Daniel Shaver: Police officer not guilty of murder
http://www.tmz.com/2017/12/07/mesa-police-involved-shooting-bodycam-philip-brailsford-not-guilty-daniel-shaver/
Daniel Shaver was sobbing on his knees while begging the cops not to shoot him.
Brailsford's(the cop who shot him) AR-15 rifle had the words "You're fucked" inscribed on the side of it.
I don't know how anyone can justify this senseless horrible execution(It was an execution IMO). I'm sure there are a few trolls that will try.
Quote: AxelWolfI just watched the video and it was very disturbing.
http://www.tmz.com/2017/12/07/mesa-police-involved-shooting-bodycam-philip-brailsford-not-guilty-daniel-shaver/
Daniel Shaver was sobbing on his knees while begging the cops not to shoot him.
Brailsford's(the cop who shot him) AR-15 rifle had the words "You're fucked" inscribed on the side of it.
I don't know how anyone can justify this senseless horrible execution(It was an execution IMO). I'm sure there are a few trolls that will try.
In better and offsetting news, the jerk cop who killed the fleeing runner in North Charleston got 20 years in prison this week. The one who shot 5 times in the back, then dropped a throw down beside the body as the guy lay dying, all caught on bystander video. That one really bugged me because I used to live and work there.
I do think the evil clown who killed all the blacks in the downtown church might have had something to do with the verdict and sentencing , though. If so, a little bit of overdue correction in a city that definitely had a double standard when I lived there in the 90's.
I agree this was an execution. A good example of Arizona "justice", the land of Arpaio and Brewer, among others. Nasty. Several people I like live there, including a couple in here. Not sure how y'all stand it.
Quote: AxelWolfI just watched the video and it was very disturbing.
http://www.tmz.com/2017/12/07/mesa-police-involved-shooting-bodycam-philip-brailsford-not-guilty-daniel-shaver/
Daniel Shaver was sobbing on his knees while begging the cops not to shoot him.
Brailsford's(the cop who shot him) AR-15 rifle had the words "You're fucked" inscribed on the side of it.
I don't know how anyone can justify this senseless horrible execution(It was an execution IMO). I'm sure there are a few trolls that will try.
What motive do you think the executioner had? What did you think the jury might have seen that you might not have? 12 people unanimously votednot guilty, correct? Why do you think that is?
Quote: AxelWolfI just watched the video and it was very disturbing.
http://www.tmz.com/2017/12/07/mesa-police-involved-shooting-bodycam-philip-brailsford-not-guilty-daniel-shaver/
Daniel Shaver was sobbing on his knees while begging the cops not to shoot him.
Brailsford's(the cop who shot him) AR-15 rifle had the words "You're fucked" inscribed on the side of it.
I don't know how anyone can justify this senseless horrible execution(It was an execution IMO). I'm sure there are a few trolls that will try.
Good god, there is no doubt in my mind that cop is a sadistic murderer.
He is clearly getting off on the power of the situation, hearing the guy beg for his life, giving bizarrely confusing instructions like some kind of F’d up sadistic Simon Says.
That went into the situation itching to kill someone. When the poor guy tried to adjust his pants, the cop saw his opportunity and took it. Absolutely disgusting.
Quote: SOOPOO12 people unanimously votednot guilty, correct? Why do you think that is?
In many cases, jurors actually think a defendant is guilty but not enough evidence to convict.
Not guilty often does not mean the jurors think a person is innocent
Sometimes its a poor prosecution case
or
Weak police investigation resulting in weak evidence to create a tiny bit of doubt
Quote: RSAccording to Wikipedia, the body-cam footage was released on Dec. 8'th and it appears (my interpretation) was not used in the trial, because of something about a right to a fair trial (that part doesn't make sense to me).
I think it was presented as evidence in the trial, and not released to the general public until afterwards for a fair trial.
Quote: terapinedIn many cases, jurors actually think a defendant is guilty but not enough evidence to convict.
Not guilty often does not mean the jurors think a person is innocent
Sometimes its a poor prosecution case
or
Weak police investigation resulting in weak evidence to create a tiny bit of doubt
or they think the person is guilty of a crime, just not the crime the prosecution charged them with
I didn't really want to watch the whole video because I don't really want to watch someone get shot, no matter the circumstances. But I did see the final part where he did get shot and I could see how that may be enough to put probable doubt or whatever into the jury's minds. I don't know what kind of information the policeman had going into it, but if someone is presumably armed and they make a quick motion to their hip......well, if it was me, I'm shooting first and asking second. I'm not gonna be the guy who got shot because I wanted to be 1000% sure the guy was armed. Put yourself in his shoes, as they say.
