Another unarmed man killed by police

[TSwizzle]

Is that a Jaguar that these thugs were in ?

They took the ads a bit too seriously.

Do you happen to know if Jaguar supply the handgun in the glove compartment as standard ?

 

[ksen]

In this case, you are worried about both suspects. You get the driver out and detain him first, as he could easily speed off, or try to run you over with the car as you are dealing with the passenger.

You know who else doesn't easily speed off?

A dead person.

 

[Derec]

You know who else doesn't easily speed off?

A dead person.

Except that he isn't dead.

 

[ksen]

do you need a minute to get over your disappointment?

 

[untermensche]

When do you think it is lawful for a cop to not only shoot somebody but shoot them several times?

When they are merely afraid?

Or when their life is in serious danger?

When a known convicted felon with a handgun in reach is forcing his way through a door a police officer is blocking with his body, and the police officer has given the convicted felon a lawful order not to do exactly what he is doing, I feel it is reasonable for that officer to think his life is in serious danger.

This is a complete dodge.

When is deadly force justified?

When a person disobeys an order? Or when your life is in actual danger?

The victim here said he was getting out to get on the ground. The cop did not permit this.

And of course you can count on a known convicted felon with a violent past, including gun crimes, to tell the truth at all times. The officer needs to carefully control the situation. You do this by removing the suspects from the vehicle, one at a time, starting with the driver. You make sure that the driver is cuffed and safely detained, before allowing the passenger to make any movement.

You can't count on it but you can wait one second to see if it is true. Especially when the person has both hands raised and visible.

 

[ksen]

When a known convicted felon with a handgun in reach is forcing his way through a door a police officer is blocking with his body, and the police officer has given the convicted felon a lawful order not to do exactly what he is doing, I feel it is reasonable for that officer to think his life is in serious danger.

This is a complete dodge.

I'd like to point out that at that point the gun had been secured by the officer and was no longer "in reach" of the soon-to-be dead guy.

You can't count on it but you can wait one second to see if it is true. Especially when the person has both hands raised and visible.

psshhh, that would lead to anarchy

 

[laughing dog]

The notion that this victim's record is relevant in the shooting is fascinating. Using that logic, in the future, any black man who is confronted by this police officer can legitimately claim he fears for his live and shoot the police officer.

 

[dystopian]

This case seems quite different from many of the other recent police shootings that have been given the #blacklivesmatter hashtag. For once, given the video evidence, I am on the cops side here. First off, Days saw a gun in the glove compartment, so he is not dealing with an unarmed man, and it is not clear from the video that the gun was removed by the officer.

Correction: he *claims* to have seen a gun. We've heard that before. The video very clearly shows that the man had two *empty* hands in the air as he exited the vehicle. Even if the cop really did see a gun in the glove compartment, it would be glaringly obvious that a man with both of his empty hands in the air isn't a threat. Even if there was a gun there... under no circumstances whatsoever should a cop *ever* fire *nine* bullets at someone while there is both another civilian AND a cop in the same fucking direction. That is some epic level incompetence on display.

"In this case, Days has a very good reason to expect Reid to comply, and meet significant noncompliance with deadly force, Fields was a known convicted felon with at least one handgun in reach."

Are we really expected to believe that these cops recognized that this person was a convicted felon (which incidentally, means fuck-all) at the time? That just sounds like after the fact justification; again, the same kind of thing we've heard before. "You guys, hey you guys, stop hating on us cops okay? The guy we killed? Turns out he was once convicted of a crime or something. So like, he wasn't a good person okay? So it's totally cool you guys."

"Days gave several warnings to Fields as Fields did exactly the opposite of the orders Days gave. Fields not only opened the passenger door, but forced it open by slamming the door into Days as Days continued to warn him not to get out of the vehicle."

What fucking video did you watch? He clearly does NOT slam the door into the cop. The cop clears the doorway well before the door opens. Incidentally, it opens the same way that anybody opens a car door, it doesn't fly open the way it would if the occupant was trying to force it open.

