North Carolina's outrage

[5m4llP0X]

Yeah, my understanding is that they've become much less popular after some high-profile incidents resulted from them (including an elderly woman getting shot to death in an unjustified drug raid, and a toddler getting severe burns from a flash-bang; those are both just examples from Georgia).

Damn elderly and children, ruining everything for everyone else! What's next? Spicy food?! They can take my life, but they can never take my THAI FOOD!

[jdurand]

Also: they claimed they saw a vial of PCP in another report

Well, it's not like the police would ever plant evidence in an attempt to justify their murderous deeds...oh, wait:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b08d73b82f4d49

*The video actually starts at about 1:15*

Just one of the many chapters in the official "Police Officer's Guide On How To Make The Community You Serve Hate You"

[5m4llP0X]

Well, it's not like the police would ever plant evidence in an attempt to justify their murderous deeds...oh, wait:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b08d73b82f4d49

*The video actually starts at about 1:15*

Just one of the many chapters in the official "Police Officer's Guide On How To Make The Community You Serve Hate You"

Which is why I want to see the autopsy report. In her defense, though, he was acting severely off in the videos and the call about him claiming the car is gonna blow up lends credence to the drug claim.

[The Blazin1]

This is strange.

Then:

I'm pretty certain you can see what is on the seats of the vehicle from either side. So this seems inconsistent to me. Also: they claimed they saw a vial of PCP in another report...actually...This sums up my issues:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/21/us/ter...-counterpoint/

Just pointing out that she said the car was running, and that he ran from it yelling it was "about to blow." Suspect could very well have been suffering from a drug induced psychotic episode. That being said, it's pretty tragic for all involved.

[5m4llP0X]

Just pointing out that she said the car was running, and that he ran from it yelling it was "about to blow." Suspect could very well have been suffering from a drug induced psychotic episode. That being said, it's pretty tragic for all involved.

I think it was someone called in and said he screamed "about to blow". But yes, very tragic.

[Woden]

Well, it's not like the police would ever plant evidence in an attempt to justify their murderous deeds...

Yeah, like others said, that's why I'm waiting on the tox report; that's going to be the real clincher, IMO. If he was indeed high on PCP at the time of death, then her story becomes highly plausible (and, therefore, there would have been reasonable belief that he was an imminent threat), while if he wasn't high, then it appears to be more of a cover-up story for an unjustified shooting.

[5m4llP0X]

Yeah, like others said, that's why I'm waiting on the tox report; that's going to be the real clincher, IMO. If he was indeed high on PCP at the time of death, then her story becomes highly plausible (and, therefore, there would have been reasonable belief that he was an imminent threat), while if he wasn't high, then it appears to be more of a cover-up story for an unjustified shooting.

If he comes up clean I'm really gonna wonder why he was as strange as he was. Nervous breakdown?

[Lurk]

If he comes up clean I'm really gonna wonder why he was as strange as he was. Nervous breakdown?

Could be anything, really. Maybe an anxiety disorder of some sort. We'd really have to dig into the guy's personal life to even make a guess.

[jdurand]

If he was indeed high on PCP at the time of death, then her story becomes highly plausible...

Well, except for the whole non-violent and unarmed thing.

[5m4llP0X]

Well, except for the whole non-violent and unarmed thing.

If you understand the effects of PCP you'd know that can and does change at a moment's notice without reason.

[Woden]

Well, except for the whole non-violent and unarmed thing.

1) Unarmed does not equate to not dangerous.

2) Being unarmed at that instant does not mean that they are not actively trying to arm themselves. If somebody (particularly if they are already being confrontational or uncooperative) reaches for (or into) their car, the officers have no way of being sure that they aren't reaching for a gun. When the situation has already been escalated, that is a bad move for the suspect to make, and that is blatantly obvious with even the slightest bit of common sense.

3) Likewise, non-violent doesn't mean that they aren't about to become violent, particularly if they are already being confrontational or they are acting erratically.


Is somebody being unarmed and non-violent a factor that should be considered? Yes, certainly. Is it the end-all, be-all of the discussion? Hell no, and the way you often try to paint it to be such is simply childish.

[The Blazin1]

Well, except for the whole non-violent and unarmed thing.

I saw the video, the guy had both his arms so..

[jdurand]

Unarmed does not equate to not dangerous.

Correct, but unless the person in question is acting in an aggressive manner toward anyone or themselves, I have an extremely difficult time accepting the use of deadly force.

Also, because I guess it needs to be repeated, non-compliance does not automatically equate to violence.

This man, while behaving peculiar, was not aggressive or moving in what I would consider to be a threatening manner. The driver's side window was rolled up, so we know he wasn't reaching into the car for anything. In the end, it sure appears to me as though Shelby, like too many other officers, allowed her fear to spiral out of control and ended up taking a life.

Being unarmed at that instant does not mean that they are not actively trying to arm themselves. If somebody (particularly if they are already being confrontational or uncooperative) reaches for (or into) their car, the officers have no way of being sure that they aren't reaching for a gun. When the situation has already been escalated, that is a bad move for the suspect to make, and that is blatantly obvious with even the slightest bit of common sense.

He was unarmed not just in an instance, but the entire time. Also, as stated above, we saw that the driver's side window was rolled up and we saw that he didn't open the door.

3) Likewise, non-violent doesn't mean that they aren't about to become violent, particularly if they are already being confrontational or they are acting erratically.

Non-violent is non-violent. You don't kill someone because they might become violent.

