Posted on 12/10/2017 7:10:13 AM PST by JP1201
If you have the stomach for it, I want you to watch one of the most outrageous and infuriating videos I’ve ever seen. It shows the police shooting of Daniel Shaver in Mesa, Arizona. He was crawling on his hands and knees, crying, and begging police not to shoot him. An officer shot him anyway:
The Washington Post’s account is decent, but you have to watch the video truly grasp the strangeness of the requests:
In fact, the Post actually sugarcoats the encounter. At one point an officer tells him “do not put your hands down for any reason,” even saying, “If you think you’re going to fall, you better fall on your face.” Then he says, “Crawl towards me.” How he can crawl without putting his hands down, I don’t know. As the sobbing man crawls, he reaches back towards his pants (perhaps to pull them up) and is immediately shot dead. He had no weapon. He had done nothing wrong. And now he’s dead.
Essentially, what the police told an innocent, law-abiding, intoxicated American was this: Follow my highly-specific, very strange instructions or die. There was no need to make him crawl. The police were in command of the situation. At no point is there a visible weapon. I have seen soldiers deal with al Qaeda terrorists with more professionalism and poise. When a man is prone, his hands are visible, and your gun is trained upon him, he is in your power. At trial, the officer testified that he though the suspect was reaching for his gun, and that if he had a chance to do things over, he’d make the same decision again. In other words, he presented the classic defense. He was afraid, so he fired.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
No & yet I am critical of the majority of journalists, or at least those that pretend to be. Much like the macho men who claim they could do a better job of being in law enforcement than the majority in there. Start putting your life on the line. If you do & find yourself in a similar situation, I will be sure to write a nice hit piece on you (since we all are now well aware that you wouldn’t want the benefit of doubt), or a flowering obituary as to what a real hero you were. Whichever is applicable.
You’ve fearlessly pounded your keyboard in defense of your own bloviation, way to put your life on the line. Bravo (golf clap).
I just love the herd mentality that has become so pervasive here as of late. Had I actually sat in the jury and I heard nothing compelling to sway my decision of guilty, that is what my vote cast would have been. Alas I am only privy to a video that sure looks like guilt to me, and an article that may or may not be holding back information that came out in the trial to sway my belief.
Nonetheless, the jury that did hear his case voted for acquittal. Not a hung jury, and obviously not guilty on any of the charges they were instructed to choose from.
There are many times I think the jury got it wrong, such as the Kate Steinle verdict, and they are often hard to swallow. An innocent found guilty on the flimsiest of evidence, and the, by all appearances, the guilty being acquitted.
I have stated before & will state again, it is obvious that this person does not need to be in law enforcement.
You do bring up an interesting point, if in fact it is accurate, that there were 5 officers at the scene. That fact alone would & does sway me to believe there was a better way to have taken this person into custody safely for all concerned. I don't remember reading that fact, but then sometimes I skim over some articles. I do know from the video that there was at least one other present, not because I saw that other officer but by the fact the girl surrendered herself and it wasn't to the officer holding the AR-15.
Afraid to put your life on the line? Of course you are, much easier to stand in judgment of those who actually do, isn’t it.
There were six officers at the scene, the shooter plus five others.
I’ve been in similar situations overseas with some potentially very bad people and one hell of a language barrier, and my Soldiers and I still never came close to acting as terrified of our shadows as this clown.
Proving intent may have proved too difficult for the prosecutor, but an innocent man was gunned down for no reason whatsoever by a guy whose training and on-site backup should’ve been more than enough to ensure a calm, orderly detention, questioning, and, ultimately, release since the call to the cops was over a pure misunderstanding. The shooter had a significant responsibility that he dumped b/c he was what? Scared? Hyped? Bloodthirsty? Who knows?
His ridiculous abuse of the trust placed in him by the people of Mesa warrants some time in jail. Instead he walks free like nothing happened.
They were not allowed to see the video.
I think that might have changed the verdict.
Which is precisely why they weren't allowed to see it...
Yet a jury of those Mesa people saw differently & acquitted him. It's always easier to make decisions in hindsight, but a much different thing to do in a split second.
Not siding against or with your statement, just stating facts.
