by uebermann » Tue Nov 25, 2014 12:58 am
Did they give a toxicology report?
The aggressive attitude is consistent with what was seen in the convenient store video. I mean, it isn't normal for someone to just charge a cop when they tell you they are pulling a gun. People are typically going to run. The ones that don't are usually on something. Why I'm curious about the toxicology report.
I think what he says after the dispute in the car is fairly accurate based on the physical evidence, however it doesn't excuse the use of deadly force imo and the use of deadly force is why I think it should have gone to trial. If he's found innocent in a trial, so be it, but at least it should have gotten to that point. What you have is pretty much his word about the situation leading up to the incident and not much else. So we just assume he is telling the truth and call it a day? Meh.
He had mace and didn't even think about using it, not even when the guy was running away nor when he was 25 feet away. It was always going to be the gun and he'd have to shoot. He even said it himself. I think thats a flawed line of thinking and is used to justify the action. Strange how pretty much every other country in the world can manage without using deadly force all the time, yet the US can't.
Going forward, there needs to be a push - nationally - for officers to have body cameras. The data from those cameras needs to be downloaded in a process that police cannot access themselves (as to alter or delete video). There also needs to be a push for police to start being held accountable for their actions. Far too often, police are believed to be truthful and incidents never go to court. Its the word of the police over the word of anyone else a lot of the time, and thats a bunch of shit. Everyone should be equal in eyes of the law, and that just isn't the case.
- These users thanked the author uebermann for the post (total 2):
- The Dharma Bum • Saz