Posted on 06/20/2018 3:08:38 PM PDT by RS_Rider
Police shot and killed an unarmed teen who ran away from a traffic stop Tuesday night in East Pittsburgh, authorities said.
Authorities identified the dead teen as 17-year-old Antwon Rose, a Woodland Hills High School student who district officials said was one English class shy of graduating. He had been riding in a car linked to a non-fatal shooting 13 minutes earlier on North Braddock's Kirkpatrick Avenue, according to Allegheny County police.
A 22-year-old man wounded in the North Braddock shooting was treated and released from a hospital.
The deadly shooting in East Pittsburgh happened at 8:40 after borough police pulled over a car near Grandview Avenue and Howard Street — about 1½ miles from the scene of the North Braddock shooting. Officials said the car matched the description of one involved in the earlier shooting and appeared to have gunfire damage to its back window.
As an officer arrested the 20-year-old driver, two people ran from the car, police said. The officer opened fire, hitting Rose.
Rose was taken to UPMC McKeesport, where he was pronounced dead at 9:19 p.m., officials said.
(Excerpt) Read more at triblive.com ...
Especially when they were, in all likelihood, participants in the previous shooting.
Yeah, here we go again. A bunch of FReepers getting all turgid over a cop shooting someone.
“He was only involved in non-fatal shootings, not like murder or anything.”
He was working his way up from blanks to wad cutters.
Bad choices have bad consequences.
Or one thesis on rap music for a PHD.
Lol, “student.”
Yeah, well, I’ll save my outrage for “honor” students shot while walking home from the library, not hood rats fleeing a gang shooting. If you have trouble discerning the difference, that’s sad.
Too tired to chase him? That’s absurd. What a low opinion of the police.
Not true. If it were, there would be a whole lot more suspects being shot than there are.
Rap that extolls the benefits of Ebonics.
Officials said the car, a silver Chevrolet Cruze, matched the description of one involved in the [13 minutes] earlier shooting and appeared to have gunfire damage to its back window . . . Officers found two firearms on the floor of the car.
The police had grounds for a reasonable belief that this was the car from which shots were fired - vehicle description (although I'm not sure how detailed that was) plus indications of possible gunfire damage to the car. After the fact, we have further indications that they were correct, although ballistics tests will give a final answer. Given the information the police officer had at the time, shooting a fleeing suspect was both reasonable and legal. I don't always approve of police shootings, but I do approve of shooting a "fleeing felon" when there is a reasonable belief that the running suspect poses a danger to the community. In this case, that belief was reasonable.
.…..my only comment on the cops liability on this one is that it is too early to tell as we simply don’t have all the facts.
My general comment is “do these cops ever watch the news and see what happens when a cop shoots somebody?”
Basically, his whole life is ruined.
If I were a cop I would say to myself...…..”self, you do not pull that trigger other than to save your own life, you do not pull that trigger unless your trying to save another fellow cops life, you do not pull that trigger to shoot unless you are trying to save a citizens life and you do not pull that trigger on someone running away from you …….regardless of police policy because the consequences for your ass are too great!”
To me a suspicion that a fleeing person MAY harm someone else is not justification to shoot him.
Cops are the thin line between the citizenry and the bad guys though and deserve the benefit of the doubt every time as the decisions they make are sometimes in fractions of a second.
We disagree on whether to shoot a fleeing felon when there is a reasonable belief that the suspect poses an immediate danger to others. To me, the driver is the least likely shooter in the car. If the person who shot the 22 year-old 13 minutes earlier was in the car, it was probably one of the two runners. If he still had the gun, he would have posed an immediate danger. Shooting someone running from a car linked to attempted murder will ruin the cop's life. It was still (probably) the right decision given the facts available at the time.
The ‘chasing police’ probably re NOT the police on the scene, so they only know that there has been a shooting. Not necessarily knowing the status of the victims second by second.
I am sure he dindu nuffin
Luv me some Warren Zevon!
If I run for cover that you don't have and you don't shoot me, you are the dumbest bloke alive for the short life you have left.
.……..I’m not questioning what the cop did. Remember, I said that in my first sentence. I am just saying that the cop shot a guy who was running away from him and killed him. We know that IS a fact.
Turns out it was a kid who may have been unarmed. This cop will have to live with this the rest of his life. In these APPARENT circumstances, I would not have shot the kid.
I think it is similar to chasing an outlaw through a neighborhood at a hundred miles an hour. The risks for all, including the cops, are just too great which is why most municipalities have restricted it severely.
So, your read is that the cops life WAS in danger beyond any shadow of a doubt?
If your right about that then your RIGHT.
I don’t know yet, not enough evidence.
My understanding is the car already had bullet holes in it (from the previous shooting) - in terms of the vehicle description.
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.