Posted on 11/05/2013 11:24:07 PM PST by Hetty_Fauxvert
That second shot while he was down on the ground was certainly premeditated and malicious -- as was the third and then the fourth and then the fifth and then the sixth and then the seventh and then the one that missed mercifully.
We have some LE trainers around here that say they are trained to shoot until the target stops moving -- and they justify it.
“Whoever pulled that plug signed the boys death warrant. “
Maybe, but what’s happened to the Second Amendment here? So far as I know, it is not illegal to openly carry a long gun in California. This deputy has a disturbing history of the use of his weapon.
Terry Leoni, an attorney representing Gelhaus in the criminal and administrative investigations, said that any implication that Gelhaus was reckless goes against his decorated 24-year history with the Sheriff’s Office.
His 24 years is not at issue. The issue is shooting a boy 7 times. In one article I read supposed while the boy was lying on the ground.
I read many accounts stating the boy was lying lifeless on the ground, as the kid was shot multiple times. That was certainly an execution.
And I’m pretty sure that police are not going to say
“oh, the tip is orange - must be a toy” and not treat it as a threat.
The bullets that went into his buttocks went travelled the length of his body indicating that they were fired when he was already lying on the ground.
* * *
UC, thanks for the tip to listen to the press conference. You were right; it was 8 minutes but worth it. I had read that one witness said that Gelhaus continued to shoot at Andy while he was on the ground, but I thought it was probably hyperbole. However, the ballistics tell the story. One bullet went into his buttock and through the length of his body, clearly indicating that he was shot while already on the ground. Gelhaus just unloaded into him, without thought for whether it was really necessary to use SO much firepower to subdue this terribly dangerous subject. (BTW, I read somewhere else, can’t remember where or I’d link it, that the family’s attorney said that the family’s private autopsy shows that the ballistics indicate that Andy did NOT “start to raise his gun” as the deputy had said. I was always suspicious of that statement from Gelhaus as it smacked of CYA on his part.)
Feel like crying now. Or throwing up. I’m raising two kids a mile from where this happened. Sure feel good and protected by our Sheriff’s dept. right now....
Three things, Hetty:
First: The family attorney paid for a private autopsy by a former Sonoma County ME that he was holding up in the presser. If you can find it please post it.
Second: That autopsy showed that it was impossible for Andy to have been raising the barrel or in the process of pointing the barrel toward the deputy. Among other things it is reported that he was found laying on the ground on top of the rifle — the body and the rifle pointing away from the deputies.
And the police department has the audacity to put Gelhaus’s BS statement out there as if it is true when they know otherwise.
Three: The attorney called the claim that Gelhaus fired before the other deputy could stop the car BS — the BS story put out there to explain why only Gelhaus felt threatened and fired and not his 11 year experienced partner. His partner being closer should have yelled at the kid but he didn’t. He was the one closest to the line of fire but he held his fire — why??? And Gelhaus had the whole front of the car to take cover behind not just the car door.
They are smart not to wait for the police investigation because all it is turning out to be is a police white wash.
“Whoever pulled that plug signed the boys death warrant.”
Officer Gelhaus signed the death warrant. Judge, jury, and executioner.
This was his friends air soft plastic pellet toy gun that the Lopez kid was playing with.
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.