Posted on 09/05/2017 4:58:58 PM PDT by GuavaCheesePuff
ST. LOUIS-Video from a police SUV and a business, obtained by the Post-Dispatch, provide the most complete picture yet of a shooting in which a former St. Louis police officer is charged with murder.
Included are store surveillance video of the attempt by Officers Jason Stockley and Brian Bianchi to arrest drug suspect Anthony Lamar Smith on Dec. 20, 2011, and a police recording of a pursuit that ends with a crash and Stockley shooting Smith.
(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...
“Going to kill this (expletive), don’t you know it.”
Oh, c’mon....that doesn’t mean he really intended to kill the guy.
Any mention by the “activists” of the 7 black on black murders in Chicago this past weekend?
This is what they are going to base their “culpable state of mind” argument on.
For Pete’s sake, if someone points a gun at you and tries to run you over escaping, what do you say at that point, I’m gonna so hug that guy when I catch him?
This case should have never been issued on except for certain perpetually aggrieved social justice warriors made it happen.
The riots may (or may not be) epic in scale. They promise Ferguson redux but this time the police may outnumber the protesters.
Intent can be formed very quickly. Like when he saw the guy was unarmed but still decided to kill him quickly. (If that’s what happened) They don’t need that oath but it certainly goes towards showing a startling lapse in professionalism.
quickly decided
Again, when someone tries to kill you, the professional language goes right out the window.
The hardest part that any prosecutor has to prove when trying to convict a police officer of murder is was the officer murdering the person or was he defending himself from he PERCEIVED to be an imminent threat to self or others.
Further, when an officer is asked whether he shot to kill, the answer will be no, I shot to stop the threat. Once the threat was neutralized, I summoned medical assistance and started my own lifesaving measures (if possible).
If police officers were truly shooting to kill, they would be demanding M1As to be there issued firearm, not Beretta 9mms that St. Louis City carries.
Which brings up another point on why Stockley was carrying his own rifle.
The St. Louis City Police Department at that time was still carrying the Beretta Storm as their patrol rifle. It is 9mm carbine, totally unsuited for patrol rifle duty. But they wanted something that would accept the pistol mags from their sidearms.
Stockley was just trying to carry something that would meet what is on the street.
The rifle is a left media red herring, imo. The killing wasn’t done with it. He shot the guy dead with his service handgun.
All the news that is fit to print that only supports the narrative.
JoMa
The problem Stockley has isn’t the AK, it’s the Taurus Pistol...
And that’s not a problem. People who get their forensic training from CSI believe that since the pistol contained Stockley’s DNA it MUST be his pistol. Lack of evidence (the decedent’s DNA) is not evidence.
This tired old argument is trotted out every time someone in the minority community is shot while committing crimes.
“He ain’t had no gun.” Every. Flipping. Time.
I mean, why not? We all saw the lies told at the Michael Brown shooting and what chaos that caused (and still causing) so why not get on your social media and tell lies before the police can even start the investigation?
Stockley will walk next week and St. Louis City is going to erupt. Again.
And the paid protesters will abound.
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.