The occupant has a couple of guns pointed at him through his window, and a very agitated and panicked-sounding cop ranting at him and explicitly threatening to kill him because he supposedly has a gun in the glove compartment. At that point, it might seem to make perfect sense to get out of the car with your hands up in order to show the crazy cop that you do not have a gun on you and that you're distancing yourself from the gun that either is in the glove compartment or that the cop imagines there to be. The cop's reaction to him doing so displayed a frightening level of incompetence.

 

[Rhea]

The notion that this victim's record is relevant in the shooting is fascinating. Using that logic, in the future, any black man who is confronted by this police officer can legitimately claim he fears for his live and shoot the police officer.

really, yah.

 

[KeepTalking]

When a known convicted felon with a handgun in reach is forcing his way through a door a police officer is blocking with his body, and the police officer has given the convicted felon a lawful order not to do exactly what he is doing, I feel it is reasonable for that officer to think his life is in serious danger.

This is a complete dodge.

When is deadly force justified?

When a person disobeys an order? Or when your life is in actual danger?

It is not a dodge, you just need to read more carefully. The underlined portion of my post strongly implies that my position is that it is when the officer feels he is in serious danger. My previous post made that even more clear, and I assumed you had read that post as well, as you had responded to it with your questions.

The victim here said he was getting out to get on the ground. The cop did not permit this.

And of course you can count on a known convicted felon with a violent past, including gun crimes, to tell the truth at all times. The officer needs to carefully control the situation. You do this by removing the suspects from the vehicle, one at a time, starting with the driver. You make sure that the driver is cuffed and safely detained, before allowing the passenger to make any movement.

You can't count on it but you can wait one second to see if it is true. Especially when the person has both hands raised and visible.

That one second could be all it takes to turn the situation around if the suspect did have a gun. I will also note that the officer did wait for longer than a second for the suspect to comply after giving the order not to get out of the car. Additionally, we don't know how if the officer had complete view of the suspects hands, given that he was just pushed back from the car by the passenger who forced the door open. It is very likely the officer made the decision to shoot the second the passenger forced the door open, and it took him a few additional seconds after being forced back to regain his aim. At that point, he would have been less focused on the passengers hands, and more focused on his center mass.

 

[KeepTalking]

This is a complete dodge.

I'd like to point out that at that point the gun had been secured by the officer and was no longer "in reach" of the soon-to-be dead guy.

You can't count on it but you can wait one second to see if it is true. Especially when the person has both hands raised and visible.

psshhh, that would lead to anarchy

I'm not sure the officer had removed the gun, I personally did not notice that when I viewed the video, though others claim to have seen that happen. I can only go on what I was able to see in the video. Removing that gun, however, does not prevent the passenger from pulling another gun. This is why the officer would use extreme caution, and make sure the passenger does not move until the driver is securely detained.

- - - Updated - - -

The notion that this victim's record is relevant in the shooting is fascinating. Using that logic, in the future, any black man who is confronted by this police officer can legitimately claim he fears for his live and shoot the police officer.

It is relevant when that record is known to the officer, and that record includes shooting at police.

 

[untermensche]

This is a complete dodge.

When is deadly force justified?

When a person disobeys an order? Or when your life is in actual danger?

It is not a dodge, you just need to read more carefully. The underlined portion of my post strongly implies that my position is that it is when the officer feels he is in serious danger. My previous post made that even more clear, and I assumed you had read that post as well, as you had responded to it with your questions.

You forget one word. The officer must have a REASONABLE suspicion their life is in danger.

A person exiting a vehicle with their hands raised and visible does not represent a reasonable suspicion of imminent danger.

You can't count on it but you can wait one second to see if it is true. Especially when the person has both hands raised and visible.

