Price Waterhouse analyst murdered in his home by police

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

If a white lady answered the door, would she have been killed? This isn't a rhetorical question. Though I think we may be dealing with probabilities and factors here, I'd like to hear your answer.

Next question is why the unnecessary killing? I mean, taking out a gun is one thing. Actually shooting to kill someone is something else.

Also, what was up with the pacing back and forth rather than applying emergency first aid? Is it because he was running away into the apartment when she shot him and thus the door closed after him? The police tend to shoot people, minorities included, when the victims are running away and we've seen this before. Do you think that is reasonable?

I have no statistics, but we've come across a lot of stories involving minorities running away and/or being shot in the back, even if unarmed.

And?

And can you answer the questions?

 

[ruby sparks]

I can't think of a good reason to. Pointless speculation not being one.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I can't think of a good reason to. Pointless speculation not being one.

You ought to be able to think of a good reason to. When examining a question of causes, it makes sense to experiment with controls and variables. In this case, you've asserted there is no good reason to consider race a factor. Therefore, after seeing other people in the thread pose this question, I've made race a variable and kept everything else constant, to examine how race relates to the outcome. Instead of participating in the analysis, you've completely broken down and declined to communicate in a forum where rational discussion is the purpose. So now that the question makes sense to you, do you think you can answer it now honestly? Thank you.

 

[ruby sparks]

I can't think of a good reason to. Pointless speculation not being one.

You ought to be able to think of a good reason to. When examining a question of causes, it makes sense to experiment with controls and variables. In this case, you've asserted there is no good reason to consider race a factor. Therefore, after seeing other people in the thread pose this question, I've made race a variable and kept everything else constant, to examine how race relates to the outcome. Instead of participating in the analysis, you've completely broken down and declined to communicate in a forum where rational discussion is the purpose. So now that the question makes sense to you, do you think you can answer it now honestly? Thank you.

Oh please. What's the point in this case?

Seems to me this is a case of 'black person shot' almost automatically raising the race issue. That's daft.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I can't think of a good reason to. Pointless speculation not being one.

You ought to be able to think of a good reason to. When examining a question of causes, it makes sense to experiment with controls and variables. In this case, you've asserted there is no good reason to consider race a factor. Therefore, after seeing other people in the thread pose this question, I've made race a variable and kept everything else constant, to examine how race relates to the outcome. Instead of participating in the analysis, you've completely broken down and declined to communicate in a forum where rational discussion is the purpose. So now that the question makes sense to you, do you think you can answer it now honestly? Thank you.

Oh please. What's the point in this case?

Seems to me this is a case of 'black person unnecessarily shot to death yet again by a police officer' almost automatically raising the race issue casts a big suspicion that race played a role. That's daft.

FIFY.

 

[ruby sparks]

When examining a question of causes, it makes sense to experiment with controls and variables.

Seems to me it makes more sense to wait for any more information that might suggest it was racial.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh please. What's the point in this case?

Seems to me this is a case of 'black person unnecessarily shot to death yet again by a police officer' almost automatically raising the race issue casts a big suspicion that race played a role. That's daft.

FIFY.

Thanks Don. Now bugger off and discuss this particular case hypothetically with someone else.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Seems to me it makes more sense to wait for any more information that might suggest it was racial.

- - - Updated - - -

FIFY.

Thanks Don. Now bugger off and discuss this particular case hypothetically with someone else.

Okay, don't answer the questions. You put yourself here in the thread, making claims. You are free to dodge questions or not.

 

[ruby sparks]

Okay, don't answer the questions. You put yourself here in the thread, making claims. You are free to dodge questions or not.

Yes. And you are free to completely waste your time speculating on a case where there is insufficient evidence (so far) that race was actually a factor. Once 'victim was black' becomes sufficient evidence, let me know. There's a thousand threads I can start for you.

That's my claim. That the victim being black is not enough of itself. And I'm happy with it.