[5m4llP0X]

Her claim is that the window was down. I call that claim BS and she already admitted to looking in the SUV so she should have known what was on the driver side even if it was down. If he was going for the door, though, I can see grounds for a taser as technically he was under arrest (She goes through the list of charges, including public intox which would have required a test) before shooting if the taser was ineffective but not at the same time.

[Foley]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/charlotte...062125956.html

Video of when the NC man was shot. Doesn't show much but how many times do you say drop the gun before you shoot?

[5m4llP0X]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/charlotte...062125956.html

Video of when the NC man was shot. Doesn't show much but how many times do you say drop the gun before you shoot?

This thread was a typeo. It's supposed to be the Tulsa man, OP messed up. The OTHER thread devolved into NC (my one about Kapernick)

[Summer]

It was a stalled vehicle situation.

They, the police, could have just asked if he needed a tow truck.

[5m4llP0X]

It was a stalled vehicle situation.

They, the police, could have just asked if he needed a tow truck.

She probably did. But, according to her, he was incoherently rambling and not responding.

[The Blazin1]

Not to mention sneaking up on her.

[Summer]

She probably did. But, according to her, he was incoherently rambling and not responding.

She could call a PERT (psychiatric emergency response team).

[Foley]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/charlotte...055733360.html

Police released their videos.

[5m4llP0X]

They should have called for medical response once they secured him.

“There is no definitive visual evidence that he had a gun in his hand, you can see something in the hand, and that he pointed it at an officer. That I did not visually see in the video,” Putney said. “But what we do see is compelling evidence that, when you put all the pieces together, supports that."

[Rokchick]

So they heard his wife saying he doesn't have a gun, and at worst he looks confused. That didn't look aggressive at all to me. They shot him anyway. It's fear run rampant, and the whole "bash the BLM" is only making it worse. The police should NOT be so scared that they shoot and kill like that. They have no reason to be. They need better training.

[5m4llP0X]

So they heard his wife saying he doesn't have a gun, and at worst he looks confused. That didn't look aggressive at all to me. They shot him anyway. It's fear run rampant, and the whole "bash the BLM" is only making it worse. The police should NOT be so scared that they shoot and kill like that. They have no reason to be. They need better training.

Amazing you can see his face on such grainy video. Also: he had a gun.

[The Blazin1]

Even if you use non-lethal force on blacks being aggressive, everyone is still mad. Make up your minds.
https://gma.yahoo.com/tulsa-police-o...opstories.html

[Woden]

https://gma.yahoo.com/tulsa-police-o...opstories.html

That provides a lot more information about the before-recording portion of the encounter than most of the other articles I've seen, and definitely has me leaning a lot more in her favor than I was before.

Also, one of our police officer patients came in today, and we ended up talking with him a bit about the shootings. He said that, having watched the video, he thinks that she reflex fired, and noted that the police protocols here require an officer using a taser to say "Taser! Taser! Taser!" as they use it to make sure that other officers don't mistakenly think a lethal weapon is being used.

[5m4llP0X]

That provides a lot more information about the before-recording portion of the encounter than most of the other articles I've seen, and definitely has me leaning a lot more in her favor than I was before.

Also, one of our police officer patients came in today, and we ended up talking with him a bit about the shootings. He said that, having watched the video, he thinks that she reflex fired, and noted that the police protocols here require an officer using a taser to say "Taser! Taser! Taser!" as they use it to make sure that other officers don't mistakenly think a lethal weapon is being used.

I still think the videos show the window up, especially in the helicopter video. Also: she looked into the SUV so she could have seen if something was on the driver-side seat.

[Woden]

How long did she have to look inside the vehicle, though? And what was she looking for inside? If she only had time for a brief glance, or she was looking for occupants, then there is no basis for assuming that she would be sure that there was no weapon. Heck, even if she did specifically look for a weapon, that doesn't mean that there couldn't be a gun under the seat, in the center compartment, or somewhere else difficult/impossible to spot from outside.

Likewise, how certain are we that she could even tell that the window was up? Did she initially look in the car from the passenger side or driver side? Did she have a reasonably clear line of sight on the window from where she stood during the confrontation? I can't tell, and those two questions could potentially mean that she wasn't able to tell if the window was up or not.

[5m4llP0X]

How long did she have to look inside the vehicle, though? And what was she looking for inside? If she only had time for a brief glance, or she was looking for occupants, then there is no basis for assuming that she would be sure that there was no weapon. Heck, even if she did specifically look for a weapon, that doesn't mean that there couldn't be a gun under the seat, in the center compartment, or somewhere else difficult/impossible to spot from outside.

Likewise, how certain are we that she could even tell that the window was up? Did she initially look in the car from the passenger side or driver side? Did she have a reasonably clear line of sight on the window from where she stood during the confrontation? I can't tell, and those two questions could potentially mean that she wasn't able to tell if the window was up or not.

Point, but if the gun is in anywhere difficult to see then it would be difficult to reach through just an open window.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5adHJhGC5k
I was wrong, window is down. 18 seconds in pause it. Very clearly down. 45 seconds as well. Compare it with rear driver side and you can see the tint contrast.
I still think the taser would have been the better option and not to close in on him, but that is me.
I will give her respect, though, she turned herself in and posted bail.

[Sapient]

I saw 8 CMPD cops hounding this elderly black lady in her car, which was surrounded by four cruisers. They saw me watching as I walked by and stared me down then left shortly after.

[Cisalpine]

Good for you giving the mean eyed state! You may have saved her life!

[cofc]

He was of course high on PCP.

[cofc]

It was a stalled vehicle situation.

They, the police, could have just asked if he needed a tow truck.

Not guilty.