I'm not saying the policeman is innocent nor he was in the right, especially with the bizarre orders and all that stuff. Just saying how I can see why the jury would have possible doubt.
Police need to be better trained here in the U.S. to not be so trigger happy. The victim was SH!TT!NG his pants the moment cops showed up. This is the kind of stuff that happens in POVERTY-STRICKEN THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES, NOT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!
This video has made me ashamed to be an American. It is just yet another example of the over-use of force by police officers. Philip Brailsford was the judge, jury, and executioner. Why was the man instructed to crawl forward? There was another officer present that could have easily handcuffed the man when he was laying on the ground. Where was the professional judgement on the officers' part? When you point an assault rifle at somebody and threaten to kill them, the average citizen is going to be beyond terrified and may have trouble complying out of sheer terror.
In the U.S., it is the police officers that are given the benefit of the doubt, and it is the citizen that is expected to remain calm and act without error in stressful situations.
There is also civil asset forfeiture, but that warrants its own topic.
This is why many law-abiding, tax-paying, productive members of society dislike the police
Quote: AxelWolfI just watched the video and it was very disturbing.
http://www.tmz.com/2017/12/07/mesa-police-involved-shooting-bodycam-philip-brailsford-not-guilty-daniel-shaver/
Daniel Shaver was sobbing on his knees while begging the cops not to shoot him.
Brailsford's(the cop who shot him) AR-15 rifle had the words "You're fucked" inscribed on the side of it.
I don't know how anyone can justify this senseless horrible execution(It was an execution IMO). I'm sure there are a few trolls that will try.
Philip Brailsford was the judge, jury, and executioner. The judge ordered that the jury not know that the words "You're Fucked" were engraved onto the weapon.
What can we do as citizens to rectify this gross, over-use of force by the police?
Why did the cop have the person crawl face forward? That seems a decision near bound to get the guy shot just like it did.
Quote: dyvan13
The officer, Philip Brailsford was charged with 2nd degree murder. The judge ordered that the officer's body-cam be sealed away until after the trial, as to not corrupt a fair trial by juror. He has since been taken off the Arizona police force for poor performance.
Are you kidding me? The JURY wasn't allowed to see the body cam record??? What fairer, more timely evidence could there have been? Are you sure the evidence wasn't presented?
I can't imagine how that could have been kept out of the trial. But that may also be the only way the jury votes "not guilty". Couldn't possibly watch that for 20+ minutes and believe it wasn't murder.
Quote: beachbumbabsAre you kidding me? The JURY wasn't allowed to see the body cam record??? What fairer, more timely evidence could there have been? Are you sure the evidence wasn't presented?
I can't imagine how that could have been kept out of the trial. But that may also be the only way the jury votes "not guilty". Couldn't possibly watch that for 20+ minutes and believe it wasn't murder.
Sorry, I mis-quoted that. The body cam footage WAS shown during the trial. The judge sealed the body cam footage out of PUBLIC eye until AFTER the trial, for the judge thought it would cause an impartial trial. I will edit my original post
I bet they argued they didn't know what was further down the hall waiting for them, and it could possibly put them in danger being exposed while handcuffing him, if someone had a gun further down the hall or someone coming out of the room with a gun.
I keep thinking what if some poor innocent person(like you or me) just happened to come out of their room next door at the same time the swat team showed up.
I bet there would have been lots of pressure for the Video to be released prior to the trial.
Quote: AxelWolfHad this been a black person that was shot, there would have been rioting.
I bet there would have been lots of pressure for the Video to be released prior to the trial.
That is the part that annoys me. It's only about race when it is convenient.
Although it is tragic and the poor guy was probably harmless he made some poor life decisions here to get to this point. Why is he drunk and playing with a pellet gun on a balcony? In light of all the recent shootings I think the police have to show up thinking the worse. The guy was told what to do and he repeatidly did something different. The cop tells him not to put his bands by his pants again and then he did it. The woman didn't seem to have any problems understanding what she was to do.
To be clear, I don't think the cop was in the right here but I don't think all of the blame is on him here. Now in don't know everything the jury heard but from the little that I know I am not sure how I would have voted. If the cop had a general good character and they told stories about his family and such then I bet that sways to voting not guilty.
