Closing your garage door is now an executable offense in America

[laughing dog]

That links agrees the garage door was closing and the police fired through the closing garage door. Why oh why did not you focus on that closing door? Hmmm.

But according to the OP article

When officers knocked on his front door, Hill opened the garage door, saw the police, and began closing it again. At that point one of the deputies opened fire through the door, striking him twice in the body and once in the head. Police later found an unloaded gun in his back pocket, and determined his BAC had been nearly five times over the legal limit.

So, if that is true, then the claims of the police are pretty hard to believe.

And yet the jury who sat through many hours of trial did not have a hard time believing it.

We have no idea what the jury believed about the claims of the police. For all we know, once they heard he was drunk, that was it.

What evidence do you have that they did not receive (or properly consider) that weights your internet opinion above that of the jury's?

I said it was hard to believe. I did not say it was impossible.

 

[laughing dog]

Um, the OP link is a from a Gawker-type site with an obvious bias. The link I posted from was from the local news station. Which of the two articles do you think is from direct sources and which is simply meant to inflame?

Irrelevant to the issue of the facts. As anyone who was interested in the facts would know. Do you have any reports that contradict the "gawker" report?

Both sources report that the garage door was closing and that an officer fired through the closing door and killed the suspect. There is no report by any source that the victim fired through the garage door. In fact, there is no report that the suspect pointed anything towards the police. One would think that information would lead to the reasonable conclusion that this victim was not a threat to anyone but himself. Or are you arguing the police fired to save that man from injuring himself?

Why do you assume no threat?

No assumption. The police did not report he aimed his weapon. And they fired through a closing door.

This guy had a long rap sheet and was going back to jail if he survived. (Probation, felon in possession.) He responded to the police by going for cover, not surrendering or disarming.

Your conjectures reflect on your state of mind, not the facts of the case. There is simply no way for you to know that he was going for cover.

 

[Derec]

No, she did not shoot her son. S

She didn't have to shoot him herself to be the causal agent. She precipitated the situation, she escalated the situation, and it was in her sole power to deescalate the situation by surrendering.

No, it is not. And if they tried for 6 hours, then it is not obvious she was still threatening them.

She still had the shotgun ready to fire. That's a threat. What were the police supposed to do? Just let her go?

Your factual basis for this claim is....?

The factual basis is that the family did not suffer $37 million in damages. It's a completely made up amount unrelated to any actual damages. Not even her side claims that the family was actually damaged to the tune of $37 million.

That is your opinion, it is not a fact.

It is a fact. There was no rational or factual basis. It's basically an impressionable jury and a lawyer skilled in manipulating them.
Do you have any arguments arguing that the verdict was right? Or are you just gainsaying everything I say as a reflex?

Your basis for this is....?

Every single article on the pro-Korryn Gaines site published since her death. The entire case has been racialized since the beginning!

 

[Derec]

No assumption. The police did not report he aimed his weapon. And they fired through a closing door.

That doesn't matter. He closed the door and obviously that door provides no cover. So he concealed himself in possession of a gun upon seeing the police and they could not see where the hell he was aiming, if anywhere. Remember: if they could shoot him, he could have shot them just as easily.

Your conjectures reflect on your state of mind, not the facts of the case. There is simply no way for you to know that he was going for cover.

Technically concealment, but what do you think he was doing?

 

[Patooka]

It's almost certainly a deliberate insult. The jury didn't like the case.

- - - Updated - - -

He had a gun on his own property. The police officer who shot him said he had the gun out but it may have been found in his pocket. Either way, it was his property, his garage. And he went to close the garage door after having opened it. I posted about this in the black privilege thread because we have people who will say it was black privilege for the family to receive $4 while not looking at the event holistically.

Gun plus BAC approaching .4. Doesn't matter if it's your own property, that's still not legal.

Really? Under what law? It's not unlawful to be drunk in your own home in Florida, is it? It's not unlawful to be in possession of a gun in your own home in Florida, is it? Is there a specific Florida or Federal statute that prohibits handling your own gun on your own property while intoxicated? If so, please provide a link.

Bilby, seriously. You should know better by now.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Really? Under what law? It's not unlawful to be drunk in your own home in Florida, is it? It's not unlawful to be in possession of a gun in your own home in Florida, is it? Is there a specific Florida or Federal statute that prohibits handling your own gun on your own property while intoxicated? If so, please provide a link.

Bilby, seriously. You should know better by now.

