ADVERTISEMENT

I'm not anti-cop at all, but holy crap...

Unreal - no sense of control by the officer at all. Then there's the Fredericksburg VA cop who tasered & pepper sprayed a black man in his car for being unresponsive when he in fact was having a stroke!
 
Unreal - no sense of control by the officer at all. Then there's the Fredericksburg VA cop who tasered & pepper sprayed a black man in his car for being unresponsive when he in fact was having a stroke!
Maybe they were trying to shock him out of it. :-/
 
I watched it twice on a different link (maybe a shorter video) and had trouble seeing when the shot was fired.

It looked like the driver started up his car and attempted to drive off when the officer kept yelling "no." Is that what happened? Did the officer shoot after that?
 
It is difficult to tell exactly what happened from that video. In any event, deadly force isn't justified to stop someone in connection with a misdemeanor unless they put the officer or someone else's life in danger. It could be argued that the deceased did just that by pulling out.
 
How is it difficult? Why is UC police pulling over people in the hood and trying to open the guys car door? We all know the retards at the police academies get regulated to University Police but come on this is just plan stupidity. Just another cop thinking he is bigger then the badge
 
How is it difficult? Why is UC police pulling over people in the hood and trying to open the guys car door? We all know the retards at the police academies get regulated to University Police but come on this is just plan stupidity. Just another cop thinking he is bigger then the badge

Most campus police agencies have jurisdiction over streets in our around their campus.

He made a lawful stop. The question is whether he intentionally shot the guy, was it accidental discharge, or did he actually fear for his life.

It appears to me might would have happened was the guy in the car attempted to drive off. The office then reaches for his weapon and has an accidental discharge which blows the guys head off. The officer then tries to cover it up by saying he was caught under the moving car. Murder, IMO, is a far fetched charge in this case.
 
Yeah he accidentally shot a guy point blank in the head as he had him pulled over. That's probably what happened you goddamned idiot.
 
I watched it twice on a different link (maybe a shorter video) and had trouble seeing when the shot was fired.

It looked like the driver started up his car and attempted to drive off when the officer kept yelling "no." Is that what happened? Did the officer shoot after that?

the prosecutor is saying that the driver didn't attempt to drive off, though he had to have been considering it. essentially, he started it and it was in drive, then was shot and slumped forward hitting the gas and the car drove off after that.

either way, yeah this traffic stop started over a missing front license plate.

i am kind of interested in whether the cop flat out lied in his police report, or if things happened so fast and in the heat of the moment forgot what happened. either way he should spend the rest of his life behind bars, but from the video it's obvious he wasn't being dragged by the car before shooting the suspect.
 
Yeah he accidentally shot a guy point blank in the head as he had him pulled over. That's probably what happened you goddamned idiot.

For the first time I literally(as in really did) LOL.

Herdman...don't you see what's going on here. Because you are so invested in a political view, you have to stretch the boundaries of reality to fit your needs. In this case you have to stretch it to the borders of silly. I've watched accidental discharges. Barny Fife use to do it all the time. He always shot into the floor while removing the gun from his holster.:p
 
Why is UC police pulling over people in the hood and trying to open the guys car door?

Why? Because he was telling the guy to take his seatbelt off to detain him for not having his license, while checking to make sure he was legit. The full length video, which I have included, shows the driver being less than forthcoming.

The driver was trying to drive off, but I don't think that is a danger to the point of shooting him.

Jail time? Yes. A murder conviction? That could be tough to get, assuming the police officer says he didn't intend to fire and was pointing the gun for defense, didn't intend to kill him, etc.

 
You have to admit one thing though, when the brutha woke up that fateful day, he decided to put on some serious threads prior to meeting his maker.
 
How is it difficult? Why is UC police pulling over people in the hood and trying to open the guys car door? We all know the retards at the police academies get regulated to University Police but come on this is just plan stupidity. Just another cop thinking he is bigger then the badge

I don't understand where you're coming from. He pulled him over for a traffic violation, which he certainly can do. The problem is not the traffic stop itself, the problem is what happens after.
 
You don't need to detain him because he didn't have his license. The officer could have easily just asked him for his license number or social and wrote it down and called it in. It has happened to me before and that's what the officer did. He didn't even give me a hard time about it either just wrote down my license number, social, and license State and did his work. Point blank period this is another case of a police officer being overly aggressive because he was dealing with an black guy and took his frustration as aggression.
 
You don't need to detain him because he didn't have his license.