On the upside yay to you (and Underseer) for showing certain posters here just how daft identity politics can get. They'll love you for it. It's why Trump got in, doncha kno.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Okay, don't answer the questions. You put yourself here in the thread, making claims. You are free to dodge questions or not.

Yes. And you are free to completely waste your time speculating on a case where there is insufficient evidence (so far) that race was actually a factor. Once 'victim was black' becomes sufficient evidence, let me know. There's a thousand threads I can start for you.

That's my claim. That the victim being black is not enough of itself. And I'm happy with it.

On the upside yay to you (and Underseer) for showing certain posters here just how daft identity politics can get. They'll love you for it. It's why Trump got in, doncha kno.

That personal garbage seems to be pointless.

Also, your argument is actually illogical. The criminal court case is NOT going to tell you that race played a factor in the shooter's head. She's obviously not a Nazi and so no question of this being a hate crime is going to be an issue in court.

Like others in the thread mentioned and I am merely repeating, race can be a factor regardless. Racism is a continuum. So is bias and belief in stereotypes. Awareness of this basic fact that racism is a continuum and plays a role in how we deal with each other creates positive change for society.

So I think zorq makes the point decently:

If the woman had seen a white female toddler dressed in a pink tutu behind the door would she have shot her?
If the woman had seen a geriatric grandfather with a 90 degree hunch, propped up with a cane, a beard down to the floor, would she have shot?

I think there are attributes that suspected intruders may possess that will contribute to the decision to shoot or not shoot. Don't you agree? Isn't it conceivable then that skin color might have been an attribute that contributed to this female officer shooting this suspected intruder?

It really isn't an enormous stretch. Racism exists.

You see, you are losing here because your fallacy is that of the excluded middle. People are either fair and not racist or they murder the subjects of their prejudice on sight? No. Racism like almost every human attribute exists on a spectrum. When you ignore this you inevitably misunderstand my point.

What is actually "daft" (your word) is to think that racism is an on-off switch with only the most extreme people in society having it flipped on. And that the middle, actually the most common kind of racism, participation in it, is difficult to measure, we may have to make statistical inferences, and do thinking exercises using Reason.

Dodging questions can be done that's fine, but you are not going to get your answers from where you are looking--more witness based evidence or the criminal court trial.

 

[ruby sparks]

...race can be a factor regardless. Racism is a continuum. So is bias and belief in stereotypes. Awareness of this basic fact that racism is a continuum and plays a role in how we deal with each other creates positive change for society.

Have a gold star for restating the bleedin' obvious and something I would not contest.

Now, in the absence of any further relevant information, and for extra credits, see if you can work out just where 'race might have been at least some sort of a factor' is going to get you in deciding how much if any part it actually played in this particular case?

Have fun with that. Do general probabilities or something. That'll nail it.

 

[TV and credit cards]

She's startled.
It's dark inside and she's stumbling toward this stranger.
Her training has her instinctively pull her gun.
She shoots him.

I have no reason to believe she simply seen it as an opportunity to shoot a black man.

Because it just seems so fucking reasonable otherwise, right?
Great training.

Our point is that if the person had been a kid - no shot likely.
If the person had been a woman, no shot likely.
If the person had been a white man, dressed the same way - no shot likely.

Her background has "trained" her to believe that black men are dangerous.

That. Is the problem.

Her training is to quickly identify and react appropriately. She failed. But if it played out as in my scenario, cop or no cop, this is not manslaughter. It is an accident.
IF she believes black men are dangerous, media and particularly the entertainment industry trained her to believe that.
But let's not be like the folks in the Heavy article and be calling for her head on a pike two days after the incident.

So, she's tired, she walks up, gets off on the floor below by mistake. She's new to the complex, attempts to unlock her door. She jiggles the key and handle in frustration. Victim who was winding down for the evening had the lights off and was watching TV or on the internet. There's only the light of the monitor (This is my typical scene at 10PM). He hears the jiggling of the door lock and handle, goes to the door. Her hand is on the door handle. Maybe she gets pulled off balance and forward when he opens the door. She's startled. Her eyes are adjusted to the well lit hallway. It's dark inside and she's stumbling toward this stranger in her apartment. Her training has her instinctively pull her gun. They are very close to one another during this exchange. She shoots him.

