Posted on 11/25/2015 11:57:19 AM PST by IChing
In the latest high-profile racial railroading of a white policeman for obvious political reasons, it has taken authorities over a full year to decide to charge Chicago cop Jason Van Dyke in the fatal shooting of black 17-year-old Laquan McDonald.
The obviousness of the racial/political theater here is largely due to the fact that the timing of the ridiculous charge — first degree murder — being suddenly announced after all these months, so transparently coincides with the sudden FOIA public release of a police dashcam video of the shooting which, to the untrained eye, looks pretty bad.
The video in question has been in the possession of the authorites this entire time. If it was a bad shoot, especially if so bad as to amount to first degree murder, they should have charged him long ago, apart from the racially ginned-up public and media hysteria wrought by release of the video, no?
As for allegations about the incident itself, there are some gray areas, and some clear-cut lines.
Officers were attempting to apprehend McDonald, who was later determined to have had PCP in his system, after he had been rampaging around the area and using a knife to not only break into cars and other property, but also slashed the tire of a police car in an initial attempt to arrest him just moments before he encountered Van Dyke and other officers.
The video shows that McDonald was not “walking away from†the officers, as many are insisting; he was walking briskly abreast of them and turning toward them(4:45), his left hand inside his pocket and swinging the knife in his right hand.
Most police officers are trained on the “21-foot ruleâ€(also known as the Tueller Drill), the distance at which an officer’s “reactionary gap†(the time it takes the officer to recognize the threat, reach, draw, aim, and fire on the subject) puts his own life in jeopardy from a subject with an edged weapon.
Here’s a very good demonstration of the 21-foot rule:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_KJ1R2PCMM
It has been proven over and over again (unfortunately not only in training drills but in many cases where officers have been murdered/gravely wounded) that an agile subject with an edged weapon can suddenly, as rapidly as 1.5 seconds, close a distance of up to 21 feet to fatally stab/slash a victim, even kill or seriously wound a trained police officer armed with a gun.
That’s LESS time than it takes an officer to recognize the threat, reach, draw, aim, and fire on the subject — the “reactionary gap.†1.23 seconds is the fastest closing time of the 21-foot distance measured.
I played the video over and over at various speeds, and the taser wires are visible well before McDonald shows any kind of reaction(indicating that the taser may not have functioned immediately or properly), and he actually turns toward the officers(4:45) as he walks briskly abreast of them with the wires attached, swinging the knife in one hand, with his other hand in his pocket.
Then, it looks like the gunfire is what brings him down, because you can see dust/debris kicked up as the rounds hit the concrete around/under McDonald’s body when he falls.
If Van Dyke believed the taser did not function, it can be argued that he legitimately perceived McDonald (who had just slashed a police car’s tire with the knife) to be an imminent deadly threat within the 21-foot reactionary gap.
That perception wouldn’t mean that he necessarily HAD to shoot McDonald, but it would definitely mean he’s not guilty of murder.
The 21-foot rule has come under scrutiny and criticism in recent years/months, and I predict it will (as “stand your ground,†as misapplied as it was, in the Zimmerman case) be the centerpiece of this case.
Not guilty.
Oh, and by the way, as for the number of shots fired, the official answer is that once deadly force is deemed justified, the number of shots is really moot — although we all know that the public, media, and jurors can imagine that there can be some kind of “excessive†force beyond deadly force.
1st degree murder is usually premeditated, which I think you’d have a hard time proving in this case.
Oh Wait! That's just TV fantasy.
They overcharged, for sure.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Perhaps so that it won’t stand up.
1st degree murder is premediated. They are going to have a difficult time proving premeditation.
I thought Freeper’s would be familiar with the Tuelle Rule. The guy was high on PCP, had shrugged off a taser, was swinging a knife, had just prior slashed a tire of police car when an officer tried to arrest him, was walking parallel to the police, not away, and was shot when he turned toward police with a knife in his hand and while reaching in a pocket. This isn’t close to murder 1. It may or may not have been a good shoot according to police procedures. The truth of that matter depends on a lot of details that aren’t in that particular film. Frankly, we are spending far too much time and too many resources on our feral population.
Wrong again, there have been many criminal cases/incidents where it does indeed tell the whole story.
...
Then please tell me a court case where video was the only evidence used.
You are probably right. I stand corrected.
You know what... I was on a jury for a murder trial. I was the foreman and I still have the jury instructions. You realize that premeditation takes all of about 5 seconds. Right? Once you decide to kill someone and do it... that is premeditation.
“Treat PCP the same as illegally carrying a deadly weapon.”
Not just PCP, but other drugs also, cocaine, meth, alcohol, heroin should be treated the same way. Especially, since Chicago cops can take one look at someone at determine what drugs they have in their system.
I wondered why first degree as well. Isn’t first degree when you plan ahead of time to murder?
That’s just it. I don’t think it’s in line with standard lethal force training. I got my CC training from a cop, and self-control, recognizing where you were in terms of real versus imagined threat, was on you, the shooter. They even provided an option for simulation training, again, the point being, when and why do you start shooting, when and why do you stop. You have to think about that and practice that ahead of time, because in the live shooting situation, you’re going to play the tape of how you’ve practiced.
So I say, based on the training I received, no way was this recognized internally as a good shoot. If it was held back, it almost certainly was for political reasons, not because they were unsure about the deviance of this shoot from acceptable standards.
As for the law, unloading the entire magazine in a situation like this is probably going to be a factor, because it speaks to the shooter’s state of mind. Someone above said there was a pause. If so, he’s probably doomed. He just demonstrated he had enough self control to assess the risk, and despite objective evidence the threat was neutralized, he kept on shooting. A jury could infer he truly meant to kill a man who was no longer a threat to him. No comfort I can find in the law for that.
Peace,
SR
Once you decide to kill someone, and then do it. That is premeditation. It doesn’t HAVE to be a long drawn out process where you plan for a period of time how you are going to do it.
If that were the case, no one would use it, including the cops. Btw, any evidence is better than none. And this goes for cops and non-cops. Learn it. Btw, there have been many criminal cases/incidents where it does indeed tell the whole story.
Then please tell me a court case where video was the only evidence used.
Boy, do you bull shit much? Of course whatever evidence is obtained will be used. But the fact is, video by itself has convicted tons of people.
You work at the dial an argument call center?
Do us all a favor and stay away from careers in law enforcement.
This will be a double plus good event for the community agitator in chief. First, he gets his love of riots and protests from his BLM shock troops. The DA over charges the officer with first degree murder. There is no evidence to prove this officer woke up and deliberately set out to murder this drug addled individual who was wielding a knife. When the officer is either acquitted of that charge then all hell will break loose.
Watch the part where he is on the ground yet still reaching for an object. If Van Dyke thought it was a gun, he walks, provided jury follows Graham v Connor instructions.
Were they in vehicle pursuit? 5 or 10 minutes?
This should have been more than enough time to to arrange for non-lethal weapons to be deployed or brought in.
A no brainer.
I know in Oklahoma it can take only seconds. I was a jury foreman and still have the jury instructions in a murder trial.
They’re hoping for conviction on a lesser included charge
In Oklahoma... if you decide to kill someone, and then do it... that is premeditation. I don’t know about Illinois.
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.