That one second could be all it takes to turn the situation around if the suspect did have a gun. I will also note that the officer did wait for longer than a second for the suspect to comply after giving the order not to get out of the car. Additionally, we don't know how if the officer had complete view of the suspects hands, given that he was just pushed back from the car by the passenger who forced the door open. It is very likely the officer made the decision to shoot the second the passenger forced the door open, and it took him a few additional seconds after being forced back to regain his aim. At that point, he would have been less focused on the passengers hands, and more focused on his center mass.

What was this man with his hands raised and empty going to do in one second?

If he reached for something that would be one thing, but exiting a car with your hands raised is about the least dangerous thing a person can do.

 

[laughing dog]

It is relevant when that record is known to the officer, and that record includes shooting at police.

That would make more sense if this man had a firearm in his hands or even near his hands. Hell, it would relevant if he had a knife or a pair of scissors in his hand. But he didn't.

 

[ksen]

I'm not sure the officer had removed the gun

You may not be sure but the officer was sure.

“Show me your hands. Show me your f—— hands,” Days said, before quickly adding, “Get him out of the car, Rog[er Worley], we got a gun in his glove compartment.”

After the gun is retrieved, Days continued to yell at Reid. “I tell you, I’m going to shoot you,” he shouted. “You’re gonna be f—— dead. You reach for something, you’re going to be f—— dead.”

Reid then attempted to exit the vehicle with his hands raised, at which point Officer Days yelled, “Don’t you f—— move!” before he and Worley opened fire, discharging their weapons at least six times.

 

[KeepTalking]

Correction: he *claims* to have seen a gun. We've heard that before.

There is no reason not to believe it in this case. Several people even say they can see the officer remove the gun from the glove compartment.

The video very clearly shows that the man had two *empty* hands in the air as he exited the vehicle. Even if the cop really did see a gun in the glove compartment, it would be glaringly obvious that a man with both of his empty hands in the air isn't a threat.

We can see that from our angle behind the car, with a steady camera, but there is no guarantee that the officer could see that as clearly after having been forced back from the car by the passenger slamming the door into him.

Even if there was a gun there... under no circumstances whatsoever should a cop *ever* fire *nine* bullets at someone while there is both another civilian AND a cop in the same fucking direction. That is some epic level incompetence on display.

The other cop fired at least one shot, perhaps more. From our vantage point behind the car, we can't see the exact angle from which the officer fired the shots. If he was more to the front of the vehicle, then the angle may have not been an issue for the driver and the other officer.

"In this case, Days has a very good reason to expect Reid to comply, and meet significant noncompliance with deadly force, Fields was a known convicted felon with at least one handgun in reach."

Are we really expected to believe that these cops recognized that this person was a convicted felon (which incidentally, means fuck-all) at the time?

The officer spoke to him by name without being provided with any ID, and had arrested him in the past. Yes, it is reasonable to believe that the officer recognized him and new of his record.

That just sounds like after the fact justification; again, the same kind of thing we've heard before. "You guys, hey you guys, stop hating on us cops okay? The guy we killed? Turns out he was once convicted of a crime or something. So like, he wasn't a good person okay? So it's totally cool you guys."

You haven't heard this from me before. Check my posting record. I do not blindly defend cops, and I am more often on the other side of the issue. I also have a felony conviction in my past.

"Days gave several warnings to Fields as Fields did exactly the opposite of the orders Days gave. Fields not only opened the passenger door, but forced it open by slamming the door into Days as Days continued to warn him not to get out of the vehicle."

What fucking video did you watch? He clearly does NOT slam the door into the cop. The cop clears the doorway well before the door opens. Incidentally, it opens the same way that anybody opens a car door, it doesn't fly open the way it would if the occupant was trying to force it open.

So, your perception is different than mine. The door did not fly open, because the officer was leaning against it when it was forced open.

The occupant has a couple of guns pointed at him through his window, and a very agitated and panicked-sounding cop ranting at him and explicitly threatening to kill him because he supposedly has a gun in the glove compartment. At that point, it might seem to make perfect sense to get out of the car with your hands up in order to show the crazy cop that you do not have a gun on you and that you're distancing yourself from the gun that either is in the glove compartment or that the cop imagines there to be. The cop's reaction to him doing so displayed a frightening level of incompetence.