In florida you can't be drunk and discharging your weapon or are ready to discharge your weapon

https://blog.uslawshield.com/more-about-guns-and-alcohol-in-florida/

 

[Jarhyn]

Really? Under what law? It's not unlawful to be drunk in your own home in Florida, is it? It's not unlawful to be in possession of a gun in your own home in Florida, is it? Is there a specific Florida or Federal statute that prohibits handling your own gun on your own property while intoxicated? If so, please provide a link.

Bilby, seriously. You should know better by now.

In florida you can't be drunk and discharging your weapon or are ready to discharge your weapon

https://blog.uslawshield.com/more-about-guns-and-alcohol-in-florida/

It's a good thing he wasn't, then. Well, good in the sense he was being ethical, but unfortunate too... if his gun had actually been loaded and in his hands such that he was ready to discharge it, he might have ended up at least taking one of those corrupt pieces of shit with him.

His gun was unloaded in his pocket. The conflicting reports just lend ambiguity to the issue, and we already see at least two, maybe more posters here, who are willing to decide that him being drunk, (black), and having a gun at all are enough justification for shooting him dead, let alone a Florida jury.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Wait, so if carrying a loaded gun while under any kind of influence at all from controlled substances is a legal issue, then where were all these people against this poor guy, when George Zimmerman was carrying a gun while under Adderall and Temazepam for his mental conditions?

 

[laughing dog]

She didn't have to shoot him herself to be the causal agent. She precipitated the situation, she escalated the situation, and it was in her sole power to deescalate the situation by surrendering.

And it is was in the sole power of the police to not shoot her or her son. No one forced the police to shoot anyone. No one was in imminent danger. The police choose to shoot.

She still had the shotgun ready to fire. That's a threat. What were the police supposed to do? Just let her go?

The police did not know she had the shotgun ready to fire and neither to do you. She was not going anywhere. Apparently you are arguing that it is okay to shoot people because you are tired to waiting.

Your factual basis for this claim is....?

The factual basis is that the family did not suffer $37 million in damages. It's a completely made up amount unrelated to any actual damages. Not even her side claims that the family was actually damaged to the tune of $37 million.

It is a fact. There was no rational or factual basis. It's basically an impressionable jury and a lawyer skilled in manipulating them.

You confuse your biased opinion with fact. You did not sit and watch the trial, so you have no idea what happened.

Do you have any arguments arguing that the verdict was right? Or are you just gainsaying everything I say as a reflex?

Other than the fact that the police ignored their own protocol, that no one was in imminent danger, and the woman was killed and her 5 year old son was shot, no, I don't.

Every single article on the pro-Korryn Gaines site published since her death. The entire case has been racialized since the beginning!

In other words, you have no evidence to support your claim.

 

[laughing dog]

No assumption. The police did not report he aimed his weapon. And they fired through a closing door.

That doesn't matter....

Of course it matters. A civilized society should not permit executions based on what someone might do.

Technically concealment, but what do you think he was doing?

I have no idea. Maybe in his drunken state, he thought closing the door would make them go away. Regardless, he was no imminent threat.

 

[ronburgundy]

Nor the 99% responsibility.

Nor how being drunk inside of one's own house is a contributing factor to being shot to death. This "defense" is meant to be used when people sue manufacturers or businesses for negligence when its really their own stupid drunk ass that caused then to slip & fall.

Being drunk and closing his garage door did not contribute to a cop shooting him.

Closing the garage door on the police after being told to drop his weapon (and also not dropping it) is 99% of the reason he was shot according to the jury. The jury believed it was only 1% the fault of the cop. In other words, the cops actions were essentially 1% legally negligent given what happened per the jury.

Right, so the jury was filled with people who think people who close a door on a cop (and therefore are clearly not an imminent threat) deserve to be killed for being disrespectful.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Of course it matters. A civilized society should not permit executions based on what someone might do.

Technically concealment, but what do you think he was doing?

I have no idea. Maybe in his drunken state, he thought closing the door would make them go away. Regardless, he was no imminent threat.

Agreed. Now lets look at what was potentially at risk. Were there any children in the garage? Were there other people in the garage? Gasoline cans, propane tanks? Stuff that would be put in imminent risk from blind bullets going through the garage door?

- - - Updated - - -

Really? Under what law? It's not unlawful to be drunk in your own home in Florida, is it? It's not unlawful to be in possession of a gun in your own home in Florida, is it? Is there a specific Florida or Federal statute that prohibits handling your own gun on your own property while intoxicated? If so, please provide a link.

Bilby, seriously. You should know better by now.

In florida you can't be drunk and discharging your weapon or are ready to discharge your weapon

https://blog.uslawshield.com/more-about-guns-and-alcohol-in-florida/

Interesting. How could be ready to discharge an empty gun?

