybe. I did agree with that part until I watched the video again and saw the officer's sudden change in demeanor. The kid was doing something in that car while waiting that caused the officer to be concerned enough to get him out of the car. Officers don't like to do that one on one. It's dangerous. That kid was doing something in that car that led that officer to believe he was more dangerous in the car than out of it.
So yes...there is an excuse. Just not one people want to hear because it blows the shit out of the "trigger happy cop out to shoot poor sweet choir boys" theory.
When I shut down all aspects of my humanity and view the video using only the logical part of my brain, I fully get this perspective. When I view it from my soul, I am sickened. I don't dispute your gut feelings. And you are right. I'm not viewing it from the same side you are viewing it on and that absolutely does give one a different perspective. However, to say that my view is only "logical" and not from my "soul" is very wrong.
View it from the perspective of someone who has seen too many good officers get buried because of some little asshole like this one. View this from the perspective of someone who has lost a mother, father, son, daughter or spouse because of some little asshole like this one who thinks he's above the law. View it from the perspective of someone who loved an officer who simply pulled over a driver for speeding and got shot in the face. Tell me that doesn't come from the soul.
I feel literally sick that this kid died. He was an ass but if the death penalty was a punishment for being an ass, we'd have very few people left walking the streets. Law enforcement officers are people, too. They have family and friends who love them. Try to view it from that perspective and see if you can call that view "logical" and not from the "soul".
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,477
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 16, 2015 11:00:18 GMT -5
When I shut down all aspects of my humanity and view the video using only the logical part of my brain, I fully get this perspective. When I view it from my soul, I am sickened. I don't dispute your gut feelings. And you are right. I'm not viewing it from the same side you are viewing it on and that absolutely does give one a different perspective. However, to say that my view is only "logical" and not from my "soul" is very wrong.
View it from the perspective of someone who has seen too many good officers get buried because of some little asshole like this one. View this from the perspective of someone who has lost a mother, father, son, daughter or spouse because of some little asshole like this one who thinks he's above the law. View it from the perspective of someone who loved an officer who simply pulled over a driver for speeding and got shot in the face. Tell me that doesn't come from the soul.
I feel literally sick that this kid died. He was an ass but if the death penalty was a punishment for being an ass, we'd have very few people left walking the streets. Law enforcement officers are people, too. They have family and friends who love them. Try to view it from that perspective and see if you can call that view "logical" and not from the "soul".
The professional police officer had every opportunity to change the outcome. He was fully in control of his actions. He shoot a seventeen year old.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Oct 16, 2015 11:19:37 GMT -5
I think part of the problem is viewing police officers as some type of noble heroes. They are just people, and as such, are fallible. But whenever one screws up, the urge seems to be to circle the wagons and defend them at all cost. To explain away why they HAD to do the awful thing they did.
Some of the onus lies with the police departments themselves. They need to properly train people how to handle these situations. And if this traffic stop is indicative of a "clean shoot" then the issue lies with the training. A routine traffic stop shouldn't end with an unarmed seventeen-year-old dead.
As a cop, knowing how dangerous traffic stops can be, why didn't he wait for his back-up? He sounded a little pissed the kid wasn't complying with his orders, so he decided to drag him out of the car. Once that happened, it quickly escalated. If he had just left the kid in the car, and waited for back-up, I really have to wonder if the outcome would be the same.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Oct 16, 2015 11:28:52 GMT -5
I know and that hurts my heart. I can't even image what his parents must be feeling.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 2:17:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2015 18:54:20 GMT -5
If more people made the right choices when confronted by cops they might be rarer still. cops serve the public not the public serve the cops, if they want uncontested deference, I say ---- them. Yes the cops serve the public. And the public should be grateful and make the job that they do easier... not harder. So... as I said... if more people made the right choices when confronted by cops, bad interactions might be rarer still.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 2:17:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2015 18:57:11 GMT -5
I think part of the problem is viewing police officers as some type of noble heroes. They are just people, and as such, are fallible. But whenever one screws up, the urge seems to be to circle the wagons and defend them at all cost. To explain away why they HAD to do the awful thing they did. Some of the onus lies with the police departments themselves. They need to properly train people how to handle these situations. And if this traffic stop is indicative of a "clean shoot" then the issue lies with the training. A routine traffic stop shouldn't end with an unarmed seventeen-year-old dead. As a cop, knowing how dangerous traffic stops can be, why didn't he wait for his back-up? He sounded a little pissed the kid wasn't complying with his orders, so he decided to drag him out of the car. Once that happened, it quickly escalated. If he had just left the kid in the car, and waited for back-up, I really have to wonder if the outcome would be the same. first bolded: And if the seventeen year old had handed over his paperwork as requested... he wouldn't have ended up dead. The cop calmly and professionally asked him several times to do the right thing, before it got all out of hand. second bolded: If the seventeen year old had just handed over his paperwork, as required by law when asked in the event of a stop, I really have to wonder if the outcome would be the same... I kind of doubt that it would be though.
|
|