I have no reason to believe she simply seen it as an opportunity to shoot a black man.

I also have no reason to believe that. It doesn't seem like she was in the apartment. Did you read the link?*

Yes, I read the link. It was 70% a write up for sainthood for the victim, sprinkled with unvetted witness accounts and tweets by average people. I think my scenario is still a valid one. Particularly important is if the lights were off inside the apartment. Then she is in a well lit hallway (eyes adjusted to the lights) looking into her dark apartment at a silhouette of a full grown man.
But we'll see. We hear something and paint a picture in our mind of what is happening. All possibilities need to be considered. For example, if you're sitting in your apartment and hear tap tap tap, tap tap tap. You think it's someone knocking on the neighbor's door knocker. But then you hear it a few more times. Curious about the person's persistence, you go to look out your peephole. It's a maintenance man working on the door. He's tapping the hinge pins out.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Her training is to quickly identify and react appropriately. She failed. But if it played out as in my scenario, cop or no cop, this is not manslaughter. It is an accident.
IF she believes black men are dangerous, media and particularly the entertainment industry trained her to believe that.
But let's not be like the folks in the Heavy article and be calling for her head on a pike two days after the incident.

I agree that media helps to reinforce such stereotypes but it's not only media. It's also people. Lots of them. Anyway, I am not calling for her head. In fact, I don't think I have enough information for a specific charge, though I do think eventually I would. You have to be able to know recklessness vs intent vs alcohol use etc. We don't know exactly what happened, just that at a minimum the killing was unnecessary which is something, but not categorized properly legally.

So, she's tired, she walks up, gets off on the floor below by mistake. She's new to the complex, attempts to unlock her door. She jiggles the key and handle in frustration. Victim who was winding down for the evening had the lights off and was watching TV or on the internet. There's only the light of the monitor (This is my typical scene at 10PM). He hears the jiggling of the door lock and handle, goes to the door. Her hand is on the door handle. Maybe she gets pulled off balance and forward when he opens the door. She's startled. Her eyes are adjusted to the well lit hallway. It's dark inside and she's stumbling toward this stranger in her apartment. Her training has her instinctively pull her gun. They are very close to one another during this exchange. She shoots him.

I have no reason to believe she simply seen it as an opportunity to shoot a black man.

I also have no reason to believe that. It doesn't seem like she was in the apartment. Did you read the link?*

Yes, I read the link. It was 70% a write up for sainthood for the victim, sprinkled with unvetted witness accounts and tweets by average people. I think my scenario is still a valid one. Particularly important is if the lights were off inside the apartment. Then she is in a well lit hallway (eyes adjusted to the lights) looking into her dark apartment at a silhouette of a full grown man.

Light spreads out. The moment he is opening the door, light is shining in. He is taller than her and so she can see his face clearly. The light she was in while fiddling with the door is approximately the same light as in the doorway in intensity. It isn't that different until many feet down the hallway in the victim's apartment. I understand we do not know the full scenario yet but I don't think we should conceive of doorways as dark when they have light being shined in. From the link, I don't think she ever even entered the apartment either. Maybe I am wrong.

But we'll see. We hear something and paint a picture in our mind of what is happening. All possibilities need to be considered. For example, if you're sitting in your apartment and hear tap tap tap, tap tap tap. You think it's someone knocking on the neighbor's door knocker. But then you hear it a few more times. Curious about the person's persistence, you go to look out your peephole. It's a maintenance man working on the door. He's tapping the hinge pins out.

Sure.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I agree that media helps to reinforce such stereotypes but it's not only media. It's also people. Lots of them.

That strikes me as a bit of a distinction without a difference. People just like bogeymen, "the media" fills that need for some.

Answer your door and get shot to death by a cop. What is wrong with this picture? Got nothing to do with "the media."

