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

[Arctish]

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.

Riiiiight.

Americans have inalienable rights except when the cops decide to kill them, and the cops are always right. Being a child doesn't matter in the slightest if the IDF, the police, or Loren decided the kid had it coming.

 

[Frikki]

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.

Neckbeard not Red neck. I like Red necks.

 

[Frikki]

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

Riiiiight.

Americans have inalienable rights except when the cops decide to kill them, and the cops are always right. Being a child doesn't matter in the slightest if the IDF, the police, or Loren decided the kid had it coming.

And they tend to be brown the kids that Loren approves of killing.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

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.

Wrong. FAIL. You don't get shoot people because you are a trigger happy fool and then suffer no consequences. That badge isn't a double 0 designation.

 

[RavenSky]

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.

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.

. Tamir did not "draw on a cop". I find it horrifying that you think it is perfectly ok for a cop to shoot and kill someone without even knowing if it is the suspect and without even giving the person a chance to respond/comply.

I have zero doubt that the only reason you take that position is because you are certain that your age/race/station in life means that you will never be the innocent person killed by police.

 

[laughing dog]

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.

Rice was not drawing on a police officer. So what exactly is your point again?

- - - Updated - - -

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.

Sorry, but I will take the expert opinion of someone trained in the law (the judge) over your biased beliefs.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

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

Wrong. FAIL. You don't get shoot people because you are a trigger happy fool and then suffer no consequences. That badge isn't a double 0 designation.

Somebody tries to draw on you without provocation, you can defend yourself. Cop or not doesn't change this.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Wrong. FAIL. You don't get shoot people because you are a trigger happy fool and then suffer no consequences. That badge isn't a double 0 designation.

Somebody tries to draw on you without provocation, you can defend yourself. Cop or not doesn't change this.

Who drew on the officers?

 

[laughing dog]

Wrong. FAIL. You don't get shoot people because you are a trigger happy fool and then suffer no consequences. That badge isn't a double 0 designation.

Somebody tries to draw on you without provocation, you can defend yourself. Cop or not doesn't change this.

Since Rice did not draw on anyone, why do you keep babbling on about this?

Loehmann says that he told Rice to drop the gun 3 times. Disregarding the fact that no witness heard anyone say that, that means that Rice would have already had a gun out in his hand - which the video evidence rebuts. There was no gun in Rice's hand when he was shot, which means he had not drawn anything.

 

[Arctish]

Somebody tries to draw on you without provocation, you can defend yourself. Cop or not doesn't change this.

Since Rice did not draw on anyone, why do you keep babbling on about this?

Loehmann says that he told Rice to drop the gun 3 times. Disregarding the fact that no witness heard anyone say that, that means that Rice would have already had a gun out in his hand - which the video evidence rebuts. There was no gun in Rice's hand when he was shot, which means he had not drawn anything.

It also means that Loehmann's version of the events is completely untrustworthy.

First he said the gun was on a picnic table and Rice picked it up as officers approached. Now the claim is that Loehmann told Rice three times to drop the gun, even though no one heard him say it and there wasn't time between when he jumped out of the car and when he pulled the trigger for it to have happened that way. But even supposing Loehmann told Rice to drop it a fraction of a second before he pulled the trigger, how was the kid supposed to do that without his hands going to the vicinity of his waistband?

 

[Keith&Co.]

Somebody tries to draw on you without provocation, you can defend yourself. Cop or not doesn't change this.

Actually, it does. Cops have 'conditions of deadly force' that must be met before they can shoot. Meeting those conditions puts a burden on the cop before he can shoot.