Cleveland Judge Finds Probable Cause to Charge Officers in Tamir Rice Death

[laughing dog]

If he had it tucked in his waistband the (realistic) handle would have been sticking out and the police would have had an idea what he was reaching for.

In less than 4 seconds in moving vehicle? Keep grasping at those straws to justify your biases.

 

[laughing dog]

On the other hand, there is a point of view on this thread that Tamir did nothing wrong whatsoever.

Nothing that merited his rapid execution.

 

[Arctish]

Yes he will be judged. And allowed to present a defense. The TIME article referenced above says something about Tamir reaching for the gun. If that can be substantiated there is a good chance they will walk on everything.

Do you have proof of this? Does the Times? NO?

Well?

I'm pretty sure the source is the shooter and his lawyer shyster.

You see, after the cop told Tamir Rice to put the gun down, Rice picked it up off the picnic table where it was lying, or maybe before that when the cops arrived and were walking toward him and saw the gun on the table, or was it in his waistband...? Something like that. Anyway, the cops told him three times to put the gun down while they were driving into the playground, but obviously Tamir wasn't supposed to use his hands because that would mean reaching for the gun in order to comply with the cop's commands which is a mistake. He was supposed to use his Magical Negro powers to levitate the gun off the table and out of his waistband, wherever it was, but he didn't so the cop had no choice but to shoot him in less than two seconds.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Trayvon Martin did NOTHING wrong either, but thanks for bringing up yet another example of you - Derec - continuing to malign and blame a black child in his own death at the hands of white men behaving badly with guns.

I referred back to that case because I can see the same insistence that "he did nothing wrong". Except beat up a stranger.

Tamir Rice didn't break any law. That is undoubtable. And seeing the officers were outside of their vehicle for 2 or so seconds, doesn't seem as if Rice had anytime to do "anything wrong" with respect to them.

And then after shooting him, did not offer any aid that may have saved his life.

 

[Frikki]

Why should I forgive you when you call me ignoble?

I was unaware that *might* constituted a clear and present danger, warranting immediate execution by a police officer who barely exited the vehicle before gunning down an unarmed child.

Actually the "mights" were reasons why he might not have been a danger. In addition to them being equivocal, they were not relayed to the police officers anyway.
As far as him being "unarmed", he certainly wasn't. Not from the perspective of the officers who did not have the benefit of hindsight. He was armed with a realistic looking pellet gun with orange tip removed.

As far as him being a "child", he was but again, the officers had no way of knowing that. He was 5'7" and 195 lbs which is more like an older teen or even an adult (George Zimmerman is about that size) than a 12 year old kid. Police officer should be judged on information they had at the time, not on hindsight.

You seemed to take such exception to the use of the word 'murder,' but since you now seem to prefer that, I will oblige you and hopefully so will a grand jury: the police officer murdered a child.

I disagree.

While it is refreshing to see you claim that the fact that Tamir Rice was black was not relevant. It would be more believable if the unarmed victims in such police shootings were not so often black.

There was also a case in Georgia of a white kid being killed by a female police officer at his doorstep because he was holding a Wii remote (much less like a gun than a realistic looking replica). No charges for the officer, no protests/riots and no widespread media coverage, because it does not fit into the politically correct "black lives matter" media narrative.

Or if you were not so quick to justify such shootings of unarmed victims, many of whom have committed NO criminal offense and who were of no danger to anyone.

I am not justifying this. I said police made mistakes but I do not think it was murder. This is similar to Freddy Grey case where some police officer did act wrongfully, but I there too think it's not a case of murder.
And it is dissimilar to Michael Brown and Tony "not Baldrick" Robinson cases, where I do think the shootings were justified and the prosecutors agreed.
As far as "no criminal offense" I do think brandishing a gun, even a realistic looking pellet gun, in public is illegal.

Ohio is an open carry state.

 

[Derec]

Did I say they were? If I didn't, what is your point? Other than to not under any circumstances say that that officer killed that boy.

It is not in dispute that the cop killed Tamir. So why do you keep harping on a fact not in dispute? Other than (and that's where omniscience comes in) to insinuate that the cops should have known that he was 12 and that the gun he had wasn't a real firearm.

