Posted on 07/29/2015 9:26:25 AM PDT by barmag25
If I were one prone to riot I would hit the local Bass Pro Shop or Academy Sports.
I’ve been on vacation for a few days ... in Cincinnati to see my dad. Just browsed this thread. I am sitting here practically slack-jawed at the attitude of some toward this shooting.
It shouldn’t matter that Sam Dubose is black, has 10+ kids, has been arrested 75 times, was uncooperative, was attempting to flee or any of the other pathetic justifications being offered.
An American citizen was executed without due process by a law enforcement officer at a freeping traffic stop. That should enrage any reasonable person.
You are joking... right?
It apparently doesn’t matter to some posters here. For them it seems that just the semblance of not being a good little robot and “obeying” every word from a cop’s mouth in a quick enough fashion is grounds for a cop to get scared and trigger- finger shoot you dead.
I don’t care. A person does not have the right to take another human being’s life, badge or not, unless there is an immediate threat to their or another innocent person’s life. A traffic stop? I don’t even care if the guy took off in the vehicle the cop can shoot the tires or give chase after calling in plates and coordinates. You don’t shoot people dead as a first resort and for merely “disobeying” your orders. It’s not like the guy was wanted for a murder etc...
Given that the cop was investigating the incident and hadn’t gathered all facts beyond a reasonable doubt yet (that’s the job of the courts, cop is just trying to figure out WTH is going on and apprehend _suspects_), that “put the car into gear” was on top of the strong likelihood of a DUI in progress involving several additional violations & suspicious behavior turning into a DUI while fleeing police in a residential/educational area.
You’d rather a drunk be racing around at high speeds with lots of pedestrians & other vehicles in the area?
Again, not “beyond a reasonable doubt” proof in court, but the cop did stop what could reasonably have turned into a drunk killing several people.
Yup, coulda been.
Cop was gathering evidence, and what he had there was an opened bottle clearly marked “GIN” well within reach of the driver. Presumptive evidence of guilt in lieu of further investigation under chain-of-custody circumstances. Cop may or may not know what that particular brand of gin looks like. Assuming it was what the label said it was, and figuring that’s more likely than pissing in a bottle and keeping that bottle at one’s feet, safe to presume it’s an “open container” violation and time for a DUI check.
...oh, but then our possible DUI suspect tried to escape, giving the cop a half-second to decide whether & how to stop him from running people over while fleeing.
"Reflective contemplation is not required in the presence of an upraised knife."
Send that quip to Tensing’s attorney. He could use it.
“Again, not “beyond a reasonable doubt” proof in court, but the cop did stop what could reasonably have turned into a drunk killing several people.”
I’m sorry, but “could reasonably have turned into” is not—and should not be—the standard for the use of deadly force by a police officer (or anyone else, for that matter). The standard is whether the officer reasonably believed there was an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others. Imminent is the key word. Not “could have turned into” a threat.
“So, why is he sitting in the can tonight?”
Because he’s not dead with a tire track over his torso.
“Evidence the guy “took off”? None.”
Cop told him to get out of the car (ok, “take off your seat belt” which pretty clearly is leading to “now get out”), and the guy started the car instead - next step is acceleration of unidentified individual, possible DUI given the open gin bottle, driving a possibly stolen vehicle. That’s the beginning of “took off”. Cops don’t have to wait for an action when someone is clearly preparing to carry out that action.
You both hold reasonable interpretations of what’s known about a case that plainly has more evidence we don’t know. Quit beating the other up for not abjectly consenting to your view when reasonable interpretations vary enough to warrant a full court case. I think the cop over-reacted, but understandably (though not justifiably) so. Let’s ease up on the ad-hominems and just share what we know and how we interpret it.
Let’s reasonably, based on analyzing the video, re-frame that as a possible DUI involving a stolen vehicle was about to flee a cop’s reasonable stop-and-interview and possibly run him over in the process.
Just let the driver take off?
That’s nice. Did the car move? No. So much for being dragged. And hands up while shot. No response from team Cherry Toppers. Pathetic.
I’m sorry...How is “I don’t care” sufficient exactly? Don’t care about what? And are you trying to tell me to shut up in a round about way? I have the right to speak out just as much as anyone else, most people give much more than 3 word posts and I get called out for saying anything more than “I don’t care?”
Explain yourself please.
That is flat out trumped by the fact that the officer claimed the shooting was justified because he was being dragged by the car and when questioned the other two cops on the scene said he wasnt being dragged.
That means he falsified his report...and the strongly implies guilt.
The problem here I see is that I really think this was accidental...I dont think the officer intended to kill the driver....but his actions and statements afterwords will be the what decides his fate....
He never once said it was an accident and he didnt mean to shoot the driver....he claimed it was justified self defense....those are two different things under the law.
I really think if he had said he screwed up and didnt mean to shoot the driver right away instead of pushing the self defense angle...he wouldnt be charged now with murder.
My two cents.
No, I think the shooting was not intended....it wasnt murder...I dont think there was any intent to kill...I think it was pure reaction and he really didnt mean to kill the driver...I think he pulled his weapon to intimidate and subdue.....and he pulled the trigger as a reaction to the driver starting the car and putting it in gear......but what will hang him was the fact that he never claimed it to be accidental...he claimed it was justified self defense...and the other two officers present dont back that up.
I really do think if he had said right away that it was an accidental discharge in the heat of a stop went sideways he wouldnt be charged with murder...but he didnt do that....he claimed it was justified self defense.
That implies guilt....what the state may be able to prove will be a different matter.
I think this will go to a plea bargin to reduced charges.
Just my opinion based on what I know of the story.
...”Don’t care about what?”...
What you stated in your post.
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.