DEFENDTHISHOUSE
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2006
- Messages
- 29,145
- Likes
- 32,929
The guy was told to stop and raise his hands....his two friends complied and were not shot. The one that was, walked away with is hand I his waist band and turned pulling hi hand out of his pants. The cop had every right to believe a gun was involved. A very tragic and disturbing situation all the way around.
I was refering to the incident were the guy died of an athsma attack after the officer pulled his car over for running a red light. Can't really blame the cop on this one. Can't say that if the cop had handled it any other way it would've made a difference. Just an unfortunate situation.Which video is that?
He was in fact told to raise his hands...while his hands were in his waist band. At that point, how could he comply without getting shot? No way to raise his hands without removing them from his waistband. Also, this appears to be yet another cop playing for the camera. He immediately starts preparing his defense by constantly stating that the guy was reaching for something. No where in the video do I see anything to support that. The guy had his hands in his waistband when he turned around. Only thing he did after that was remove his hands, which he would have to do to comply with the officer's order to raise his hands. I see nothing in the video that could be termed as reaching.
He was in fact told to raise his hands...while his hands were in his waist band. At that point, how could he comply without getting shot? No way to raise his hands without removing them from his waistband.
Please explain why you say the shooting was justified.
Based on the information the cop was given, he believed one of the three was armed. When the only one not complying with their command to put their hands up also had his hand wrist deep in his pants he automatically assumed he was the one. To make matters worse he pulls up his shirt as if he's creating clearance for the removal of his right hand right after he said "nah fool"..... That's basically what the DA said..... It's believable.... And probably in the DA's mind ..... Almost impossible to prove it wasn't justified.
Something no one has mentioned that I found disturbing was the fact that the other cop didn't have his camera on. If he would have there would have been a better view of the victim.
He was told by dispatch that one of them was armed.
Something no one has mentioned that I found disturbing was the fact that the other cop didn't have his camera on. If he would have there would have been a better view of the victim.
DA on No Charges: "Not because he posed an actual threat, but because (Officer) Cruz reasonably perceived a threat"
That's laughable at best. Only a cop gets away with that.
Utah Local News - Salt Lake City News, Sports, Archive - The Salt Lake Tribune
DA on No Charges: "Not because he posed an actual threat, but because (Officer) Cruz reasonably perceived a threat"
That's laughable at best. Only a cop gets away with that.
Utah Local News - Salt Lake City News, Sports, Archive - The Salt Lake Tribune
He was told by dispatch that one of them was armed.
Yes. So he shows up by himself. It takes no less than 3 cops to tell me my tail light is out.
He then gets out of the cruiser and draws his gun on the guy. He has no idea whether this guy has broken any law.
He tells the guy to stop and turn around.
He then gives the guy an order that automatically creates this perceived threat you speak of.
Then he kills him.
Great policing.
He should've been charged and sent to prison.
