Followup on the Jonathan Ferrell shooting

[laughing dog]

Not to the victim it isn't. The Police are supposed to assess situations. They completely fucked up in the assessing a car accident had happened. That the person wasn't well.

They had no way of knowing about the car accident, that's not a fuck up.

It didn't happen on another planet or in another dimension, so yes it is a fuck up.

As for his being not well--being crazy doesn't give you a magic pass to hurt people.

He didn't hurt anyone else. Being a cop or a coward should give you a magic pass to kill people.

 

[ksen]

As for his being not well--being crazy doesn't give you a magic pass to hurt people.

I agree with Loren that Kerrick should be held accountable for his crimes. Crazy isn't a "get out of jail free" card after all.

 

[Arctish]

Not even the prosecution is advancing the theory that Little attacked Ferrell illegally.

I see what you did there.

You tacitly acknowledge Little attacked Ferrell but are acting as though the question is whether Little did it legally.

Little attempted to incapacitate Ferrell with a taser as Ferrell approached the cops seeking assistance. Ferrell saw Little aim and fire the weapon at him, dodged the taser barbs, and ran. We all can see it happen on the dash cam recording. The only question we are currently discussing is whether Ferrell's running was a continuation of Ferrell avoiding Little's attack or Ferrell attacking Kerrick.

You and Loren keep using that word "charging" to describe his running, implying that Ferrell was attacking Kerrick, even though you don't know where Kerrick was, you don't know if Ferrell knew, you don't know if Ferrell intended to encounter Kerrick as he ran, and the only reason you have to suppose it is because you want it to be true. You are imputing a motive to Ferrell without any evidence he ever possessed it.

All we know about Ferrell's motives is that he was trying to contact the police and get assistance following a bad car crash, and that he didn't want to be tased. Anything else you suppose he wanted to do is guesswork. I can't help buy notice that once again you are failing to champion the cause of "innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" in the case of a black man. You are more than willing to proclaim his guilt based on nothing but supposition and bullshit.

Whether or not he knew he was running toward Kerrick is unknown. You don't know if Ferrell could see Kerrick beyond the glare of the headlights, or had even noted Kerrick's presence as he approached Little and Neal for help. You keep trying to assign ill-intent to Ferrell, and it's pure bullshit.

It doesn't really matter if Ferrell had ill-intent. He is not on trial here.

Then it shouldn't matter if you simply say that Ferrell ran in Kerrick's direction, either knowing or unknowingly. And yet somehow it does, because you keep calling it charging, thereby implying it was an attack.

What matters is what Kerrick thought was happening and he saw a large man, a burglary suspect, charging at him after an unsuccessful tasing attempt

I agree. The question here is whether Kerrick's actions were understandable, reasonable, and correct, or incomprehensible, unreasonable, and/or wrong.

and after he ignored repeated commands to get down.

Those commands all came after Ferrell was running away from the cop who fired a taser at him, not before. Also, we don't actually know if Ferrell ignored them. He had very little chance to respond, it was dark, and Kerrick's impressions were affected by Kerrick's alarm. For all we know, Ferrell might have slowed down in order to comply, which allowed Kerrick to get in a couple of good shots and knock him to his hands and knees.

In that situation it was reasonable to shoot to neutralize the threat.

Perhaps. Or perhaps Kerrick panicked, which is understandable but not reasonable. And he definitely didn't follow procedure, but Little didn't either and Kerrick testified he was following Little's lead.

Why does there have to be a bad guy?

Same question I posed earlier.

Yes, and I keep asking it in the hopes you will answer it. Why do you keep making Ferrell out to be the bad guy? Why do you insist he was charging Kerrick, not merely running away from Little?

A man seeking help from the cops was killed by them, and another man has had his life upended and his mind traumatized. The fact Kerrick and Ferrell had such a close encounter that Ferrell's DNA got on Kerrick's gun as Kerrick unloaded into him at point blank range was a terrible misfortune for them both.