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I agree that media helps to reinforce such stereotypes but it's not only media. It's also people. Lots of them.

That strikes me as a bit of a distinction without a difference. People just like bogeymen, "the media" fills that need for some.

True.

Answer your door and get shot to death by a cop. What is wrong with this picture? Got nothing to do with "the media."

Not in the immediate sense as it is a bit indirect, etc. Also, along the way, we are each responsible for being fooled and media-ed at. That said, how to separate one's self from a culturally prevalent idea and its tentacles is difficult for some or maybe most, myself included.

 

[Toni]

Her training is to quickly identify and react appropriately. She failed. But if it played out as in my scenario, cop or no cop, this is not manslaughter. It is an accident.
IF she believes black men are dangerous, media and particularly the entertainment industry trained her to believe that.
But let's not be like the folks in the Heavy article and be calling for her head on a pike two days after the incident.

So, she's tired, she walks up, gets off on the floor below by mistake. She's new to the complex, attempts to unlock her door. She jiggles the key and handle in frustration. Victim who was winding down for the evening had the lights off and was watching TV or on the internet. There's only the light of the monitor (This is my typical scene at 10PM). He hears the jiggling of the door lock and handle, goes to the door. Her hand is on the door handle. Maybe she gets pulled off balance and forward when he opens the door. She's startled. Her eyes are adjusted to the well lit hallway. It's dark inside and she's stumbling toward this stranger in her apartment. Her training has her instinctively pull her gun. They are very close to one another during this exchange. She shoots him.

I have no reason to believe she simply seen it as an opportunity to shoot a black man.

I also have no reason to believe that. It doesn't seem like she was in the apartment. Did you read the link?*

Yes, I read the link. It was 70% a write up for sainthood for the victim, sprinkled with unvetted witness accounts and tweets by average people. I think my scenario is still a valid one. Particularly important is if the lights were off inside the apartment. Then she is in a well lit hallway (eyes adjusted to the lights) looking into her dark apartment at a silhouette of a full grown man.
But we'll see. We hear something and paint a picture in our mind of what is happening. All possibilities need to be considered. For example, if you're sitting in your apartment and hear tap tap tap, tap tap tap. You think it's someone knocking on the neighbor's door knocker. But then you hear it a few more times. Curious about the person's persistence, you go to look out your peephole. It's a maintenance man working on the door. He's tapping the hinge pins out.

If she was more threatened because she saw a black man, it isn't just media who trained her to believe that black males are dangerous. It's likely her department as well.

I can easily buy that she was confused because she was tired and new to the complex rather than drunk or drugged or mentally ill. She may have also been pumped on adrenaline because she just came off shift. That does not justify in any way the fact that she shot a man in his own apartment who opened his door to help whoever was standing in the hall.

It is almost impossible for me to believe that she did not perceive the person who opened the door as a greater threat because he was a black male vs a white female, an elderly person of any gender, a child or even a white male. Suppose the person who opened the door were Channing Tatum? I doubt she would have shot him.

The man who was shot seems to have been a very good human being. Frankly, it does not matter if he were a drug dealing, meth cooking low life. He opened the door to his own apartment in order to help whoever seemed to be struggling and he was shot dead. By a cop who was still armed after her shift.

 

[ruby sparks]

If she was more threatened because she saw a black man, it isn't just media who trained her to believe that black males are dangerous. It's likely her department as well.

I can easily buy that she was confused because she was tired and new to the complex rather than drunk or drugged or mentally ill. She may have also been pumped on adrenaline because she just came off shift. That does not justify in any way the fact that she shot a man in his own apartment who opened his door to help whoever was standing in the hall.

It is almost impossible for me to believe that she did not perceive the person who opened the door as a greater threat because he was a black male vs a white female, an elderly person of any gender, a child or even a white male. Suppose the person who opened the door were Channing Tatum? I doubt she would have shot him.

