Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Botham Shem Jean

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
    I was surprised at that as well but, meh...it's a little bit of semantics isn't it CP?

    Yes, you're correct but...that training used to be fire 2 shots and see if they stop...NOW it says, you stop shooting when the subject is down and not moving...which is either dead or dying.
    Both sides will do "witness prep" - and I'm surprised she wasn't "prepped" to be more distinctive... "I saw a threat, and my reaction was to stop the threat..."
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      I'm actually surprised that, when asked if she intended to kill Jean, she testified "yes I did".

      The training is to STOP the subject, not to kill them.
      Can you mention a single case of a cop who got convincted of manslaughter despite using the "I was afraid for my life" defense? That appears to be a universal get-out-of-jail free card that never fails. In this case it can even apply when the subject is inside his own home, watching television, and getting out of the chair calmly.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
        Regardless of how the trial is resolved, she isn't getting off scot free. She lost her job and her reputation, and had her face in the international media as a killer in the court of public opinion.
        While true, I'd still be surprised if she doesn't get manslaughter in some form.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          Both sides will do "witness prep" - and I'm surprised she wasn't "prepped" to be more distinctive... "I saw a threat, and my reaction was to stop the threat..."
          Well she certainly prepped her witness. He's in a grave now. And her police buddies gave her a three day head start, and was sure to leak evidence about drugs in his apartment to the press.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
            Can you mention a single case of a cop who got convincted of manslaughter despite using the "I was afraid for my life" defense? That appears to be a universal get-out-of-jail free card that never fails. In this case it can even apply when the subject is inside his own home, watching television, and getting out of the chair calmly.
            In fact, since 2005, there have only been 13 officers convicted of murder or manslaughter in fatal on-duty shootings, according to data provided to The Huffington Post by Philip Stinson, an associate professor of criminology at Ohio’s Bowling Green State University.


            That took 2 seconds.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              In fact, since 2005, there have only been 13 officers convicted of murder or manslaughter in fatal on-duty shootings, according to data provided to The Huffington Post by Philip Stinson, an associate professor of criminology at Ohio’s Bowling Green State University.


              That took 2 seconds.
              That's fair, I'll grant that.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                Well she certainly prepped her witness. He's in a grave now. And her police buddies gave her a three day head start, and was sure to leak evidence about drugs in his apartment to the press.
                The actual details and facts were aired in court over the past 6-7 days, Leon, subject to cross-examination - the jury will be deciding the case.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  The actual details and facts were aired in court over the past 6-7 days, Leon, subject to cross-examination - the jury will be deciding the case.
                  Whatever evidence wasn't scrupped clean by the police. Remember that guy who was shot while running away from a cop? They planted a tazer in that guys hands, and faked further records at the police station. The only reason we know about that case, was due to a citizen recording the whole thing on a cellphone camera.

                  Comment


                  • In the US a police officer shot a guy crawling along the ground begging for his life. No punishment.

                    If in the US a police officer can also walk straight into another persons apartment, and cry 'accidental shooting' and walk away clean as a whistle, I don't think the trust in the US police will ever fully recover.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                      In the US a police officer shot a guy crawling along the ground begging for his life. No punishment.
                      If that's true, it's obviously horrible.

                      If in the US a police officer can also walk straight into another persons apartment, and cry 'accidental shooting' and walk away clean as a whistle, I don't think the trust in the US police will ever fully recover.
                      Let's see what the jury decides, OK?
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                        In the US a police officer shot a guy crawling along the ground begging for his life. No punishment.

                        If in the US a police officer can also walk straight into another persons apartment, and cry 'accidental shooting' and walk away clean as a whistle, I don't think the trust in the US police will ever fully recover.
                        The Daniel Shaver case was an obvious travesty of justice (and it bothered me to see so many people defend the police there), but each case needs to be considered separately. This case is not quite as cut and dry.

