To Protect and to Serve II

#3,351
#3,351
armchair said:
Yes, can't wait to hear why a cop in the passenger seat of his cruiser shot the Aussie woman through the door of the vehicle at a time when the woman was apparently talking to the officers. She had called the police herself. Why would a cop in the passenger seat, talking to a woman in her bathrobe, even have his gun out in the first place?
Click to expand...

they are ignorant and treat every little thing with TV cop drama
 
#3,352
#3,352
lawgator1 said:
Link?

I've read none of that, at all.
Click to expand...

Dude, it was within the first few lines of the twitter link that was originally posted.

Australian woman shot dead by police in Minneapolis

Minnesota newspaper The Star Tribune reports Ms Damond was dressed in her pyjamas when she went to the driver’s side door of the police vehicle that responded to the emergency call.

She was talking to the driver when the officer in the passenger seat pulled out his gun and shot across his fellow officer.
Click to expand...


Click on the link... not that hard to find, LG.

Velo Vol said:
[twitter]https://twitter.com/newscomauHQ/status/886751812921032704[/twitter]

Police cameras turned off.
Click to expand...
 
#3,353
#3,353
Velo Vol said:
What is your default starting point? Shootings are justified? Shootings are not justified?
Click to expand...


Putting aside any bias based on what I do for a living, what I have found after having tried a number of cases involving allegations of police misconduct is that most people begin with the presumption that the officer was trying to do the right thing. They believe that they are hard-working and motivated by good things.

Not to say they just blindly accept it, and if a plaintiff can prove the officer acted wrongly they will be quick to find in favor of the plaintiff. But the starting point I think for most people is that the other side needs to prove the officer did something wrong, rather than the other way around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,355
#3,355
lawgator1 said:
Putting aside any bias based on what I do for a living, what I have found after having tried a number of cases involving allegations of police misconduct is that most people begin with the presumption that the officer was trying to do the right thing. They believe that they are hard-working and motivated by good things.

Not to say they just blindly accept it, and if a plaintiff can prove the officer acted wrongly they will be quick to find in favor of the plaintiff. But the starting point I think for most people is that the other side needs to prove the officer did something wrong, rather than the other way around.
Click to expand...

Wait, that runs totally counter to the presumption of innocence for the civilian. You've already got it factored in that the civilian is guilty until proven innocent. The burden of proof should be on the prosecutor/LEO to prove otherwise.
 
#3,357
#3,357
Rasputin_Vol said:
Wait, that runs totally counter to the presumption of innocence for the civilian. You've already got it factored in that the civilian is guilty until proven innocent. The burden of proof should be on the prosecutor/LEO to prove otherwise.
Click to expand...

You are mixing so many different concepts it's not worth unravelling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,358
#3,358
lawgator1 said:
I went one step further and read the Star Tribune, the original source of that information. I don't see it in there.
Click to expand...

http://www.startribune.com/woman-ki...ed-shooting-in-south-minneapolis/434782213/#1

Three sources with knowledge of the incident said Sunday that two officers in one squad car, responding to the 911 call, pulled into the alley. Damond, in her pajamas, went to the driver’s side door and was talking to the driver. The officer in the passenger seat pulled his gun and shot Damond through the driver’s side door, sources said. No weapon was found at the scene.
Click to expand...
 
#3,360
#3,360
Sources with knowledge of the incident.

Are these the same sources tgat said Michael Brown was just standing there with his hands up?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3,361
#3,361
lawgator1 said:
Sources with knowledge of the incident.

Are these the same sources tgat said Michael Brown was just standing there with his hands up?
Click to expand...
Let's have a moment of silence for the Gentle Giant, and for the University of Missouri that he took down, when he put his hands up.
 
#3,362
#3,362
lawgator1 said:
Sources with knowledge of the incident.

Are these the same sources tgat said Michael Brown was just standing there with his hands up?
Click to expand...

Lol, who didn't see that reply coming?