Do you have proof of this? Does the Times? NO?
Well?

It is interesting that you demand absolute proof for any possibly exculpatory claim or piece of evidence, but you take any claim in favor of guilt at face value. But at trial, the burden of proof is going to be on the prosecution, not defense.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Why should I forgive you when you call me ignoble?

Actually the "mights" were reasons why he might not have been a danger. In addition to them being equivocal, they were not relayed to the police officers anyway.
As far as him being "unarmed", he certainly wasn't. Not from the perspective of the officers who did not have the benefit of hindsight. He was armed with a realistic looking pellet gun with orange tip removed.

As far as him being a "child", he was but again, the officers had no way of knowing that. He was 5'7" and 195 lbs which is more like an older teen or even an adult (George Zimmerman is about that size) than a 12 year old kid. Police officer should be judged on information they had at the time, not on hindsight.

You seemed to take such exception to the use of the word 'murder,' but since you now seem to prefer that, I will oblige you and hopefully so will a grand jury: the police officer murdered a child.

I disagree.

While it is refreshing to see you claim that the fact that Tamir Rice was black was not relevant. It would be more believable if the unarmed victims in such police shootings were not so often black.

There was also a case in Georgia of a white kid being killed by a female police officer at his doorstep because he was holding a Wii remote (much less like a gun than a realistic looking replica). No charges for the officer, no protests/riots and no widespread media coverage, because it does not fit into the politically correct "black lives matter" media narrative.

Or if you were not so quick to justify such shootings of unarmed victims, many of whom have committed NO criminal offense and who were of no danger to anyone.

I am not justifying this. I said police made mistakes but I do not think it was murder. This is similar to Freddy Grey case where some police officer did act wrongfully, but I there too think it's not a case of murder.
And it is dissimilar to Michael Brown and Tony "not Baldrick" Robinson cases, where I do think the shootings were justified and the prosecutors agreed.
As far as "no criminal offense" I do think brandishing a gun, even a realistic looking pellet gun, in public is illegal.

Ohio is an open carry state.

Conceal carry with a permit state, not open carry.

 

[RavenSky]

Why should I forgive you when you call me ignoble?

Actually the "mights" were reasons why he might not have been a danger. In addition to them being equivocal, they were not relayed to the police officers anyway.
As far as him being "unarmed", he certainly wasn't. Not from the perspective of the officers who did not have the benefit of hindsight. He was armed with a realistic looking pellet gun with orange tip removed.

As far as him being a "child", he was but again, the officers had no way of knowing that. He was 5'7" and 195 lbs which is more like an older teen or even an adult (George Zimmerman is about that size) than a 12 year old kid. Police officer should be judged on information they had at the time, not on hindsight.

You seemed to take such exception to the use of the word 'murder,' but since you now seem to prefer that, I will oblige you and hopefully so will a grand jury: the police officer murdered a child.

I disagree.

While it is refreshing to see you claim that the fact that Tamir Rice was black was not relevant. It would be more believable if the unarmed victims in such police shootings were not so often black.

There was also a case in Georgia of a white kid being killed by a female police officer at his doorstep because he was holding a Wii remote (much less like a gun than a realistic looking replica). No charges for the officer, no protests/riots and no widespread media coverage, because it does not fit into the politically correct "black lives matter" media narrative.

Or if you were not so quick to justify such shootings of unarmed victims, many of whom have committed NO criminal offense and who were of no danger to anyone.

I am not justifying this. I said police made mistakes but I do not think it was murder. This is similar to Freddy Grey case where some police officer did act wrongfully, but I there too think it's not a case of murder.
And it is dissimilar to Michael Brown and Tony "not Baldrick" Robinson cases, where I do think the shootings were justified and the prosecutors agreed.
As far as "no criminal offense" I do think brandishing a gun, even a realistic looking pellet gun, in public is illegal.

Ohio is an open carry state.

Conceal carry with a permit state, not open carry.

Incorrect. Ohio is "open carry" and the gun-nuts exercise this right with "open carry" visits to Walmart


So the question remains - in an open carry state - why did police shoot first, ask questions later just because (toy) gun?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Incorrect. Ohio is "open carry" and the gun-nuts exercise this right with "open carry" visits to Walmart

Holy fuck. You are right. Odd, you need a permit to conceal carry, but you are allowed to open carry. I've never seen a person open carry before in his state.