                        But I am absolutely with you on how the mistrust of police is a crisis. I was talking to some black co-workers and their thought was that you only call the police if there is a murder in progress, and even then, you go out in public until you find a pay phone. Do I blame them for feeling that way? No.
                        "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          If that's true, it's obviously horrible.
                          He's talking about the Daniel Shaver case. I remember you were active in that discussion.
                          "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                            The Daniel Shaver case was an obvious travesty of justice (and it bothered me to see so many people defend the police there), but each case needs to be considered separately. This case is not quite as cut and dry.

                            But I am absolutely with you on how the mistrust of police is a crisis. I was talking to some black co-workers and their thought was that you only call the police if there is a murder in progress, and even then, you go out in public until you find a pay phone. Do I blame them for feeling that way? No.
                            And you have to be certain not to make quick arm movements, or hold a cellphone. They shoot you for that as well. You must make slow motions... but not too slow, such as this case shows, as she argues that he was too slow to respond, and so she shot him in his heart.

                            You must cooporate with the police, so if he asks you if you have a gun you tell him, but be careful not to show him where the gun is or he will shoot you like in the Castille case.

                            There's a very specific dance to go through that avoids you getting shot, and it seems to get narrower with each of these legal cases.
                            Last edited by Leonhard; 09-30-2019, 04:15 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                              He's talking about the Daniel Shaver case. I remember you were active in that discussion.
                              It slipped my mind. But I clearly condemned that action.
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              I'm not going to re-read all 120+ posts, so this may have been said before, but what really upsets me about this is how preventable it was.

                              There were SIX officers in the hallway, and they allowed this incident to be dragged out for nearly FIVE minutes, during which time a wide range of complicated and conflicting commands were yelled at a man who was intoxicated, yet trying to be compliant at every step. You can tell he was scared to death.

                              I still train with a swat team, my son-in-law is their commander. The job of the swat team (and even any officers initially responding) is to take control of the situation and bring order out of chaos. That didn't happen here.

                              I've heard it argued that the officers were concerned somebody else might be down the hall, but there were SIX OFFICERS lined up, and plenty of opportunity for cover while one or two of them went and cuffed the suspect. (One of the officers may have been removed from action because of the subdued woman being taken in custody, but that still leaves FIVE officers, guns drawn, at the ready)

                              Rather than have the man lay face down, and somebody approach and cuff him, they order him to crawl forward. At several points, both suspects tried to ask questions for clarification, and were shouted to "shut up - this is not a conversation". One of the things that is hammered into our officers is "talk to them like they're people". These people were not talked to like people. It was more like they were enemy combatants on a battlefield.

                              When the guy is told to crawl forward, you'll notice that this means he approaches the woman's purse, which she had dropped about 4 feet in front of him. No officer in his right mind would order somebody to crawl toward something like that, where there could conceivably be a weapon or anything.

                              From a police incident report written by a Mesa Police Officer watching the video...

                              Shaver could be partially seen walking from the alcove into the hallway a split second after Sgt. Langley shouted for them to stop. Shaver raised his hands in the air prior to any further command, round the alcove into the hallway and immediately dropped to his knees with his hands in the air facing the officers … Sgt. Lanley shouted for both of them to get on the ground. Shaver placed his hands in front of him and laid down on the ground on the south side of the hallway with his hands extended above his head. In the video, Shaver appeared to be wearing a dark colored shirt and dark shorts. No weapon was visible in the video, but also it was not clear Shaver did not have a weapon from the camera view. Shaver was, however, obviously compliant and offered no resistance at that point.

                              Sgt. Langley asked Shaver if there was anyone else in the room and Shaver answered that there was no one else in the room … Sgt. Langley then calmly asked if both of them could understand him … Sgt. Langley then stated, “Alright, if you make another mistake, there is a very severe possibility you are both going to get shot, do you understand?”

