Posted on 03/09/2016 4:58:26 AM PST by Nextrush
So do you think this shooting was unjustified or not?
He told them that because they had already shot at him. Talking Point fail.
Even if Finicum had been unarmed, he made a move that the police saw as threatening and they shot him for it.
We don't know why he made that "move", because they haven't released their audios/videos.
Oh, but they WILL... :)
LaVoy's Widow To Sue
2016-03-16 04:00 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231241
LaVoy Finicum’s widow, Jeanette Finicum, announced this week that she would be pursuing a wrongful death lawsuit against officials in Oregon. Her husband was murdered on January 26, 2016 in an ambush orchestrated by the Oregon State Police and the FBI. The Oregon State Police are attributed with the fatal shots.
I saw the original video when it first was released and was skeptical of the claim that LaVoy Finicum was reaching for a weapon; it looked to me like he had been hit with a projectile (a bullet) and was grabbing at the wound.
As it turns out that appears to be exactly what did transpire.
There are now FBI agents under federal investigation for false statements, covering up the firing of their weapons and conspiracy by multiple Law Enforcement Agents in assisting them in doing so.
If LaVoy was shot in the back unprovoked then the government has a problem, especially if they lied about discharging their weapons and tampered with the evidence by removing shell casings. I remind you that it is no longer legal to shoot a fleeing man, even if a felon, unless certain criteria are met (including imminent danger to the public) -- a standard basically impossible to meet in a remote area of the country with few if any people around. (This was the subject of a USSC case in 1985, Tennessee .v. Garner.)
This case bears watching folks..... Ruby Ridge anyone?
Try again, or better yet try watching the video. It was filmed from inside the truck. They weren't filming him when he was shot. He was telling them to shoot him at the first road block.
We don't know why he made that "move", because they haven't released their audios/videos.
The "why" doesn't matter. He made a move the police took for going for a gun and they shot him for it.
Are you just thick, or are you being deliberately obtuse?
THEY HAD ALREADY SHOT AT FINICUM when the video inside the truck started.
How many times do I have to post that?
Do you want me to detail it?
The law enforcement people at the scene have already proven themselves to be liars. They can't walk that back.
They're going to have to release their audios/videos in discovery.
Betcha they move for a gag order on the widow Finicum's lawyer...
Michael Brown's family sued, too. I don't think they were very successful.
They've also been found to have had justification for the shooting. I don't think they'll be walking that back either.
Betcha they move for a gag order on the widow Finicum's lawyer...
I doubt they would get it. But what can she say that you aren't already saying? She wasn't there.
Well, these lying "law enforcement" officers are more like the murdering backshooting former South Carolina police officer Michael Slager. Things are not going well for him - just as they won't go well for these backshooting murderers. :)
By gums, you ARE thick!
In legal discovery for the civil trial, the widow Finicum's lawyer will get hold of the audios/videos that the policemurdererliars have.
The PMLs will move to have the judge gag Finicum's attorney so he won't spill the beans on their lies before the civil trial.
Slager's shooting was found to be a criminal act right from the beginning. In Finicum's case the shooting was found to be a justifiable use of deadly force. That's one difference right off the bat.
And that Finicum was merely calling out the yellowback backshooters for the cowards that they are...
I know you've said they did.
And that Finicum was merely calling out the yellowback backshooters for the cowards that they are...
How'd that work out for him?
That was before the Deschutes County Sheriff's people spilled the beans on the OSP/fibbie policemurdererliars. LOL! :)
It's not going to go well for them in civil court - all that "explainin" about why they lied and covered up evidence, like used shell cartridges.
It's called "tampering with a crime scene". Bad juju. :)
Hasn't changed the finding has it?
It's not going to go well for them in civil court - all that "explainin" about why they lied and covered up evidence, like used shell cartridges.
Time will tell.
It's going to set his widow and children up for life. LOL! :)
And it might even put a few "law enforcement" gunthugs in jail as a bonus!
That means that you've accepted that Finicum had REASON to tell them the things he did at the first stop, and that the Talking Point about "he's not interested in being taken peacefully" is a load of PML hooey.
Thank you for that admission.
Time will tell.
And it might even put a few "law enforcement" gunthugs in jail as a bonus!
I doubt that.
I don't think I said that.
That means that you've accepted that Finicum had REASON to tell them the things he did at the first stop, and that the Talking Point about "he's not interested in being taken peacefully" is a load of PML hooey.
I don't think I said that either.
Thank you for that admission.
I don't think I admitted anything.
Just to be clear.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.