Chicago Cop Indicted For 1st Degree Murder......

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

At least you finally showed yourself crowing over a pile of shit. Fucking retard.

You sound jealous.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You sound jealous.

Are you? Whackoff needs a WK to help him out.

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Get you some booty, Shit Baller...

Mebbe assup, woomby , Ekim and the rest of the lyin liberal reach around crew can have some of these same " peaceful protesters " over for Thanksgiving " and tea and crumpets ! Let woomby, et.al. , house them feed them, provide health care and all of their other needs out of HIS earnings from his "work " down at the 'holes and his "winnings " from the DOTY award ! HE can sure up his daily quota of ropey load facials that way ! He can teach them a trade, like dingleberry picking, to help them get started here !

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Are you? Whackoff needs a WK to help him out.

Hardly, and if I were inclined to be jealous it certainly would be about you!

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

Mebbe assup, woomby , Ekim and the rest of the lyin liberal reach around crew can have some of these same " peaceful protesters " over for Thanksgiving " and tea and crumpets ....

Training for them in anticipation of the Syrian Refugee Tent City next door!

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Hardly, and if I were inclined to be jealous it certainly would be about you!

I can see why you would be jealous about me lexie.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

It wouldn't be such a bad thing if later this shooting is justified. I am just concerned about the number of shots that were fired after the suspect went down and was no longer a threat. Below is a Dash cam video of a Seattle Police Officer shooting a knife wielding suspect. Notice how the suspect rushes hard at the Officer. The Officer retreats just to draw his weapon and get some distance and fires THREE fatal shots. To me this is a text book shooting. Skip the beginning if you want and just go to 1.20 about the time the altercation begins.

Jim

https://youtu.be/6g3oPgJYeDU

That (your point) does seem to be the essence of the issue. I agree that the exact number of shots does not matter. The issue is repeatedly shooting after the suspect is no longer a threat. But then we know a few of the true Wackos on here would be perfectly willing to use certain people as trussed up target dummies. Tongue, Whacked out Kid, to name a couple.

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by Old-T

That (your point) does seem to be the essence of the issue. I agree that the exact number of shots does not matter. The issue is repeatedly shooting after the suspect is no longer a threat. But then we know a few of the true Wackos on here would be perfectly willing to use certain people as trussed up target dummies. Tongue, Whacked out Kid, to name a couple.

That's where your wrong , Old Thumper. As a conservative, I believe in the conservation of lots of things, including ammo rounds. That's why myself and other's practice our version of " gun control " to be able to place a double tap accurately and effectively. So that we'll have more ammo for later use on the muzzies and the lying liberals that support and WK for them. And all of the targets I take to the range with odummer and Shrillary's ugly mugs on them MORE than pay for my target rounds and range fees with a little " adult beverage " money on the side ! They sell out quick, just like all of YOU liberals do !

[DSK]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

"Double tapping" in center mass is the standard for police shooting and depending on the training it should be instinctive firing. It's not a "hesitation" for assessment purposes, but in the process it should be visibly apparent that the threat is neutralized when the person is going down, particularly with a knife. Training goes out the window sometimes in live-fire situations ... and few officers who have fired multiple rounds know how many they fired.

Years back there was an incident with Houston PD on a traffic stop from a "chase" (pursuit) in which when the driver finally stopped he emerged from the vehicle holding something that was believed to be a weapon in front of a number of officers in the chase ... my recollection is 50+ shell casings were counted on the ground at the scene. What amazed me was that no onlookers/passersby were reportedly hit ... since it was on the freeway and he was "stopped" on the inside lane.

If a bystander was hit accidentally, is the officer criminally culpable?

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I see my comment from yesterday didn't make it....so here we go again.

The video is pretty damning but the trial will go something like this;

Prosecutor: Why did you shoot 16 times?
Cop 1: I felt my life was in danger so I fired until I thought the danger was over.

Prosecutor: Why DIDN'T you fire?
Cops 2, 3, and 4: We didn't feel our lives were in danger.
or
Cops 2, 3, and 4: We also felt our lives were in danger.
Prosecutor: So why didn't you fire?

Well, according to the latest news reports that I've read there were no other shots fired by other cops. This cop was also reloading which means he emptied his weapon and still didn't think he did the job (something really wrong with that). If watch the video, the knife wielding idiot went down with the first exchange. He was not getting any closer so where was the threat.

[CuteOldGuy]

There are reports that the cop had a long history of complaints and cost the PD lots of money in settlements. He shouldn't have been on the force. He deserves his day in court, as does any accused. I don't think First Degree Murder will stick, but I predict he will be doing time. Lots of time. And he should. The guy is a brutal idiot. If you want to defend law enforcement, don't hang your hat on this guy. There are good cops out there. This guy isn't one of them.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by DSK

If a bystander was hit accidentally, is the officer criminally culpable?

Theoretically yes. Self-defense or defense of another party only allows the use of force against the person using or threatening the use of force for which the defense is addressed. I say "theoretically" because they are culpable, but whether they get charged will be another matter. Unfortunately the standard definition of murder does not require the intent to kill the individual actually killed, and the lesser included offenses don't either.

That is why decision making and "shoot-don't shoot training, as well as weapon and ammunition choices are relevant and critical. That is also why I believe the "customary" concealed carry training is inadequate.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

This cop was also reloading which means he emptied his weapon and still didn't think he did the job (something really wrong with that).

That is not a good "assumption" or "presumption."

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

There are reports that the cop had a long history of complaints and cost the PD lots of money in settlements. He shouldn't have been on the force. He deserves his day in court, as does any accused. I don't think First Degree Murder will stick, but I predict he will be doing time. Lots of time. And he should. The guy is a brutal idiot. If you want to defend law enforcement, don't hang your hat on this guy. There are good cops out there. This guy isn't one of them.

I don't see anyone "defending" this guy other than his attorney, who had revealed some additional information that was not provided by the media, and that is not the first time the public has experienced a media bias.

Case in point: "The guy is a brutal idiot" and "his guy isn't one of them"!

Based on the media "reports" you have convicted him, but you want to say:

"He deserves his day in court, as does any accused."

You keep saying like others: "There are REPORTS"! ... In the media! And then you draw your CONCLUSION.

[DSK]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Theoretically yes. Self-defense or defense of another party only allows the use of force against the person using or threatening the use of force for which the defense is addressed. I say "theoretically" because they are culpable, but whether they get charged will be another matter. Unfortunately the standard definition of murder does not require the intent to kill the individual actually killed, and the lesser included offenses don't either.

That is why decision making and "shoot-don't shoot training, as well as weapon and ammunition choices are relevant and critical. That is also why I believe the "customary" concealed carry training is inadequate.

Thanks for your response. Tough to be a cop these days. They really need a good intermediate non-lethal response.