Skip to comments.Houston officer kills unarmed man walking with trousers down
Posted on 03/28/2018 2:26:40 PM PDT by Ennis85
A US police officer shot dead an unarmed man walking in traffic with his trousers down, and his family says it looks like "premeditated murder".
Police dashcam video shows Danny Ray Thomas, 34, walking towards the officer on a road in Houston, Texas, last Thursday before a gunshot rings out.
Deputy Cameron Brewer repeatedly shouts "get down on the ground" before firing. Both the officer and victim are black.
Mr Thomas' family say he suffered from depression after his children died.
His sister, Kita Thomas-Smith, attended a Houston City Council meeting on Tuesday where she tearfully urged politicians do to something about "police brutality".
Mayor Sylvester Turner told her: "I certainly feel your pain. We are certainly sorry for any life that is taken."
Outside city hall, Ms Thomas-Smith told the Houston Chronicle of the dashcam video. "It feels like premeditated murder.
"He was clearly walking, not running, toward the deputy not trying to hurt or harm him."
Deputy Brewer, who had a Taser with him, has been placed on administrative leave as police investigate the shooting.
Houston Police Department said in a statement last week that Mr Thomas was found "walking in the middle of the intersection" of a busy road in the city.
Deputy Brewer noticed him with "his pants around his ankles, talking to himself and hitting vehicles as they passed by".
"Thomas then struck a white vehicle, and the driver exited and engaged in a physical altercation with the suspect," Houston police said.
The Harris County Sheriff's deputy saw the fracas and stopped his car to intervene.
"Fearing for his safety, the deputy discharged his duty weapon, striking Thomas once in the chest," said Houston police, which is leading the investigation.
In a different video taken by a bystander and published by the Chronicle last week,
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...
“If you think conservatism is about a police state it’s you who is the leftist, dsc.”
Noting I’ve said implies that. Many things you’ve said are in the “Oh, what a giveaway,” category. You have given yourself away as a leftist.
And a poorly educated one. “You...is a leftist?” Good grief.
“Prayers for our men and women officers in harms way.”
Prayers for the safety of the men, and for the women to wake up and realize that women should not be police officers.
You believe police are entitled to kill basically at will, dsc. That makes you an advocate of a police state, practically by definition. And, you understand rules of grammar just about as well as you understand conservatism. “Who” is the subject of that sentence, not “you.” Consider yourself schooled.
I wouldn’t go quite that far but I agree that there are officer roles not suited for women but there are some they are well suited for. Prayers for those in over their heads that they can see their limitations and properly addresses them.
In the overwhelming majority of these cases where the police officer kills an unarmed person it's a guy who did it. Maybe the answer is not fewer female officers but fewer panicky male ones?
The overwhelming majority of police officers are male, so by all means slime males via statistics with negative connotation. I’d expect no less from you, Doodle.
“You believe police are entitled to kill basically at will”
That’s the sort of lie that leftists tell about normals.
“That makes you an advocate of a police state, practically by definition.”
Ah, a conclusion based on a lie. How typically leftist.
Who is the subject of that sentence, not you. Consider yourself schooled.”
Nominative case and both number and person agreement are required. Since leftists lack to wit for schooling, just consider yourself corrected.
The overwhelming majority of police officers don't shoot unarmed suspects either. A blanket defense of those who do regardless of the situation is not a surprising position for you to take either.
“Maybe the answer is not fewer female officers but fewer panicky male ones?”
It goes without saying that fewer panicky officers has to be a good thing.
It should go without saying that women should not be police officers.
And again, you have just as much trouble confusing conservatism with authoritarianism backed up by a police state, as you do with grammar. You just do not understand cleft sentences. Don’t feel too badly about it, at least you seem able to spell, unlike most others who don’t grasp finer points of the English language. So, at least there’s that.
Oh boy, are you ever an idiot. You’re clearly confusing me with dsc.
“I wouldnt go quite that far but I agree that there are officer roles not suited for women but there are some they are well suited for.”
After a man spends a long time at the tip of the spear, he needs some time to decompress. The job he needs then is the one that women are suited for, and he can’t get his decompression time because a woman is in that job.
“You just do not understand cleft sentences.”
Wrong. It’s becoming rather boring. Try to be right about something before...
I see your point however that seems more of a management problem to me. I don't see officer duty assignments as a zero sum game.
Disclaimer: I have no firsthand experience in the area. I have friends that are and have been officers so I must defer to the expertise of those in the trenches and I thank them for their selfless service.
Who is mistaken? It’s you who is mistaken.
See? I guess not, so shoot me.
Not an equivalent comparison at all. You ought to recognize that.
Hard to be barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen if we're out there working, isn't it?
I'm not touching that
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.