To Protect and to Serve II

#3,351
#3,351
n_huffhines said:
I haven't opined. Your problem is you don't even know what other people are actually saying, in any thread, ever.
Click to expand...

You don't even know what you post your freakin' self. any time, all the time, in any thread. You're the most delusional poster on this site besides Highchair of course.

n_huffhines said:
We don't know, but that didn't stop involuntary from guessing that it's an accident.

What we do know is that they violated department policy by not having their cams on. No matter what happens, their needs to be a stiff punishment (paid leave is not going to cut it) otherwise cops are gonna conclude, "I guess I don't have to have my camera on".
Click to expand...
 
#3,352
#3,352
Velo Vol said:
Per the news report I read she was unarmed, talking to officers who had arrived and were still in their vehicle. What scenario is there, whether she was intoxicated or not, that would justify deadly force?

I supposed she could have been reaching into their car trying to strangle an officer, but that seems highly unlikely.

0d45be5a5292b8aa4b6157f8eca343d7
Click to expand...



Link?

I've read none of that, at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,353
#3,353
InVOLuntary said:
You don't even know what you post your freakin' self. any time, all the time, in any thread. You're the most delusional poster on this site besides Highchair of course.
Click to expand...

This is even worse than the quora link. What are you proving with the bolded statement? That I did in fact not jump to a conclusion or that I said you called it an accident?
 
#3,355
#3,355
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3,357
#3,357
lawgator1 said:
Thanks, but all that says is that they did not find a weapon nearby. It says nothing about the other claims about her approaching the officers as they were in their cars, her actions, their actions, etc.

I'm not saying it was justified. But I don't know enough to conclude otherwise.
Click to expand...

that it was not justified. She was not armed, and why would she be given that she called the police in the first place; she was closest to the cop who was driving, who did not feel it necessary to pull his gun. Even if she were having some sort of mental meltdown, which would be worst case scenario, you don't pull a gun. Maybe I'll be proved wrong, but this sounds like a case of an undertrained or just plain incompetent, jittery cop. Maybe the cop had a mental meltdown. He is 31, Somali, and a recent (1 year or so) police academy graduate. We already know that the two cops violated procedures by not having their cameras activated. I assume they had some lights on in the alley. It is a bizarre and tragic case. I have a big respect for cops--they have a tough job, and the vast majority do it well--but a lot of them are young and quick to pull their guns.
 
#3,358
#3,358
It could be that the shooter/cop thought that the woman was the perpetrator of the original complaint--it was dark, they were in an alley, she obviously approached the vehicle. However, I assume the cops had at least one light focused on the alley, which would have offered some visibility. And the initial reports said that the woman was talking to the police when she was shot, which would negate the idea that she was perceived to be the intruder/perp.
 
#3,359
#3,359
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
 
#3,360
#3,360
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...
 
#3,361
#3,361
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
#3,363
#3,363
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.
 
#3,365
#3,365
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
#3,366
#3,366
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...
 
#3,368
#3,368
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
#3,369
#3,369
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.
 
#3,370
#3,370
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
#3,372
#3,372
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
#3,373
#3,373
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
 
#3,374
#3,374
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
 
#3,375
#3,375
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
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top