If your end game was just to sh** on what was reported, then you should have just dropped the "I didn't see that" bullsh**.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,364
#3,364
n_huffhines said:
So because people lied once upon a time, you get to assume the story isn't as bad as it sounds?
Click to expand...


No, I'm waiting for eyewitnesses and forensics to tell us something.

I mean, are you not a little skeptical of the claim that cops pulled up, she went to the driver and started explaining what she saw, and for no reason the passenger took his gun out and shot past his partner to kill her for no reason?

If so, it's just random murder.

But on it's face I find it just so outside the norm I'm wanting more info, first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,365
#3,365
lawgator1 said:
No, I'm waiting for eyewitnesses and forensics to tell us something.

I mean, are you not a little skeptical of the claim that cops pulled up, she went to the driver and started explaining what she saw, and for no reason the passenger took his gun out and shot past his partner to kill her for no reason?

If so, it's just random murder.

But on it's face I find it just so outside the norm I'm wanting more info, first.
Click to expand...

Doubt there were any witnesses at this point and the only way to solve this is for the other cop to rat out the partner
 
#3,366
#3,366
lawgator1 said:
No, I'm waiting for eyewitnesses and forensics to tell us something.

I mean, are you not a little skeptical of the claim that cops pulled up, she went to the driver and started explaining what she saw, and for no reason the passenger took his gun out and shot past his partner to kill her for no reason?

If so, it's just random murder.

But on it's face I find it just so outside the norm I'm wanting more info, first.
Click to expand...

Could be she approached the car "aggressively". Being that she's from Australia she might not have known approaching a police car is an aggressive act in the US
 
#3,367
#3,367
hog88 said:
Could be she approached the car "aggressively". Being that she's from Australia she might not have known approaching a police car is an aggressive act in the US
Click to expand...

Or, could have been a language barrier/miscommuncation. She may have said something like "bloke" or "flat" and maybe the cops took it as an insult and justification to shoot her.

Maybe she had on pig pajamas?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,372
#3,372
Maybe she mentioned throwing a little shrimp on the barbie or called him a Sheila. Surely there's going to be audio of what happened. By this point they would have enough to go on to release why the officer shot her if he had a legitimate reason.
 
#3,373
#3,373
MercyPercy said:
I don't know how pointing out that a cop is unlikely to get there fast enough in many scenarios is being misconstrued as offensive. Cops aren't omnipotent and omnipresent, it's not a knock, just a fact. That's why people buy guns for home defense.

Get a grip.
Click to expand...

I'm going to play devil's advocate here. Imagine it from his perspective. He's been there in the middle, he's stopped in progress violent crimes and it's being said that cops arrive after the fact.

It's like telling a stay at home mom of three that she doesn't do anything all day when in reality she gets the kids ready, feeds them, drops them off, cleans the house, laundry, goes to the grocery store, picks the kids up and takes them to extracurricular activities, comes home, cooks dinner, washes the dishes, bathes all the kids, gets them ready for bed, puts them to bed and finally has a moment to sit at 9:00 but the husband wants some action and says "how can you be tired? you don't work"
 
#3,374
#3,374
Rasputin_Vol said:
Unfortunately, cops keep coming up with new material. Of course, that usually comes at the expense of someone's life or freedoms.
Click to expand...

All of this based on one sided stories, incomplete/edited videos, and speculation. Like I said, circle jerk.
 
#3,375
#3,375
lawgator1 said:
Putting aside any bias based on what I do for a living, what I have found after having tried a number of cases involving allegations of police misconduct is that most people begin with the presumption that the officer was trying to do the right thing. They believe that they are hard-working and motivated by good things.

Not to say they just blindly accept it, and if a plaintiff can prove the officer acted wrongly they will be quick to find in favor of the plaintiff. But the starting point I think for most people is that the other side needs to prove the officer did something wrong, rather than the other way around.
Click to expand...

um that's the way our justice system is set up. innocent before proven guilty and all that jazz...?
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top