The man who was shot seems to have been a very good human being. Frankly, it does not matter if he were a drug dealing, meth cooking low life. He opened the door to his own apartment in order to help whoever seemed to be struggling and he was shot dead. By a cop who was still armed after her shift.

Temporarily assuming she saw enough of his characteristics clearly enough before shooting........

All other things being equal (eg his bodily movements for example, her state of mind, what was said, etc) there would, I think, be distinctions to be made between issues such as sex/gender, age, race, size etc. (of the tragic victim). The accuracy or otherwise of stereotypes would not necessarily be equal for all of them. Take for instance meeting a typical adult male versus a small girl or frail elderly woman when the door to what you thought was your apartment opened.

The other general issue is the routine arming of police and the tendency for US Police to resort to shooting more readily, it seems, than police in many (most? all?) other 'western' countries.

 

[dismal]

If she was more threatened because she saw a black man, it isn't just media who trained her to believe that black males are dangerous. It's likely her department as well.

I can easily buy that she was confused because she was tired and new to the complex rather than drunk or drugged or mentally ill. She may have also been pumped on adrenaline because she just came off shift. That does not justify in any way the fact that she shot a man in his own apartment who opened his door to help whoever was standing in the hall.

It is almost impossible for me to believe that she did not perceive the person who opened the door as a greater threat because he was a black male vs a white female, an elderly person of any gender, a child or even a white male. Suppose the person who opened the door were Channing Tatum? I doubt she would have shot him.

The man who was shot seems to have been a very good human being. Frankly, it does not matter if he were a drug dealing, meth cooking low life. He opened the door to his own apartment in order to help whoever seemed to be struggling and he was shot dead. By a cop who was still armed after her shift.

Temporarily assuming she saw enough of his characteristics clearly enough before shooting........

All other things being equal (eg his bodily movements for example, her state of mind, what was said, etc) there would, I think, be distinctions to be made between issues such as sex/gender, age, race, size etc. (of the tragic victim). The accuracy or otherwise of stereotypes would not necessarily be equal for all of them. Take for instance a typical adult male versus a small girl.

The other general issue is the routine arming of police and the tendency for US Police to resort to shooting more readily, it seems, than police in many (most? all?) other 'western' countries.

Assuming the facts turn out as currently reported, this was a woman in (what she thought) was her apartment with an unknown stranger at night. The fact she was a police officer is largely irrelevant. She was not acting in the capacity of a police officer.

The reality is if she had been inside her own apartment this would be a non-story. The reaction, if we ever heard about it at all, would be "looks like this dude picked the wrong woman to prey upon". The #metoo crowd would probably hold her up for some sort of empowered female of the week award.

The unique and tragic thing is that she was not in her own apartment. She made a mistake that destroyed her life and his.

The normal human reaction is to wonder how she could have made that mistake. When I talk about this with normal people at work or in public that's what they talk about.

But unfortunately there is a disgusting element who must shoehorn a tragic incident into their "white cops love to shoot black people" narrative. They've never met this woman, but they can be sure she's a racist without any evident to suggest it because it helps their narrative.

 

[jladam]

It seems to me that there are a lot of people here who are extremely angry about people bringing up the race angle to this shooting. However, being angry that an innocent person was unnecessarily shot to death by a person, off-duty cop or otherwise, who to all appearances was clearly overreacting? Not so much.

 

[Toni]

If she was more threatened because she saw a black man, it isn't just media who trained her to believe that black males are dangerous. It's likely her department as well.

I can easily buy that she was confused because she was tired and new to the complex rather than drunk or drugged or mentally ill. She may have also been pumped on adrenaline because she just came off shift. That does not justify in any way the fact that she shot a man in his own apartment who opened his door to help whoever was standing in the hall.

It is almost impossible for me to believe that she did not perceive the person who opened the door as a greater threat because he was a black male vs a white female, an elderly person of any gender, a child or even a white male. Suppose the person who opened the door were Channing Tatum? I doubt she would have shot him.