So you agree that Kerrick is not guilty of manslaughter?

I think Kerrick panicked. I said so in the first thread. Since then, after reading about what Kerrick said on the stand, I'm even more certain of it.

Kerrick said he was following Little's lead. When he saw Little try to tase Ferrell he assumed Little had seen something to justify it. When Ferrell ran toward him, Kerrick was startled. He didn't know the taser had missed; he thought Ferrell shrugged it off or something. Kerrick also said he thought he had only fired 5-6 times, and he thought his bullets were ineffective.

It sounds to me like a fear response. Not malicious, not intentional, but nevertheless an unjustified homicide aka involuntary manslaughter.

 

[Arctish]

What is this, the Random Dumbass Standard?

"If it's okay for some random dumbass to do [x] then it's okay for a trained professional to do it, too" is not how we judge the job performance of police officers. Police are held to a higher standard than average citizens because they are entrusted with powers that exceed those of average citizens. They are trained how to respond to all sorts of situations, including dangerous ones. They are required to adhere to their training and established procedures, and they are not allowed act like some random dumbass whenever they feel like it.

The world doesn't work the way you want it to. The police may have more options and are better able to evaluate the situation but the fact remains they can shoot in any situation a civilian can shoot.

Professionals are held to a higher standard than average citizens.

It doesn't much matter if the world works that way. That's how it's done here in the USA.

Police officers are empowered to act in ways that are illegal for average citizens, but they are also required to follow established procedures and act in accordance with their training and the law. They are more constrained in some ways, and less constrained in others. The Random Dumbass Standard does not apply to them or how they perform of their duties.

Of course it shows Ferrell fleeing. He fled the taser barbs by dodging to his right, and then continued fleeing by running.

Fix your calendar. It's not 1984. Ferrell is charging towards the cops. I can't see how you can imagine this to be fleeing.

Charging: to aggressively advance, to attack.

You can't imagine how Ferrell running away from Little could be anything other than an attack because you can't see how the cops are ever wrong. If some random dumbass could have shot Ferrell, then it's okay for a cop to do it, too, right?

Not to the victim it isn't. The Police are supposed to assess situations. They completely fucked up in the assessing a car accident had happened. That the person wasn't well.

They had no way of knowing about the car accident, that's not a fuck up.

As for his being not well--being crazy doesn't give you a magic pass to hurt people.

They were supposed to speak to the pedestrian and assess the situation. They were supposed to listen when he spoke to them. As long as he was calm and non-threatening, they were supposed to remain calm and non-threatening, too. They fucked up by failing to properly assess the situation and find out exactly what they were dealing with before deciding to deal with it by deploying a taser.

 

[Derec]

North Carolina policeman won't face retrial in fatal shooting of black man

 

[laughing dog]

Yet another police officer getting away with a pointless killing of another unarmed civilian. Wow.

 

[Derec]

Yet another police officer getting away with a pointless killing of another unarmed civilian. Wow.

Again: unarmed != not a threat.

 

[laughing dog]

Yet another police officer getting away with a pointless killing of another unarmed civilian. Wow.

Again: unarmed != not a threat.

Again, black != threat

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yet another police officer getting away with a pointless killing of another unarmed civilian. Wow.

Again: unarmed != not a threat.

Yes, we've been through this. However, there is no evidence to suggest he posed a threat until after an officer attempted to taser him.

The officers went into a situation with one thing in mind (a person trying to break into a home, help homeowner!). Some officer upon arrival should have at least asked the question, "If his guy is trying to break into homes, why in the fuck is he casually walking towards us?"

Had that happened, it is likely Ferrell would still be alive. Instead, they didn't ask any questions, continued on with their primary assumptions, didn't actually assess the situation, and now we have another body that can be tossed on the pile of victims of policemen who aren't thinking in the field. And you don't give a fuck.