The cop shouting the blizzare instructions in the video is not the cop who shot and was charged
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/08/graphic-video-shows-daniel-shaver-sobbing-and-begging-officer-for-his-life-before-2016-shooting/?utm_term=.a7ff685ef4ea
Quote: TigerWuHow hard is it to subdue someone who is not being threatening AND you outnumber them? We did it in Iraq all the time with zero problem, and we probably had even LESS training than police in how to take people into custody.
I have no knowledge of the situation, but I would like confirmation from the Iraqis that there were zero problems.
Quote: HugoSlaviaI have no knowledge of the situation, but I would like confirmation from the Iraqis that there were zero problems.
Okay, what I meant was, I PERSONALLY was never involved in or witnessed any unnecessary violence or undue lethal force used when apprehending suspected or confirmed terrorists/enemies/insurgents/etc. In the rare instance I heard rumors of stuff like that happening, the soldier involved was crucified.
You point a gun at someone, tell them to put their hands up, and when they do, you walk up and search them and if necessary restrain and detain them. There's no reason the cops in this Arizona situation couldn't have done that. It was a completely straightforward, non-threatening, and textbook situation. That guy just wanted an excuse to murder someone.
Quote: TigerWuThat guy just wanted an excuse to murder someone.
I agree about the importance of proper training and disciplinary consequences for misbehavior, but I think it's inevitable that people with dysfunctional motivations will be attracted to jobs that involve pointing guns at other people, literally or figuratively.
Therefore if I had any input, I would try to keep law enforcement/military/government functions somewhat small. Small enough to fit inside the Constitution, as the saying goes.
Quote: rawtuffThis is an efing disgrace sorry, but not sorry. US needs to get a grip on their police/special forces training. What if I'm drunk as f, half-def, 3 diopter sight impaired random tourist in that hallway? What if I consider this to be a Halloween joke in my drunk state? I'm dead right? Right?
Well in your drunk state you probably shouldn't have a pellet gun on the balcony which causes people to call the police.
Quote: TigerWuOkay, what I meant was, I PERSONALLY was never involved in or witnessed any unnecessary violence or undue lethal force used when apprehending suspected or confirmed terrorists/enemies/insurgents/etc. In the rare instance I heard rumors of stuff like that happening, the soldier involved was crucified.
You point a gun at someone, tell them to put their hands up, and when they do, you walk up and search them and if necessary restrain and detain them. There's no reason the cops in this Arizona situation couldn't have done that. It was a completely straightforward, non-threatening, and textbook situation. That guy just wanted an excuse to murder someone.
My guess, and guess only is they thought there might be another personn with a gun and didn't want to put themselves into the open where someone could take a shot from the room they came out of.
I guess this is the price Americans pay for the right to bear arms. Cowardly and sociopathic police can hide behind the excuse that they thought the suspect was reaching for a weapon.
I'm disgusted with the USA. If I had the money, I'd move to Canada or Europe. I hear that gambling winnings aren't taxable in the UK
If in fact the video was shown to the jury, how in the world can they find him not guilty? Then again, look at some of the idiots in this country that voted for Trump... and are some of the ones who aren't smart enough to get out of jury duty... just sayin.
Quote: gamerfreakSome new info....
The cop shouting the blizzare instructions in the video is not the cop who shot and was charged
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/08/graphic-video-shows-daniel-shaver-sobbing-and-begging-officer-for-his-life-before-2016-shooting/?utm_term=.a7ff685ef4ea
I ain't paying no damn dollar to view WaPo. This is what I pulled from the HTML, with possible modidifcations if I ain't lazy.
Quote:After the officer involved was acquitted of second-degree murder charges, officials in Arizona publicly released graphic video showing Daniel Shaver crawling on his hands and knees and begging for his life in the moments before he was shot and killed by police in January 2016.
Shaver died in one of at least 963 fatal police shootings in 2016, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/">according to a Washington Post database</a>. And his death was one of an increasing number of such shootings to prompt criminal charges in the years since the 2014 protests in Ferguson, Mo. following the death of Michael Brown. Yet charges <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/04/11/thousands-dead-few-prosecuted/">remain rare</a>, and convictions even more so.