The man who was shot seems to have been a very good human being. Frankly, it does not matter if he were a drug dealing, meth cooking low life. He opened the door to his own apartment in order to help whoever seemed to be struggling and he was shot dead. By a cop who was still armed after her shift.

Temporarily assuming she saw enough of his characteristics clearly enough before shooting........

All other things being equal (eg his bodily movements for example, her state of mind, what was said, etc) there would, I think, be distinctions to be made between issues such as sex/gender, age, race, size etc. (of the tragic victim). The accuracy or otherwise of stereotypes would not necessarily be equal for all of them. Take for instance a typical adult male versus a small girl.

The other general issue is the routine arming of police and the tendency for US Police to resort to shooting more readily, it seems, than police in many (most? all?) other 'western' countries.

Assuming the facts turn out as currently reported, this was a woman in (what she thought) was her apartment with an unknown stranger at night. The fact she was a police officer is largely irrelevant. She was not acting in the capacity of a police officer.

The reality is if she had been inside her own apartment this would be a non-story. The reaction, if we ever heard about it at all, would be "looks like this dude picked the wrong woman to prey upon". The #metoo crowd would probably hold her up for some sort of empowered female of the week award.

The unique and tragic thing is that she was not in her own apartment. She made a mistake that destroyed her life and his.

The normal human reaction is to wonder how she could have made that mistake. When I talk about this with normal people at work or in public that's what they talk about.

But unfortunately there is a disgusting element who must shoehorn a tragic incident into their "white cops love to shoot black people" narrative. They've never met this woman, but they can be sure she's a racist without any evident to suggest it because it helps their narrative.

Assuming that the facts are as reported: she was not in any apartment at all. She was trying to open to her own apartment but she made an honest mistake. Fair enough: could happen to anyone.

The actual resident of the apartment hears someone struggling to open a door and opens the door to offer assistance.

The woman who was in the wrong place immediately assumed that she was under attack and fired her weapon, killing the lawful resident who opened his door to help a stranger.

That she was a police officer matters. Most other people would not be armed, for one thing. Additionally, much has been made of the fact that she was just coming off a full shift. I assume most of us work full shifts routinely or have done so. I assume most of us have had terrible days at work and are ending our day over tired and in need of some dinner and a bit of relaxation. I doubt that any of us are primed or armed to shoot any perceived threat on sight.

Why are police officers trained to shoot at any perceived threat? There are other options. We’ve all read far too many stories of police offers shooting unarmed victims, including unarmed children, within seconds of encountering them. Black people of all ages, from children to elderly, male, female, are killed by police on a daily basis for simply existing. Playing in a park or opening the door to your own apartment is somehow sufficiently threatening to warrant nearly instantaneous death at the hands of police officers who are sworn to serve and protect others—not themselves.

There are explanations for this shooting but these are not justifications.

Wh

 

[Sue Sponte]

I will offer a simple observation about how these cases with shootings in America, particularly involving police, play out.

This is a sad, simple story. A man in his own abode, through no fault of his own, just living his life and doing nothing wrong, was shot and killed. That should never happen. It isn't complicated.

The discussion of these issues, even here on a freethought blog where logic and reason vary significantly from other settings, principally shifts to trying to explain, solely from the perspective of the shooter, why this may or may not have been an excusable event. Did the shooter have some tenable reason to feel a threat, regardless of the perspective of the victim? That is the metric American society has allowed to be applied.

It should be simple. You can't shoot people who have done nothing wrong. You are an obvious societal risk who takes a life when not needed. We as society should demand that you account for the life you took.

But that's not how it works.

At a bare minimum, this is manslaughter. The shooter negligently attempted to enter the wrong apartment. Her genuine belief that she was not wrong as to whose apartment it was may show she did not act with intent, but doesn't excuse the negligence which created the event. At best, it was a negligent taking of life due to the shooter's failure to reasonably determine the apartment was not her own.

Yet the discussion will all turn on whether her killing should be excused. "She didn't know." "It was a mistake." "He scared her." Goodness forbid anyone actually care that a guy minding his own business at home was needlessly killed.