 

[Derec]

Again: unarmed != not a threat.

Yes, we've been through this. However, there is no evidence to suggest he posed a threat until after an officer attempted to taser him.

The officers went into a situation with one thing in mind (a person trying to break into a home, help homeowner!). Some officer upon arrival should have at least asked the question, "If his guy is trying to break into homes, why in the fuck is he casually walking towards us?"

Had that happened, it is likely Ferrell would still be alive. Instead, they didn't ask any questions, continued on with their primary assumptions, didn't actually assess the situation, and now we have another body that can be tossed on the pile of victims of policemen who aren't thinking in the field. And you don't give a fuck.

All of what you are saying is arguing that Little improperly discharged a taser. Nothing in what you wrote even attempts to argue that Kerrick acted improperly when he shot at the charging Ferrell. Note that Kerrick had to retreat and ended up in a ditch because Ferrell would not stop advancing. Not for the taser, not for the commands to get down, not even after first shots were fired.

 

[laughing dog]

Yes, we've been through this. However, there is no evidence to suggest he posed a threat until after an officer attempted to taser him.

The officers went into a situation with one thing in mind (a person trying to break into a home, help homeowner!). Some officer upon arrival should have at least asked the question, "If his guy is trying to break into homes, why in the fuck is he casually walking towards us?"

Had that happened, it is likely Ferrell would still be alive. Instead, they didn't ask any questions, continued on with their primary assumptions, didn't actually assess the situation, and now we have another body that can be tossed on the pile of victims of policemen who aren't thinking in the field. And you don't give a fuck.

All of what you are saying is arguing that Little improperly discharged a taser. Nothing in what you wrote even attempts to argue that Kerrick acted improperly when he shot at the charging Ferrell. Note that Kerrick had to retreat and ended up in a ditch because Ferrell would not stop advancing. Not for the taser, not for the commands to get down, not even after first shots were fired.

To most people familiar with minimal reading comprehension skills would know that "the officers" includes Kerrick which means Jimmy Higgins is arguing that Kerrick and the other officers acted improperly.

Nothing you have shown or argued shows that Kerrick had to retreat. Certainly nothing in evidence now indicates that anyone had to retreat since Ferrell was not attacking anyone but seeking help.

 

[Arctish]

Yes, we've been through this. However, there is no evidence to suggest he posed a threat until after an officer attempted to taser him.

The officers went into a situation with one thing in mind (a person trying to break into a home, help homeowner!). Some officer upon arrival should have at least asked the question, "If his guy is trying to break into homes, why in the fuck is he casually walking towards us?"

Had that happened, it is likely Ferrell would still be alive. Instead, they didn't ask any questions, continued on with their primary assumptions, didn't actually assess the situation, and now we have another body that can be tossed on the pile of victims of policemen who aren't thinking in the field. And you don't give a fuck.

All of what you are saying is arguing that Little improperly discharged a taser. Nothing Everything in what you wrote even attempts to argue that Kerrick acted improperly when he shot at the charging Ferrell as he ran away from Little's attack. Note that [I presume] Kerrick had to retreat and ended up in a ditch because [I presume] Ferrell would not stop advancing running away from the taser attack. Not for the taser, not for the commands to get down, not even after first shots were fired Kerrick shot him and he was on his hands and knees.

FYP

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yes, we've been through this. However, there is no evidence to suggest he posed a threat until after an officer attempted to taser him.

The officers went into a situation with one thing in mind (a person trying to break into a home, help homeowner!). Some officer upon arrival should have at least asked the question, "If his guy is trying to break into homes, why in the fuck is he casually walking towards us?"

Had that happened, it is likely Ferrell would still be alive. Instead, they didn't ask any questions, continued on with their primary assumptions, didn't actually assess the situation, and now we have another body that can be tossed on the pile of victims of policemen who aren't thinking in the field. And you don't give a fuck.

