Posted on 07/08/2016 12:54:31 PM PDT by sheikdetailfeather
MAJOR UPDATE BELOW: In order to give the update context we are placing the update at the conclusion of the original outline.
By now everyone is aware of the officer involved shooting of Philando Castile that became a viral BLM activist case as a direct result of his girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds (aka Lavish Reynolds) live-streaming the aftermath from their vehicle. – BACK STORY HERE –
NOTE: It is critical to remember -as you review the images and the video- optically the live stream was captured as a mirror image. Some video uploads mirror the image, it can be confusing, you have to reset your reference points. Philando Castile was driving, Diamond Reynolds was the passenger.
During the uploaded video narration Ms. Reynolds stated the police officer pulled them over for a broken tail light.
There are several aspects of the narrative as told that didn’t pass the sniff test, however, something about the “tail light” just didn’t seem to make sense. Especially when you consider it was daylight when they were pulled over; and where –in the aftermath media video– it can be noted the tail lights were operable.
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
I wish we took the streets of the white house when Lavoy Finicum was murdered by some kind of “enforcement”. Whoever they were.
now there was a man who was gunned down in cold blood. And the recordings continued to record gunshots on the passengers.
And brakelight ? LaVoy was killed for camping under a tarp.
One of the guys in the video is a dead ringer for Castile.
Perhaps the officer caught his perp.
Did the woman call an ambulance BEFORE she got on social
media & publicized the situation. IF NOT, why would she not
do first things first?
I don’t know. I would think the police would release that info.
Rather odd he kept the gun in plain sight.
An update to this same article confirms that if the officer said anything about a broken tail light, it was a ruse.
Before stopping Castile, the officer called in to report that he was stopping them to check IDs, because the driver looked like the robbery suspect.
Frankly, I see the resemblance, but I don't see any distinguishing characteristic that positively identifies Castile as the robbery suspect.
And therein lies the problem: Castile wasn't shot because he was black, it was because he was a CHL/CCW holder that happened to look like a robbery suspect. The officer was treating him as a threat.
I know nothing about guns, but is there enough info in the pics to compare the one in the lap to the one in the robber’s hand?
The article specifically states that both his and his passengers' profiles were tracked down, and that he was most definitely a Crip gang member. There's no evidence whatsoever that he was a valid CCW permit holder.
I’m just aghast at this. I mean, seriously, demonizing the dead man?
Two questions: Was there a gun drawn by the man shot four times sitting restrained in his car? Did that gun ever point towards a passenger or the officer?
If the answer to those questions is no, get out the handcuffs, put them on the officer, take him down to the station, book him, and his lawyer can explain to a jury why he pulled the trigger because the man MIGHT have been reaching for a gun. Just like officers would have done if it was you or I in that situation.
Everything else is immaterial. He might have been a armed robber, he was in gangs, he works at a school, his girlfriend started broadcasting on Facebook, etc, means absolutely nothing.
Was there an imminent and direct threat to the officer or passengers? No? Then take two steps towards the back of the car to take yourself out of his immediate line of sight where you can observe the passengers, keep your gun trained on the driver and regain control of the situation. Pulling the damn trigger is NOT what should be considered acceptable.
Honestly, I am getting absolutely sick of all the people who seem to think it is just fine for officers to kill people because they MIGHT do something.
The main thing about the story is that the officer pulled them over for a different reason and viewed this man as a threat due to the robbery that just happened. Combine that with the fact that this woman began to film everything calmly and upload the video to facebook while the boyfriend is dying beside her. Who could do that at such a time?
When I saw the video I kept saying something smells about this. She never even checked on the poor child. The whole thing just reeks.
Well, the leftist MSM has apparently convinced you, anyway.
The man had a CCW permit, by God.
This smells bad for the police like the shooting of LaVoy in Oregon.
I don’t care if the guy ‘was a gang member’.
I’ve seen a story saying LaVoy was seen with a ‘white supremacist’ which sound like spin to justify the unjustifiable.
The elites are flooding this country with ‘migrants’ from the Middle East and others streaming in from the South.
The fighting over this issue distracts from what’s really going on.
Correct. Local Sheriff stated he did not issue Castile a CCW, nor had Castile applied / asked for one form his department.
He did not have a CCW.
Because she is a sociopath that just won the ghetto lottery. That was not her husband or fiance’, it was her baby daddy and not worth putting compression on his wounds, not she had to film it, a damn snuff film.
If we lived in Mayberry, circa 1950, then your argument might have some validity. But, as it is, your argument/position is a purely academic, and utterly irrelevant, one. The reason is simple: modern police officers do not do their job in a peaceful, civilized society. Instead, modern police officers have to do their job in what is, for all intents and purposes, a war zone, in which a sizable number of residents are, for all intents and purposes, savages (lacking in basic impulse control, and basic norms of civilization). You can pretend otherwise, and call for rules of engagement that are hopelessly archaic. Or, you can support those people who put their lives on the line to make sure the worst of this war zone, and its combatants, don’t directly affect you or your family.
Frankly, I am more aghast at attitudes like yours, than I am at anything done by the people who make up “black lives matter”, or any of the other quasi-military would-be tyrants. They know no better, for they were born into that world. They have an excuse for being the way they are. What is your excuse, for being hopelessly naive, irresponsible, and selfish (yes, selfish — nothing is more selfish than sitting on a moral high horse while others do your dirty work)?
Who is at fault for the war zone in our urban environment (and anywhere else that has public housing)? The media, academia, cultural figures, economists, politians — the list is too long to go through. But it is the police, and ONLY the police, that is keeping that war zone from your front door.
The police didn’t invent the world in which they have a very realistic chance of getting shot everytime someone reaches for their pockets. But they do have to live in it. And that is why they demand compliance — they are police officers in a war zone. And that is why good people accept their demands for compliance. Obviously, you don’t.
Next time, rather than getting “aghast”, you may want to thank them.
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.