Since I do not know if I have all the facts, I cannot 2nd guess them. There is no sure proof way to ensure only the guilty get convicted & the innocent walk free. We are after all imperfect humans, thus the systems we create contain flaws.
All I know is that I will never be in a position that he (the policeman) was in because I would never be a policeman doing a thankless job that is 2nd guessed by everyone & their brother.
Is your analysis correct, my emotions say yes. But then again my emotions are probably wrong about 50% of the time, whether I know that to be the fact or not.
Not according to this article.
It is difficult to watch. But this is the footage that jurors reviewed in the case, and if the public wants to diminish the likelihood of shootings like this one, ordinary citizens will need to grapple with what it depicts.
I have no problem second-guessing him since I’ve found myself in similar circumstances. I know what this kind of thing is like. Instead of exuding calm professionalism while assessing the situation, he bellowed and screamed, escalating it every step of the way. I frequently held short conversations with people I detained while I was detaining them. What harm can it do? We’re all alert, looking for threats. Maybe he’s trying to clarify something that will help later on? Not this one. He’s way too badass for that kind of thing.
As for the jury, I imagine most of them held the same opinion that you do—I wasn’t there, I have no idea how I’d react if I was in his place, etc. I’d be very interested to see what a panel of Iraq/Afghanistan Infantry veterans would have to say about it.
Daddy was a big-wig in Mesa PD Internal Affairs (very recently retired), so that casts doubt on the other officers’ reports and testimony, too. Cops should be held to a very high standard. That they immediately close ranks to protect trigger-happy buffoons like this guy does them no favors.
No argument from me. How this cop ever got through an initial psych evaluation is a stumper.
It is unlikely that a civil suit against him will prevail. I think it is high time that the age old established precedents of sovereign immunity and no duty of care be narrowed if not abolished outright. I don’t know if a legislature can do this and survive a challenge in court. But if an officer knew that he was no longer exempt from personal liability because of his actions while on duty it might curb a bunch of abuses.
lastchance I have been advocating for personal accountability for LEO’s for a very long time. Hiding behind the badge, sovereign immunity makes it possible, even probable that people who happen to be LEO will do things they would not otherwise do. They would be limited by personal morality, personal ethics. The same personal morality and ethics that curtails the actions of all of us. With the concept of sovereign immunity morality and ethics become institutional morality and ethics. So what is taught in POST becomes moral and ethical superseding personal morality and personal ethics.
Institutional morality and ethics are imposed. In this day and age of internet and global communications morality and ethics can be centrally crafted, disseminated and imposed. I do not, I cannot trust these institutions any more than I can trust UC Berkeley, or The Swamp. These places do not respect Natural Law. These institutions are diametrically opposed to Natural Law. So it follows they are opposed to the U.S. Constitution.
So yes. pierce the veil!
I stand corrected. thanks!
I'll agree you are uniquely more qualified than I am with regards to being in these types of situations. If there really were 5 other officers there as someone told me, then I see no reason why he couldn't have taken him into custody without him moving an inch.
No problem. I actually didn’t know if you were providing me something I hadn’t read which is why I did a search to determine if the jury was withheld viewing the video. We are both more knowledgeable as a result. Everyone makes mistakes. I make many more than I care to think about, especially when I respond with my emotions, which I do on certain subjects. This actually is not one of those subjects, just in case you were wondering. 8>)
“”justice in the alley.””
From Here to Eternity...who could forget the justice meted out in that movie in the alley?
That is the most disgusting video I’ve seen in a long time. What a disgrace.
Agreed. Police on average are a violent and ignorant protected class (enforcers) of the local, state and federal government. I would rather deal with my chances than deal with them. I’m tired of the whole good cops get a bad name bull shit. If the day comes when a cop shoots another cop in their protect and serve role call me. No 2 undercover cops trolling and creating crime each other count. My guess is I will have won the lottery 3 times before that happens.
The day of reckoning is coming and the cops are on the shoot at the start list.
I stand in judgement of this officer’s behavior and will in no way attempt to excuse the inexcusable as you continue to do. The person whose life was on the line in this instance lost his. The officer’s life was never threatened. This kind of literal injustice will lead to reprisals and vigilantism. You will have had a hand in it. Idiot.
Agreed.
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.