Except that it doesn't make sense to get out of the car when the entire reason the officer is yelling at you, and threatening you, is that you have been ordered to remain in the car and not move, and you are doing the exact opposite.

 

[ksen]

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/...cle_e0581fd4-90a2-11e4-94d3-53446e031a2e.html

According to a complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, Reid alleged two jail officers beat him inside his jail cell in Bridgeton following a transfer to a different holding cell on Oct. 15, 2009.

The excessive force complaint alleges officers beat him in his cell, sprayed him in the face with mace and dumped a cold bucket of water on him.

The complaint says he was taken to Cooper University Hospital’s emergency room for his injuries. The lawsuit alleges Reid initially told nurses he was beaten by fellow inmates.

The jail formally denied the allegations in court documents and said the lawsuit was unjustified.

The case is still pending.

I guess the case can be resolved now that the defendant is dead.

 

[untermensche]

Except that it doesn't make sense to get out of the car when the entire reason the officer is yelling at you, and threatening you, is that you have been ordered to remain in the car and not move, and you are doing the exact opposite.

The man had a gun pointed at him and three cops were all yelling different things.

And one of the cops was repeatedly telling him that he was going to kill him.

I suppose this would not have effected your judgement in any way.

 

[KeepTalking]

It is not a dodge, you just need to read more carefully. The underlined portion of my post strongly implies that my position is that it is when the officer feels he is in serious danger. My previous post made that even more clear, and I assumed you had read that post as well, as you had responded to it with your questions.

You forget one word. The officer must have a REASONABLE suspicion their life is in danger.

A person exiting a vehicle with their hands raised and visible does not represent a reasonable suspicion of imminent danger.

It is reasonable. Where there is one gun there can be more. When you have been forced away from the car by the car door opening, it is reasonable to assume that you will not have the same view of the passengers hands as the camera behind the car. When a felon has been convicted of firing a gun at one officer in the past, it is reasonable to assume he will be willing to fire at an officer again.

You can't count on it but you can wait one second to see if it is true. Especially when the person has both hands raised and visible.

That one second could be all it takes to turn the situation around if the suspect did have a gun. I will also note that the officer did wait for longer than a second for the suspect to comply after giving the order not to get out of the car. Additionally, we don't know how if the officer had complete view of the suspects hands, given that he was just pushed back from the car by the passenger who forced the door open. It is very likely the officer made the decision to shoot the second the passenger forced the door open, and it took him a few additional seconds after being forced back to regain his aim. At that point, he would have been less focused on the passengers hands, and more focused on his center mass.

What was this man with his hands raised and empty going to do in one second?

If he reached for something that would be one thing, but exiting a car with your hands raised is about the least dangerous thing a person can do.

I am not assuming that the officer could clearly see the passengers hands as he exited the vehicle.

 

[KeepTalking]

You may not be sure but the officer was sure.

“Show me your hands. Show me your f—— hands,” Days said, before quickly adding, “Get him out of the car, Rog[er Worley], we got a gun in his glove compartment.”

After the gun is retrieved, Days continued to yell at Reid. “I tell you, I’m going to shoot you,” he shouted. “You’re gonna be f—— dead. You reach for something, you’re going to be f—— dead.”

Reid then attempted to exit the vehicle with his hands raised, at which point Officer Days yelled, “Don’t you f—— move!” before he and Worley opened fire, discharging their weapons at least six times.

Okay, the officer was sure that he retrieved one gun from the car. That does not prevent the passenger from having another gun.

 

[ksen]

You may not be sure but the officer was sure.

Okay, the officer was sure that he retrieved one gun from the car. That does not prevent the passenger from having another gun.

It also doesn't prevent the passenger from having a unicorn either.

Thinking there might be another gun is not justification to shoot someone to death.