Posted on 03/09/2016 3:47:24 PM PST by navysealdad
New footage has emerged that was taken by one of the passengers in the car with LaVoy Finicum that detail his final moments during an encounter with Oregon State Police and the FBI.
(Excerpt) Read more at truthinmedia.com ...
He stopped when the trailing vehicle was pulled over. Had he disembarked from that vehicle, under those circumstances, he would likely have been shot then.
When (apparently) no one came up to his vehicle, he left the scene and proceeded, slowly at first, then picking up to highway speeds (55-60 mph, just going by the dashes in the road). When he came around the turn, there was a roadblock that he took the ditch to avoid.
The police stand in the way at those things, banking on people's instinct to NOT hit someone on foot with a vehicle, something as ingrained as trying to avoid hitting a deer, if not more so.
So Lavoy hit the ditch, missing the LEO, who apparently saw that Finnicum would not be able to stop in time, where it was pretty much guaranteed they were going to be stuck. (anyone who has driven in areas with a lot of snow will tell you that is the outcome to be expected, not going around a roadblock and back onto the road and continuing).
Were police shooting at the vehicle before it came to rest? If so, why? What actions by these people justified using potentially lethal force against them at that point?
What action justified shooting an old man in the back three times? Were those shots fired while he was standing (or attempting to do so--not easy in cowboy boots in deep snow) with his hands up? Why did fire continue at the vehicle after Finnicum had exited the vehicle? The windows were rolled up, and no one in the vehicle was able to shoot at the LEOs without breaking the windows. Again, how was the use of lethal force justified when there was no imminent threat?
The term for the actions of the LEOs in this instance is "bushwhacking". Otherwise known as an ambush.
The use of lethal force without justification is known as "murder".
The wrong people are being held.
Because I haven't seen any evidence.
What I have seen is LaVoy sitting in the truck and sticking his head out of the window, jawing with the LEOs for minutes.
Why would he think he would get shot if he exited but wouldn't get shot if he sat there like a sitting duck? Especially since his partners had already surrendered and not been executed.
This scenario you're concocting just doesn't hold together if you give it any thought.
“... The cop’s job isn’t to get the law perfect...”
Are you freakin’ serious????????????
Watch again, there was also a shot that impacted low on the passenger door, low enough to kick up some snow. Note the resolution is too low to be able to spot any holes in the bodywork of the truck, and that the image is of such low brightness that muzzle flashes cannot be distinguished and the flashbangs are of far lower intensity than they should be.
The overkill by cops was disgusting! Were this a gang of Muslim terrorists, I would not shed a tear. But they all knew he was a reasonable non-violent fellow and planned to kill him
True, but these two words are being used interchangeably all over this thread. I was only trying to clarify.
For brevity's sake, I'm jumping to your last point.
Or do you think they were going to “murder” him no matter what that day?
Even though I agree that the police seemed to be using non-lethal techniques (mostly), I'm still of a mind to believe that snipers up on the hill had other orders.
Finicum and the others are exposing what our leaders are doing with large tracts of land and they don't take too kindly to that.
My other half (I'm of two minds one might say) says that they didn't really want him dead because that would make the government look bad in the public's eye. That half also says that the only reason we are being allowed to see these videos is because it supports their case that they TRIED not to kill anyone.
I understood your point from the beginning. I'm still saying that the WHY of this is the only thing that matters.
There had to be a problem for there to be a protest. Why is the problem not relevant to the protest ?
Have to construct the scene to match the drone video.
If he had been shot in the back through the right kidney instead of the left they would have "found" the gun in his right pocket.
They say they “found” the gun in his left pocket...
Was he right handed or left handed??? I’m pretty sure that would matter....
There's a couple of posts about it laying around on these Finicum threads.
So, what about a roadblock around a blind curve?
Oh, and common police practice these days seems to be that they leave a "safe lane" if the stoppee wants to blow the roadblock anyway.
This is what I don't get. If the plan was to kill LaVoy (or others), why not do it at the first stop?
LaVoy sat there for minutes, window open, fiddling with the radio, and conversing with the LEOs. If they wanted him dead he would have been dead then.
I don't remember you specifying "when we join the video in progress".
RIghtfighter said they didn't fire (IN THE VIDEO) before FINICUM asked the cops to identify themselves.
Then you jumped in and said he was lying. He wasn't, he was correct. I went back and watched the first part again.
You didn't make it clear you meant BEFORE THE VIDEO (which was the subject of the thread) HE WAS SHOT. Which would have made for a lousy argument because most of us were watching ONLY this video.
The problem isn't that anyone is a liar, it's that accused someone of lying but it was based on you not clarifying you have seen something the rest of us had not and that wasn't part of the video the thread was ABOUT.
So, get off your high horse and debate or discuss this issue intelligently, and quit trying to throw people off because of your 'lack of communication'.
The only alternative I saw to a collision was to take the ditch. That will stop the vehicle, as most drivers from anywhere that gets deep snow can attest.
So, your version of the in-truck video has no sound, just like the overhead video of the shooting. LOL!
You can HEAR Ryan Bundy and Finicum repeatedly try to pry out of the unidentified men who they are. They finally say that they're "Oregon state police" - who wear distinctive blue uniforms with blue Mountie hats.
Which these guys were apparently NOT wearing.
Thank you.
That's not a debate - that's "flailing".
There's a BUNCH of "tells" about "RightFighter".
You just donm't want to see them. :)
Yep. He took the ditch to avoid the collision, most likely.
I never suggested the protesters didn’t have a valid issue to protest. In fact, somewhere in this thread or another I said that I sympathize with them on the issue of federal land grabs. However, protest has the potential to turn very dangerous when it is backed up with firearms and people saying things like “they’ll never take me alive” which is what Finicum had been saying before he ever left the property. That’s the background to what happened as far as those law enforcement officers were concerned. They had a man they were determined to arrest. Whether you agree with why he was being arrested or not, they were acting within the law to arrest him. He chose to make good on his ‘threat’ that they’d have to shoot him.
All communications including cell phone traffic was shut down and the Sheriff they were going to see did not know they were coming. The FBI/Oregon State Police ensured he did not know so he would not interfere.
He carried his concealed weapon on his left side, often in a shoulder holster, but in this case, apparently in his coat pocket.
A very important point that I noticed as well.
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.