I respectfully disagree. When someone fails to present a license, it's that officer's duty to determine who that person is, and detain him until he can verify who it is, does he have warrants, is he a wanted fugitive, and so on. However, based on that outfit he's wearing, I'm guessing he was on his way to perform at a colored vaudeville performance.
 
You don't need to detain him because he didn't have his license. The officer could have easily just asked him for his license number or social and wrote it down and called it in. It has happened to me before and that's what the officer did. He didn't even give me a hard time about it either just wrote down my license number, social, and license State and did his work. Point blank period this is another case of a police officer being overly aggressive because he was dealing with an black guy and took his frustration as aggression.

the driver could've easily carried his license with him, or in one of the dozen times the officer asked him if he had his license not lied to the officer and told him he didn't have his license on him and offered up his license or ssn. that doesn't excuse the end result, but the driver wasn't cooperative at all.
 
Either way if he had his license or not, that's a moot point. The officer didn't have to draw his gun. I seriously feel that officers shouldn't even carry their service weapon on them anymore. NO where else in the world does officers kill as much as here, not even third world countries. I am not even upset over another black person killed, I am more upset about an officer killing another unarmed person over nothing.....nothing at all
 
Either way if he had his license or not, that's a moot point. The officer didn't have to draw his gun. I seriously feel that officers shouldn't even carry their service weapon on them anymore. NO where else in the world does officers kill as much as here, not even third world countries. I am not even upset over another black person killed, I am more upset about an officer killing another unarmed person over nothing.....nothing at all
So you want to disarm police? What do you suggest we do with guns in the hands of criminals?
 
other countries do a much better job then our police. I mean how many police is killed by criminals a year compared to criminals. Also any true gangster or criminal knows you don't kill cops, women and children, and anyone else that is not in the "Game"
 
Can anyone even distinguish what the issue is anymore? Jeeze...no one can contest that the officer had a right to pull this guy over. This guy was clearly in violation of the law. The police had every right to do what he did....UP UNTIL THE POINT HE PULLED OUT A GUN AND SHOT HIM IN THE HEAD.

I mean, why are you guys compelled to defend a police who used deadly force in a traffic violation? If it is discovered that this guy pulled a gun or threatened the safety of the officer in any way, I'll retract my statement. But for crying out loud, how can anyone defend this guy. If it was an accidental discharge....fine. But that still leads back to the same point...why was it necessary to pull a weapon anyway? Even if the guy WAS fleeing...you don't shoot him. Do you really believe that this guy could have drove off and not be caught later? The officer knew the car, had a camera that recorded th physical features of the guy, and let's face it...the way this guy was dressed he could be identified and picked up later so easily it isn't even questionable.

I just don't get how it's even arguable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToesMU
other countries do a much better job then our police. I mean how many police is killed by criminals a year compared to criminals. Also any true gangster or criminal knows you don't kill cops, women and children, and anyone else that is not in the "Game"
Tell that to the kids being killed in Chicago.
 
Can anyone even distinguish what the issue is anymore? Jeeze...no one can contest that the officer had a right to pull this guy over. This guy was clearly in violation of the law. The police had every right to do what he did....UP UNTIL THE POINT HE PULLED OUT A GUN AND SHOT HIM IN THE HEAD.

I mean, why are you guys compelled to defend a police who used deadly force in a traffic violation? If it is discovered that this guy pulled a gun or threatened the safety of the officer in any way, I'll retract my statement. But for crying out loud, how can anyone defend this guy. If it was an accidental discharge....fine. But that still leads back to the same point...why was it necessary to pull a weapon anyway? Even if the guy WAS fleeing...you don't shoot him. Do you really believe that this guy could have drove off and not be caught later? The officer knew the car, had a camera that recorded th physical features of the guy, and let's face it...the way this guy was dressed he could be identified and picked up later so easily it isn't even questionable.

I just don't get how it's even arguable.

aside from herdman, i don't see anyone arguing anything in favor of the officer other than what you stated; up until the point he pulled his gun out, he was actually in the right. when he pulled his gun he was 100% in the wrong.
 
Can anyone even distinguish what the issue is anymore? Jeeze...no one can contest that the officer had a right to pull this guy over. This guy was clearly in violation of the law. The police had every right to do what he did....UP UNTIL THE POINT HE PULLED OUT A GUN AND SHOT HIM IN THE HEAD.

I mean, why are you guys compelled to defend a police who used deadly force in a traffic violation? If it is discovered that this guy pulled a gun or threatened the safety of the officer in any way, I'll retract my statement. But for crying out loud, how can anyone defend this guy. If it was an accidental discharge....fine. But that still leads back to the same point...why was it necessary to pull a weapon anyway? Even if the guy WAS fleeing...you don't shoot him. Do you really believe that this guy could have drove off and not be caught later? The officer knew the car, had a camera that recorded th physical features of the guy, and let's face it...the way this guy was dressed he could be identified and picked up later so easily it isn't even questionable.