The shooting, by Philip “Mitch” Brailsford, then an officer with the Mesa Police Department, occurred after officers responded to a call about a man allegedly pointing a rifle out of a fifth-floor window at a La Quinta Inn. Inside the room, Shaver, 26, had been doing rum shots with a woman he had met earlier that day and showing off a pellet gun he used in his job in pest control.
The graphic video, recorded by Brailsford’s body camera, shows Shaver and the woman exiting the hotel room and immediately complying with commands from multiple officers. The video was shown in court during the trial, but it was released to the public after jurors acquitted Brailsford on Thursday.</p> <p class="interstitial-link "><i>[<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/"> The Washington Post’s 2017 fatal police shooting database </a>]</i>
After entering the hallway, Shaver immediately puts his hands in the air and lies down on the ground while informing the officer that no one else was in the hotel room.
“If you make a mistake, another mistake, there is a very severe possibility that you’re both going to get shot. Do you understand?” Sgt. Charles Langley yells before telling Shaver to “shut up.”
“I’m not here to be tactical and diplomatic with you. You listen. You obey,” the officer says.
For the next five minutes, officers give Shaver a series of instructions. First, an officer tells Shaver to put both of his hands on top of his head, then he instructs him to cross his left foot over his right foot.
“If you move, we’re going to consider that a threat and we are going to deal with it and you may not survive it,” Langley said.
The officer then has the woman crawl down the hallway, where she is taken into custody. Shaver remains on the ground in the hallway, his hands on his head.
Langley tells Shaver to keep his legs crossed and push himself up into a kneeling position. As Shaver pushes himself up, his legs come uncrossed, prompting the officer to scream at him.
“I’m sorry,” Shaver says, placing his hands near his waist, prompting another round of screaming.
“You do that again, we’re shooting you, do you understand?” Langley yells.
“Please do not shoot me,” Shaver begs, his hands up straight in the air.
At the officer’s command, Shaver then crawls down the hallway, sobbing. At one point, he reaches back — possibly to pull up his shorts — and Brailsford opens fire, striking Shaver five times.</p> <p class="interstitial-link "><i>[<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/04/11/thousands-dead-few-prosecuted/?utm_term=.070eb2f14661"> Fatal shootings by police are up in the first six months of 2016, Post analysis finds </a>]</i>
According to the police report, Brailsford was carrying an AR-15 rifle with the phrase “You’re F—ed” etched into the weapon. The police report also<b> </b>said the “shots were fired so rapidly that in watching the video at regular speed, one cannot count them.”
Brailsford testified in court that he believed Shaver was reaching for a gun.
“If this situation happened exactly as it did that time, I would have done the same thing,” Brailsford said during the trial. “I believed 100 percent that he was reaching for a gun.”
No gun was found on Shaver’s body. Two pellet rifles used in Shaver’s pest-control job were later found in the hotel room.
After two days of deliberation, jurors found Brailsford not guilty of second-degree murder as well as of a lesser charge of reckless manslaughter.
“The justice system miserably failed Daniel (Shaver) and his family,” said Mark Geragos, an attorney for Shaver’s widow, <a href="https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/mesa/2017/11/16/former-mesa-police-officers-murder-trial-what-we-know/871689001/">according to the Arizona Republic</a>.
Attorneys for the officer had petitioned to keep the video from being released, and a judge agreed to block its release to the public until after the trial had concluded.
Brailsford’s attorney, Mike Piccarreta, told The Post in a previous interview that he thinks the body camera footage clears his client.
“It demonstrates that the officer had to make a split-second decision when [Shaver] moved his hands toward the small of his back after being advised that if he did, he’d be shot,” Piccarreta <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/fatal-shootings-by-police-surpass-2015s-rate/2016/07/07/81b708f2-3d42-11e6-84e8-1580c7db5275_story.html?utm_term=.80d1c4cc09ae">told The Post in 2016</a>.
Piccarreta also said he wasn’t sure his client would be interested in trying to get his police job back.
Shaver’s widow and parents have filed wrongful-death lawsuits against the city of Mesa.
<em>Kimberly Kindy contributed to this report.</em>
<em>Correction: An earlier version of this story misidentified the officer who was shouting commands to Shaver. It was Sgt. Charles Langley.</em></p> <p><strong>Read more:</strong></p> <p><a
Quote: GWAEWell in your drunk state you probably shouldn't have a pellet gun on the balcony which causes people to call the police.