                              Shaver responded “Yes” to this question … Sgt. Langley then began to talk when Shaver started to ask a question by saying “What’s––”. Sgt. Langley told Shaver to shut up and stated that he was not there to be tactful and diplomatic with Shaver and they need to obey his commands. At that point, Shaver’s outstretched arms had both palms facing up so the officers could see his hands. As Sgt. Langley was saying they needed to obey his commands. Shaver moved both his arms in front of his face in a similar manner to what would occur when someone is lying on their stomach and intending to rest their head in their crossed arms. Sgt. Langley took note of this and asked Shaver if he had told Shaver to move. Shaver immediately moved his hand back out in front of him with his palms facing up and said, “I’m sorry. No, sir.”

                              Sgt. Langley then ordered Shaver to place his hands on the back of his head and interlace his fingers. Shaver was again compliant. Sgt. Langley then told Shaver to cross his left foot over his right foot. Shaver complied with this but appeared confused as to which foot Sgt. Langley had ordered him to cross. He crossed his feet both ways before finally crossing his feet as Sgt. Langley had instructed. Sgt. Langley then asked again who else was in the room and Shaver responded with “nobody.”

                              Sgt. Langley then asked if both of them were drunk and they both responded that they were not … He then told Shaver that he turn his eyes down and look at the carpet and not move. He further instructed that Shaver needed to keep his fingers interlaced on his head and his legs crossed. Sgt. Langley then told Shaver that if he moved, it would be considered a threat and the officers would have to deal with that and Shaver “may not survive it.” Shaver acknowledged with “yes sir” when asked if he understood this.


                              One thing that I can't seem to get clarification in is that the officer writing the incident report refers to "16 minutes and 40 seconds into the recording" as the time just before the fatal shooting. I have to assume that we're watching 5 of the final minutes of that 16 minutes, which probably began as the officers arrived on the scene and were setting up. I really don't know.

                              The incident report continues...

                              Sgt. Langley could then be heard telling Shaver to crawl towards him. Sgt. Langley shouted this command and Shaver again dropped to his hands and knees and again can audibly be heard sobbing “Yes, sir,” as he began to crawl forward. Shaver reached the area where Portillo’s purse was and his left hand moved across his body and around the purse in order to crawl past it. Shaver was audibly sobbing as he crawled. Officer Brailsford’s rifle was primarily pointed down the hall until this movement was made. Officer Brailsford then swung his rifle back towards Shaver where Shaver could be seen with his braced left hand and his right hand moving back towards his waist with his elbow raised behind him. Shaver’s head appeared to be down with his face looking at the carpet. What appeared to be multiple voices, including Sgt. Langley’s, then began to say “Don’t” as Shaver’s hand moved back toward the front of his body. When his hand moves toward the front it is very slightly balled and his thumb is towards the top. Officer Brailsford fired his first shot as Shaver’s hand was moving toward the front of his body and as at least one officer was heard saying, “Don’t.”


                              Again, "in the moment" (and trying not to "Monday morning quarterback") it's entirely possible that the officer thought Shaver was reaching for a gun, but in my opinion, highly unlikely.

                              The fact is that only ONE of the five (or six) officers fired. In a situation where 5 or 6 officers believe there is a credible, immediate and deadly threat, there is usually a hail of gunfire from multiple officers, as each is reacting to what he sees at the time, and there's no coordination "OK, you guys hold your fire, I'll take the shot", etc. It's usually just a hail of gunfire. But only one officer fired.

                              Again, I'm about as pro-police as they come, still serving as police chaplain and closely involved with two police departments, city and county, along with a multi-jurisdictional task force. I've been keeping up with after action reports, and this situation has actually been used in a couple of training episodes I've attended.

                              It is pretty much described as "a really good example of a really bad police action".
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • I can understand Leon being upset about that particular issue because a certain disreputable member of this forum with a history of pretending to be Russian was personally trolling him on that thread
                                "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                231 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                291 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X