 

[southernhybrid]

I don't know why anyone still believes what the police say in regards to these unwarranted shootings. They've lost all credibility as far as I'm concerned. It's almost always shoot first, ask questions later. WTF! Then make up a story to cover your ass. Police officers do have a difficult job, but they need more training on how to deal with people who may be drunk, on drugs or mentally ill. There are better ways of dealing with them then simply killing them.

And, who the fuck calls the police to report loud music coming from a neighbor's garage at 3 PM on a Saturday!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't know why anyone still believes what the police say in regards to these unwarranted shootings. They've lost all credibility as far as I'm concerned. It's almost always shoot first, ask questions later. WTF! Then make up a story to cover your ass. Police officers do have a difficult job, but they need more training on how to deal with people who may be drunk, on drugs or mentally ill. There are better ways of dealing with them then simply killing them.

I would think the reaction incorrect, but at least understandable had the shooting occurred once the garage door started going up. But too shoot after it goes down?

And, who the fuck calls the police to report loud music coming from a neighbor's garage at 3 PM on a Saturday!

Can't say for the caller, but I know that my tolerance for the death penalty seemed to rise exponentially, regardless the time of day, when my infant daughter was asleep.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's almost certainly a deliberate insult. The jury didn't like the case.

- - - Updated - - -

He had a gun on his own property. The police officer who shot him said he had the gun out but it may have been found in his pocket. Either way, it was his property, his garage. And he went to close the garage door after having opened it. I posted about this in the black privilege thread because we have people who will say it was black privilege for the family to receive $4 while not looking at the event holistically.

Gun plus BAC approaching .4. Doesn't matter if it's your own property, that's still not legal.

Really? Under what law? It's not unlawful to be drunk in your own home in Florida, is it? It's not unlawful to be in possession of a gun in your own home in Florida, is it? Is there a specific Florida or Federal statute that prohibits handling your own gun on your own property while intoxicated? If so, please provide a link.

It's not illegal to be drunk.

It's not illegal to drive a car.

Does that mean it's legal to drive drunk?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Nor the 99% responsibility.

Nor how being drunk inside of one's own house is a contributing factor to being shot to death. This "defense" is meant to be used when people sue manufacturers or businesses for negligence when its really their own stupid drunk ass that caused then to slip & fall.

Being drunk and closing his garage door did not contribute to a cop shooting him.

The jury has a better picture than we do and certainly felt it was his own stupidity.

 

[Derec]

I don't know why anyone still believes what the police say in regards to these unwarranted shootings.

You are engaging in circular reasoning. You conclude the shooting is not warranted because you don't believe what the police say. And you don't believe what the police say because the shooting was unwarranted.

And, who the fuck calls the police to report loud music coming from a neighbor's garage at 3 PM on a Saturday!

Maybe she really hates the Drake.
And we do not know how loudly he was playing it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The police were there, responding to a noise complaint, to request of someone to keep noise down. The BAC was measured at autopsy, not any kind of knowledge by police at the time. Also irrelevant is the police record. Again, noise complaint. My nephew had one of those once because his band is loud. No one got shot.

Because he didn't point a gun at the cops. This guy opened the door with a gun in his hand. A very bad idea when it's the cops.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Nor the 99% responsibility.

Nor how being drunk inside of one's own house is a contributing factor to being shot to death. This "defense" is meant to be used when people sue manufacturers or businesses for negligence when its really their own stupid drunk ass that caused then to slip & fall.

Being drunk and closing his garage door did not contribute to a cop shooting him.

The jury has a better picture than we do and certainly felt it was his own stupidity.

Had the jury awarded the family $4 million, I doubt you'd be citing their judgment as gospel.

I'm curious at what point an officer feels he must shoot through a closed garage door to ensure his own safety.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Closing the garage door on the police after being told to drop his weapon (and also not dropping it) is 99% of the reason he was shot according to the jury.

1. The family says that is a false claim. The gun was found in his pocket after being shot in the head dead. How do you explain that?
2. Actually, the jury awarded each family member $1 for all the damages due to a black life lost. They then determined, incorrectly it looks like, the dead guy was 99% at fault, so they awarded 1% of the emotional and material damage to the family. So they gave them 4 cents.

Since we are being told that privilege is relative and so many families got $0, it means this is black privilege.

My guess:

He opened the door intending to scare off whoever was there griping about the noise. He saw the cops and had an "oh, shit!" moment, closed the door and put the gun away.

Less likely:

Someone in the house put the gun in his pocket afterwards.