What pellet gun? I'm happy, drunk and innocent, hearing and sight impaired tourist walking down that same hallway. They start yelling at me. I smile and keep walking not hearing well and being happy and drunk. I reach to scratch my behind (not even necessary, that american ninja there would've shot me dead for just keeping walking and not obeying his orders to crawl towards him) . I'm dead. Oh well. Good job, S.W.A.T.
Quote: RSBrailsford testified in court that he believed Shaver was reaching for a gun.
It boggles my mind that just guessing what someone has in their pockets, and then assuming you know what they're going to do with it, is an actual working legal defense for killing someone.
Quote: SOOPOOWhat motive do you think the executioner had? What did you think the jury might have seen that you might not have? 12 people unanimously votednot guilty, correct? Why do you think that is?
Because the laws are written to allow police to murder.
He maybe, might have, possibly feared for his life because maybe, perhaps he thought the guy was going for a gun.
Cops kill like 1200 people a year, which is insane, especially since only about 40-50 a year are killed by violence (more die in car crashes and stuff.)
The risk isn't there, but as long as they can claim to think it's there, they are in the clear.
It seems like they are actually trained to be vaginas. A family dog MIGHT bite you? Waste it. Somebody MIGHT shoot you? Waste them.
Cops are paid to put their lives on the line and be brave. If they want to be a bunch of putty cats, just replace them all with mall cops or whatever at 12$/hr.
Dude should have gotten 6 months just for writing that on his gun. He's supposed to be in service to the community.
Quote: GWAEThat is the part that annoys me. It's only about race when it is convenient.
Although it is tragic and the poor guy was probably harmless he made some poor life decisions here to get to this point. Why is he drunk and playing with a pellet gun on a balcony? In light of all the recent shootings I think the police have to show up thinking the worse. The guy was told what to do and he repeatidly did something different. The cop tells him not to put his bands by his pants again and then he did it. The woman didn't seem to have any problems understanding what she was to do.
To be clear, I don't think the cop was in the right here but I don't think all of the blame is on him here. Now in don't know everything the jury heard but from the little that I know I am not sure how I would have voted. If the cop had a general good character and they told stories about his family and such then I bet that sways to voting not guilty.
Nonsense.
The job of the police IS to deal with idiots, drunks, the mentally ill, people on drugs and people on the fringes of society. That is what they are paid to do. Those people behave erratically. Plus, unlike cops, we are not trained for these situations so any of us might panic or slip up or unthinkingly pull up our pants. If they can't handle it without shooting people, they are negligent and should go to jail.
There are a ton of other jobs where people deal with the same stuff. Teachers, EMTs, postmen, etc. Only the police shoot people over miscomunications or because they are too cowardly to take the slightest risk.
You think a teacher can shoot a kid who they know to be in a gang for reaching in his pocket or disobeying instructions or because they feel scared?
But crystal clear that the cop executed him ?
NO.
If anything, I fault the police training. Certainly there was a better way to restrain this young man. There were multiple cops. He should have been able to be hand-cuffed safely and searched.
So, if you were a policeman responding to that call, you would have BET YOUR LIFE that he was not reaching for a gun ? The police already had reports that someone in that room had a gun, right ?
Yes, a tragedy, no question.
Quote: JohnnyQAbsolutely disturbing video. No question. A tragedy, plain and simple.
But crystal clear that the cop executed him ?
NO.
If anything, I fault the police training. Certainly there was a better way to restrain this young man. There were multiple cops. He should have been able to be hand-cuffed safely and searched.
So, if you were a policeman responding to that call, you would have BET YOUR LIFE that he was not reaching for a gun ?
Yes. That is precisely what cops are doing when they accept high paying jobs (for HS education) with great benefits. They are accepting that there is a tiny risk of being shot.
The rest of us must make similar "bets" but we don't get anything. We've all felt threatened or scared, but we don't get to go around killing anybody we are slightly scared of because they scratched their ear.
Cops should be no different. Actually, they should be held to a higher standard as they are heavily armed, have training and backup. Why should we expect less of them than we do the guy on nighshift at 7-11?
Quote: JohnnyQA
So, if you were a policeman responding to that call, you would have BET YOUR LIFE that he was not reaching for a gun ? The police already had reports that someone in that room had a gun, right ?
They have those training videos that put law officers in several ambiguous situations that are hard for anyone to judge whether the officer has to decide whether to shoot.
I think the question to ask is, if this one would make the cut. Or is it really that difficult to judge?