So the question remains - in an open carry state - why did police shoot first, ask questions later just because (toy) gun?

I think your question is misleading as it appears the officers in question never bothered to ever ask any questions.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

It is not in dispute that the cop killed Tamir. So why do you keep harping on a fact not in dispute? Other than (and that's where omniscience comes in) to insinuate that the cops should have known that he was 12 and that the gun he had wasn't a real firearm.

Do you have proof of this? Does the Times? NO?
Well?

It is interesting that you demand absolute proof for any possibly exculpatory claim or piece of evidence, but you take any claim in favor of guilt at face value. But at trial, the burden of proof is going to be on the prosecution, not defense.

I have not claimed guilt or innocence. I simply have stated that the officer killed the boy. I have not used the word murder, manslaughter or homicide. I have stated the facts of the case as we know them and not indulged in speculations about what might have happened.

Provide evidence that the police had time to assess the situation or that Tamir made any illegal action in the less that five seconds that it took to shoot him, and I will consider it. Provide evidence that the officers quickly went to the fallen boy's aid, and I will consider it. Provide the law the boy broke prompting a call for the police, and I will consider it.

Provide evidence that you have shown an ounce of compassion or consideration for the victim of this shooting, And I will consider that too.

 

[Toni]

It is not in dispute that the cop killed Tamir. So why do you keep harping on a fact not in dispute? Other than (and that's where omniscience comes in) to insinuate that the cops should have known that he was 12 and that the gun he had wasn't a real firearm.

Do you have proof of this? Does the Times? NO?
Well?

It is interesting that you demand absolute proof for any possibly exculpatory claim or piece of evidence, but you take any claim in favor of guilt at face value. But at trial, the burden of proof is going to be on the prosecution, not defense.

So the police respond to the report of someone waving a gun around. They are not given the information that he's probably a juvenile and probably the gun is a fake. They pull up along side an individual sitting in the gazebo and within 2 seconds they see the 'gun' in his waistband and kill him without even getting out of the vehicle. No witness can testify that they heard them instruct Tamir to show his hands. It took them two seconds to kill the child.

How did they even know they had the correct 'suspect?' How did they even see the toy gun which was in Tamir's waistband (making the presence or absence irrelevant since the tip was concealed)?

Or does that matter?

 

[RavenSky]

Holy fuck. You are right. Odd, you need a permit to conceal carry, but you are allowed to open carry. I've never seen a person open carry before in his state.

and yet, in Ohio, you need a concealed weapon permit in order to open carry in your car.

 

[Frikki]

Why should I forgive you when you call me ignoble?

Actually the "mights" were reasons why he might not have been a danger. In addition to them being equivocal, they were not relayed to the police officers anyway.
As far as him being "unarmed", he certainly wasn't. Not from the perspective of the officers who did not have the benefit of hindsight. He was armed with a realistic looking pellet gun with orange tip removed.

As far as him being a "child", he was but again, the officers had no way of knowing that. He was 5'7" and 195 lbs which is more like an older teen or even an adult (George Zimmerman is about that size) than a 12 year old kid. Police officer should be judged on information they had at the time, not on hindsight.

You seemed to take such exception to the use of the word 'murder,' but since you now seem to prefer that, I will oblige you and hopefully so will a grand jury: the police officer murdered a child.

I disagree.

While it is refreshing to see you claim that the fact that Tamir Rice was black was not relevant. It would be more believable if the unarmed victims in such police shootings were not so often black.

There was also a case in Georgia of a white kid being killed by a female police officer at his doorstep because he was holding a Wii remote (much less like a gun than a realistic looking replica). No charges for the officer, no protests/riots and no widespread media coverage, because it does not fit into the politically correct "black lives matter" media narrative.

Or if you were not so quick to justify such shootings of unarmed victims, many of whom have committed NO criminal offense and who were of no danger to anyone.