I just don't get how it's even arguable.

Besides Herdman, who is arguing that?
 
After rereading the thread you guys are correct. It just felt like this thing has devolved into the discussion of minutia that is totally irrelevant to a guy being shot and killed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: herdit44
Maybe it's my desire to play devil's advocate a little, but I have no problem with the officer pulling his gun. I don't have an issue with him shooting out a tire at very close range, scaring the driver so he didn't speed off, or perhaps, even shooting him non-lethally to stop the threat.

The guy was attempting to flee in a residential area. So you think he was going to pull away and drive the speed limit as the police car followed him trying to pull him over? If your son was playing on the sidewalk a block away, would you be cool with this guy driving 75 mph and then trying to take a turn to escape the pursuit? If your wife had been driving home from the grocery store, would you be fine with this guy driving 75 mph running stop signs in the neighborhood?

And did the police really know who this guy was? Was he in a stolen car that may have not been reported yet? Had he just committed a major crime which was why he wasn't cooperating?

In no way do I condone shooting him lethally, but I don't have a problem with him pulling the gun to diffuse the situation without causing harm to others (meaning those in the area who could be harmed by this guy).
 
I'm with rifle. I don't have a problem with pulling the gun. The lethal force was no where near necessary though
 
If we're worried about him speeding off and hitting some kid playing, shouldn't that concern also extend to high speed chases? If it was known that this guy was a murderer or felon with a history of violence, I won't disagree with you. But I don't believe any of this stuff was known when he pulled the gun.

Look, police have a very difficult job. The majority of them perform their job admirably. But there are many that get into law enforcement for the wrong reasons. There are way too many police (and the rash of video evidence from the age of cell phones support this) that are exercising force in unnecessary situations, and generally misusing their authority. Every day it seems we are seeing video of inappropriate use of force, deadly force, unfair seizure of property, etc. If I were a police I'd want those guys out of the business. There are too many idiots tainting the reputation and eroding public confidence in them.

I'd bet there are far more honest and conscientious police than there are bad ones. But until the police start getting outraged by their own they're going to have a tremendous PR problem. But they don't help themselves by calling out the bad ones, they gather around these guys and protect them.
 
I stated what I thought happened. The cop screwed up and lied about it.

He pulled his gun and it went off. We don't even know what kind of weapon he was using. The cop is lying about what went down.

Damn no reason to take it personal. He shot the dude in the head. I don't think he walked up.yo that car thinking he was going to cap a home boy. He screwed up and lied about it.
 
Morons

Ina. Not defending the cop. Inam.systing what I think happened. Cop made ridiculous mistake and discharged his weapon.

And gk barney fife doesn't hit the floor if he he is falling back.

Again nit defending the cop stating what I think happened. Then he lied his ass off.
 
Morons

Ina. Not defending the cop. Inam.systing what I think happened. Cop made ridiculous mistake and discharged his weapon.

And gk barney fife doesn't hit the floor if he he is falling back.

That's nice of herdman to let sisters use his login.

If we're worried about him speeding off and hitting some kid playing, shouldn't that concern also extend to high speed chase? .

It does. That is why a very high number of municipalities have banned police departments from taking part in those types of pursuits, even for crimes such as grand theft. Once speeds reach a certain level or it is in a residential area, many areas have requirements that the police stop the chase.

That's why I have no problem with the officer taking out his weapon to use as a threat to diffuse the criminal from continuing to attempt to flee or, if he has a safe shot, taking out a tire so the vehicle can't flee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: herdit44
I'm just having fun with the Barney Fife reference Herdman. Of course they're different situations. By the way, I enjoy picking arguments with you. Besides the fact that we don't always agree, you seldom get personal with things and don't really hold grudges. We both like Tiger though. Common ground I suppose.
 
You mean kids getting killed by other kids?
Yeah the innocent 8 year olds that get caught up in the gang war. But in your mind thats just ok because they arent targeting those kids just the rival gang bangers. And you still havent answered my question about what you want to do with all the criminals with guns since you want disarm police.
 
The officer had other options before he escalated to the use of deadly force... Capstun, Tazer, Firearm...
I agree. However, that does not mean he committed murder. Negligent homocide, manslaughter, etc. I do not think, no matter how much he screwed up, that he woke up that day wanting to kill someone.
 
ADVERTISEMENT