(Dude was reaching for a gun)
Quote: Dyvan13In all honesty, cops turning unarmed victims into swiss cheese is nothing new in the USA.
I guess this is the price Americans pay for the right to bear arms. Cowardly and sociopathic police can hide behind the excuse that they thought the suspect was reaching for a weapon.
I'm disgusted with the USA. If I had the money, I'd move to Canada or Europe. I hear that gambling winnings aren't taxable in the UK
It doesn't take a lot of money to move to canada. Don't let money be your excuse. If you want out then just go.I think the wizard has a phrase for that.
Quote: JohnnyQAbsolutely disturbing video. No question. A tragedy, plain and simple.
But crystal clear that the cop executed him ?
NO.
If anything, I fault the police training. Certainly there was a better way to restrain this young man. There were multiple cops. He should have been able to be hand-cuffed safely and searched.
So, if you were a policeman responding to that call, you would have BET YOUR LIFE that he was not reaching for a gun ? The police already had reports that someone in that room had a gun, right ?
Yes, a tragedy, no question.
I definitely agree with you here. If they felt they couldn't get to him safely I don't understand why a flash grenade, or one of those high pitched weapons that basically knocks you out, or a beam bag gun, or some other non fatal weapon can't be used. There are plenty of other ways to deal with people than with an automatic asault weapon.
Quote: JohnnyQAbsolutely disturbing video. No question. A tragedy, plain and simple.
But crystal clear that the cop executed him ?
NO.
If anything, I fault the police training. Certainly there was a better way to restrain this young man. There were multiple cops. He should have been able to be hand-cuffed safely and searched.
So, if you were a policeman responding to that call, you would have BET YOUR LIFE that he was not reaching for a gun ? The police already had reports that someone in that room had a gun, right ?
Yes, a tragedy, no question.
Respectfully, that's all baloney. This cop WANTED to execute someone. And since when do we call "murder" a "tragedy"?
If there was any question whether the kid was reaching for a gun, then why make him jump through all those hoops and crawl toward the cop? He had a chance to check for weapons, and cuff him, in the beginning, when he could have been laid flat out on the ground, arms out, hands exposed, etc. Got away with murder, plain and simple.
Quote: beachbumbabs
I agree this was an execution. A good example of Arizona "justice", the land of Arpaio and Brewer, among others. Nasty. Several people I like live there, including a couple in here. Not sure how y'all stand it.
I'm glad you didn't miss a good opportunity to diss republicans, would have been such a waste to skip that. Maybe this cop first phoned Arpaio and Brewer to personally get their ok to murder this kid. Yeah, that's probably what happened. I feel sure of it now.
Yes, we agree on this point.Quote: bobbartopHe had a chance to check for weapons, and cuff him, in the beginning, when he could have been laid flat out on the ground, arms out, hands exposed, etc.
They must be a bunch of pussies since they were scared of a guy who was on his knees crying and begging for his life.Quote: bobbartopQuote: JohnnyQAbsolutely disturbing video. No question. A tragedy, plain and simple.
But crystal clear that the cop executed him ?
NO.
If anything, I fault the police training. Certainly there was a better way to restrain this young man. There were multiple cops. He should have been able to be hand-cuffed safely and searched.
So, if you were a policeman responding to that call, you would have BET YOUR LIFE that he was not reaching for a gun ? The police already had reports that someone in that room had a gun, right ?
Yes, a tragedy, no question.
Respectfully, that's all baloney. This cop WANTED to execute someone. And since when do we call "murder" a "tragedy"?
If there was any question whether the kid was reaching for a gun, then why make him jump through all those hoops and crawl toward the cop? He had a chance to check for weapons, and cuff him, in the beginning, when he could have been laid flat out on the ground, arms out, hands exposed, etc. Got away with murder, plain and simple.
Take a look at some of his family photos.
https://www.facebook.com/JusticeForDaniel/photos/rpp.1709890655901266/1999939080229754/?type=3&theater
They must be a bunch of pussies since they were scared of a guy who was on his knees crying and begging for his life.Quote: AxelWolf
Take a look at some of his family photos.
https://www.facebook.com/JusticeForDaniel/photos/rpp.1709890655901266/1999939080229754/?type=3&theater
Thanks for the facebook link. I looked through the pictures. I would be fkg crazy.