All of what you are saying is arguing that Little improperly discharged a taser. Nothing in what you wrote even attempts to argue that Kerrick acted improperly when he shot at the charging Ferrell. Note that Kerrick had to retreat and ended up in a ditch because Ferrell would not stop advancing. Not for the taser, not for the commands to get down, not even after first shots were fired.

That is a bald face inaccuracy. You he didn't stopped "advancing", not for the taser. He was slowly, calmly walking towards the officers... who typically show up after car accidents. He charges after the taser attempt.

I don't get it. An officer assaulted him. You want to ignore that. Or you want to justify whatever happened to Ferrell afterwards because of Ferrell's reaction to the assault. My point was clear. If someone just asked the question, why is this dangerous burglar coming down to talk to us, they could have eased off, shook the guys hand and no one gets killed. What is with people like you wanting to justify killings over technicalities.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

All of what you are saying is arguing that Little improperly discharged a taser. Nothing in what you wrote even attempts to argue that Kerrick acted improperly when he shot at the charging Ferrell. Note that Kerrick had to retreat and ended up in a ditch because Ferrell would not stop advancing. Not for the taser, not for the commands to get down, not even after first shots were fired.

That is a bald face inaccuracy. You he didn't stopped "advancing", not for the taser. He was slowly, calmly walking towards the officers... who typically show up after car accidents. He charges after the taser attempt.

I don't get it. An officer assaulted him. You want to ignore that. Or you want to justify whatever happened to Ferrell afterwards because of Ferrell's reaction to the assault. My point was clear. If someone just asked the question, why is this dangerous burglar coming down to talk to us, they could have eased off, shook the guys hand and no one gets killed. What is with people like you wanting to justify killings over technicalities.

We don't know if he was doing it calmly, the video doesn't show that. His attorney has been proven to be lying about what happened and we don't have the other side of the story other than this video.

 

[laughing dog]

That is a bald face inaccuracy. You he didn't stopped "advancing", not for the taser. He was slowly, calmly walking towards the officers... who typically show up after car accidents. He charges after the taser attempt.

I don't get it. An officer assaulted him. You want to ignore that. Or you want to justify whatever happened to Ferrell afterwards because of Ferrell's reaction to the assault. My point was clear. If someone just asked the question, why is this dangerous burglar coming down to talk to us, they could have eased off, shook the guys hand and no one gets killed. What is with people like you wanting to justify killings over technicalities.

We don't know if he was doing it calmly, the video doesn't show that. His attorney has been proven to be lying about what happened and we don't have the other side of the story other than this video.

The video also does not show Ferrell "charging" anyone, despite your repeated claims to the contrary. Does that mean you have been lying about what happened or simply mistaken?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We don't know if he was doing it calmly, the video doesn't show that. His attorney has been proven to be lying about what happened and we don't have the other side of the story other than this video.

The video also does not show Ferrell "charging" anyone, despite your repeated claims to the contrary. Does that mean you have been lying about what happened or simply mistaken?

He charged after the taser failed.

We are seeing the same thing we see all too often--someone who comes from a culture where you don't back down and they behave the same when confronting the police.

 

[RavenSky]

The video also does not show Ferrell "charging" anyone, despite your repeated claims to the contrary. Does that mean you have been lying about what happened or simply mistaken?

He charged after the taser failed.

We are seeing the same thing we see all too often--someone who comes from a culture where you don't back down and they behave the same when confronting the police.

what "culture" is that Loren?

 

[laughing dog]

The video also does not show Ferrell "charging" anyone, despite your repeated claims to the contrary. Does that mean you have been lying about what happened or simply mistaken?

He charged after the taser failed.

Where on the video does it show that?

We are seeing the same thing we see all too often--someone who comes from a culture where you don't back down and they behave the same when confronting the police.

I am seeing the same thing that we see all to often on this board - someone who comes from a culture where you don't substantiate your claims of fact and behave as if your assumptions about reality are necessarily true.