I am not justifying this. I said police made mistakes but I do not think it was murder. This is similar to Freddy Grey case where some police officer did act wrongfully, but I there too think it's not a case of murder.
And it is dissimilar to Michael Brown and Tony "not Baldrick" Robinson cases, where I do think the shootings were justified and the prosecutors agreed.
As far as "no criminal offense" I do think brandishing a gun, even a realistic looking pellet gun, in public is illegal.

Ohio is an open carry state.

Conceal carry with a permit state, not open carry.

According to Wiki it´s open carry also. Well not for black people obviously! Just for libertarian neck-beards inside Starbucks.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

According to Wiki it´s open carry also. Well not for black people obviously! Just for libertarian neck-beards inside Starbucks.

This was Cleveland though. No red necks. They live south of I-76 or east of the Summit County (Akron) border.

 

[Playball40]

I agree but in this context it is unfair to describe Tamir as a 12 year old boy as it was not known at the time of the shooting and while I am not unsympathetic, I question it's relevancy. At the time of the incident the officer's (still in training) knowledge of the situation was that of a black male with a gun. This is the information from dispatch at that point in time and his partner places him roughly six feet from this 195 lb male.
What type of motions did Tamir make at this point in time, the seconds before he was shot? Here is the latest story with the report. I haven't looked through the report but my understanding is only the rookie cop, Loehmann is witness to Tamir's movements between the cop car and the gazebo.
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/06/tamir_rice_investigation_relea.html#incart_maj-story-1

Tamir was 12

His actions are the actions of a 12 year old.

His actions were not given sufficient time to be anything other than being in the park.

The officers were both grown men and trained professional and I don't think them too fragile or precious to face the consequences of their actions.

I thought the 911 call even said he was a boy or teen. I could be misremembering though.

 

[Toni]

Tamir was 12

His actions are the actions of a 12 year old.

His actions were not given sufficient time to be anything other than being in the park.

The officers were both grown men and trained professional and I don't think them too fragile or precious to face the consequences of their actions.

I thought the 911 call even said he was a boy or teen. I could be misremembering though.

The call said it was probably a kid and the 'gun' was probably a fake. Those details were apparently not conveyed to the responding officers. I believe that omission has been documented.

- - - Updated - - -

According to Wiki it´s open carry also. Well not for black people obviously! Just for libertarian neck-beards inside Starbucks.

This was Cleveland though. No red necks. They live south of I-76 or east of the Summit County (Akron) border.

You've never been to Ohio, I take it. PLENTY of rednecks.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It means they are not omniscient.

Yes he will be judged. And allowed to present a defense. The TIME article referenced above says something about Tamir reaching for the gun. If that can be substantiated there is a good chance they will walk on everything.

Tamir Rice was allegedly reaching for something in his belt/pants. There is no way those officers had any idea what it was. Nor did they give Rice a chance to put his hand on anything. If this does go to trial, they had better hope they have a sympathetic jury.

If he was reaching for something near the gun, too bad. Justified shoot, there should be no consequences.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So the question remains - in an open carry state - why did police shoot first, ask questions later just because (toy) gun?

Open carry doesn't mean you draw on a cop. In any state drawing on a cop is liable to get you killed.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

According to Wiki it´s open carry also. Well not for black people obviously! Just for libertarian neck-beards inside Starbucks.

This was Cleveland though. No red necks. They live south of I-76 or east of the Summit County (Akron) border.

You've never been to Ohio, I take it. PLENTY of rednecks.

I live in Ohio and I explained where the red necks are.

- - - Updated - - -

So the question remains - in an open carry state - why did police shoot first, ask questions later just because (toy) gun?

Open carry doesn't mean you draw on a cop. In any state drawing on a cop is liable to get you killed.

Especially in Loren's state of mind, where any action is liable to get you killed by a cop.

 

[Toni]

According to Wiki it´s open carry also. Well not for black people obviously! Just for libertarian neck-beards inside Starbucks.

This was Cleveland though. No red necks. They live south of I-76 or east of the Summit County (Akron) border.

You've never been to Ohio, I take it. PLENTY of rednecks.

I live in Ohio and I explained where the red necks are.

OK but I work with someone from a whole big family of rednecks who live in Cleveland, OH. That's discounting the people I knew growing up.