Quote: AxelWolfThey must be a bunch of pussies since they were scared of a guy who was on his knees crying and begging for his life.Quote: bobbartopQuote: JohnnyQAbsolutely disturbing video. No question. A tragedy, plain and simple.
But crystal clear that the cop executed him ?
NO.
If anything, I fault the police training. Certainly there was a better way to restrain this young man. There were multiple cops. He should have been able to be hand-cuffed safely and searched.
So, if you were a policeman responding to that call, you would have BET YOUR LIFE that he was not reaching for a gun ? The police already had reports that someone in that room had a gun, right ?
Yes, a tragedy, no question.
Respectfully, that's all baloney. This cop WANTED to execute someone. And since when do we call "murder" a "tragedy"?
If there was any question whether the kid was reaching for a gun, then why make him jump through all those hoops and crawl toward the cop? He had a chance to check for weapons, and cuff him, in the beginning, when he could have been laid flat out on the ground, arms out, hands exposed, etc. Got away with murder, plain and simple.
Take a look at some of his family photos.
https://www.facebook.com/JusticeForDaniel/photos/rpp.1709890655901266/1999939080229754/?type=3&theater
The existing laws, policies and procedures suggest that cops are the biggest cowards in this country.
"I thought maybe their could possibly be an outside chance that the guy could have had a gun and if he had a gun, there was an outside chance he could some how draw and shoot before me even though I was already aiming at him, and then if he did THAT there was a chance he could hit me, so I flew into a hysterical panic and killed him."
The law: Awesome. Great job. What a hero.
When I was a substitute teacher, I had a kid shoving me and yelling "I'm gonna kill you!" This was in one of the worst neighborhoods in LA. Wouldn't be a big shock if he had at least a knife.
If I laid a finger on him... I don't mean hurt him, but say I grabbed his hands so he couldn't touch me or grab a weapon, I would be fired at a minimum. I just stood there until I could flag down a security guy.
I wasn't particularly scared. Would never have even dreamed of doing something like shooting him. And I'm not especially brave. I'm just not a monumental coward.
If I'd been a cop, different story. Shit my pants, blow his brains out, be back at work a month later.
I don't think MOST cops are like this, but it's messed up that we are so accommodating of the ones who are.
So, basically just being an intoxicated guy in a hotel room could end up getting you killed under the right circumstances. You can get from ordinary citizen doing nothing unusual to getting killed pretty easily. Freakin' scary.
- I don't know if this was brought up at the trial or not. IF the officer did not follow their own procedures, he would be at fault to a degree.Quote: JohnnyQI fault the police training. Certainly there was a better way to restrain this young man. There were multiple cops. He should have been able to be hand-cuffed safely and searched.
According to the following site, approx 55 police in the US were killed by gunfire, assault, or stabbing so far in 2017.Quote: JohnnyQSo, if you were a policeman responding to that call, you would have BET YOUR LIFE that he was not reaching for a gun ?
https://www.odmp.org/search/year
https://www.lvmpd.com/en-us/ProtectTheCity/Pages/Applyforajob.aspx.Quote: AxelWolfThey must be a bunch of pussies since they were scared of a guy who was on his knees crying and begging for his life.
Our police DO need to be held accountable. In this case, however, from the brief video that was posted here I believe the police were placed in a horrible situation where they had to make a split second decision.
Quote: JohnnyQThere were multiple cops. He should have been able to be hand-cuffed safely and searched
Our police DO need to be held accountable. In this case, however, from the brief video that was posted here I believe the police were placed in a horrible situation where they had to make a split second decision.
I just don't get the jury system. I previously asked what 12 jurors saw that made them acquit. It really seems clear cut to me, having finally seen the video, that there was no justification. I'm pretty 'pro cop' in general. I really would like to interview the jurors.
Quote: SOOPOOI just don't get the jury system. I previously asked what 12 jurors saw that made them acquit. It really seems clear cut to me, having finally seen the video, that there was no justification. I'm pretty 'pro cop' in general. I really would like to interview the jurors.
I too am pretty pro cop in general. But I have a couple questions and I can't find a definitive answer. First, I was confused and thought they suppressed the video from the jury. Apparently that was not the case. Right? The jury DID watch the video, right?
Another question, apparently the cop's gun had an against-policy inscription on it that said "you're f**ked". If that is accurate, did the jury get to see THAT? I would think something like that would go toward cop's state of mind.
Go ahead and set me straight because I'm not sure of anything I just said. I'm just asking.
