I think some people, including the Justice department might have wanted it held until things quieted down (crowd control), and that the police went ahead and did so, may have been interpreted as them justifying their actions through character assassination, which could inflame the situation further. However, we do have the 4th estate, and people, in a broader viewing audience, want to know the whole story. It's a tricky balance to maintain.
Of course I get it from the family's perspective, as they are emotionally invested and its their child, not some nameless/faceless person. But not getting it from the media and people who aren't close family/friends of his though.
It seems like the issue is that they released the info on the same day as the cops name? Is that simply it?
In other words, had they waited a week or so after the release of the officers name, would that have been fine? Or did they not want the vid released ever?
The vid seems relevant to me but the timing of its release is debatable I suppose.
Really trying to understand this complaint, not making light of it.
-- Modified on 8/17/2014 4:55:06 PM
I think some people, including the Justice department might have wanted it held until things quieted down (crowd control), and that the police went ahead and did so, may have been interpreted as them justifying their actions through character assassination, which could inflame the situation further. However, we do have the 4th estate, and people, in a broader viewing audience, want to know the whole story. It's a tricky balance to maintain.
In other words, they didn't take a pic off his social media page showing him giving the finger or smoking weed, something that obviously had nothing to do with the shooting and may have happened weeks/months/years ago.
But if he is on tape committing a felony on the same day as the shooting as he was, thats just info that is for public disclosure.
And yes, I agree, it is tricky as to when/how to release this type of info as you dont want to increase the burden on the teens grieving family.
At best, the video may have some relevance to the question of whether the officer had reasonable suspicion or probable cause for the initial stop. But the initial stop is not in question here. It was undisputed that the boys were jaywalking in the officer’s presence and he could stop and arrest them for this offense. But the officer could not use deadly force even if they disregarded his commands and attempted to run away.
Deadly force is permitted only if the officer has probable cause to believe his life was in danger or that the life of another was in danger and only if the risk was present when the deadly force was still applied. This is looking more and more like a bad shooting. Unless the boy grabbed the officer’s gun and that fatal shot was fired in immediate response to this, the shooting is a homicide. If the shot was fired after the boy raised his hands, the officer is a goner.
Since the video is not relevant to the use of deadly force, all the video does is smear the boy and make him look like a thug. Or suppose a woman is raped. The police release info that she is a prostitute. Relevance? The family is justifiably outraged
Isnt it news worthy, regardless of the death? The police said that their attorney stated they had to release the vid due to a FOIA request. Is that valid?
And isn't the police side of this, at least what has been leaked, so take that fwiw, that there was a struggle INSIDE the car and the shooting took place there? Seems like forensics/autopsy would clear this up fairly fast I would think.
But you and I know the cop is not going to say he murdered this kid. The cop has injuries (I have heard) which would seem to suggest there was a fight which would/could point to a justifiable shooting.
One other thing. Doesnt the theft/video go to the the decedents state of mind at the time of his arrest? In other words, he knew earlier in the day that he committed a felony, then the police show up while he is J-walking. Isnt it entirely plausible that the kid thought he was being approached for the theft, got desperate, and attacked the officer, leading the cop to use deadly force?
Of course this is all theory/speculation on my part, but if you could comment on the above I'd appreciate it.
immediate disclosure of evidence in an on-going police investigation.
Under the federal FOIA, that kind of evidence is exempt from disclosure. Under most state acts, you can get arrest records and incident reports but I did not think you could get the underlying evidence. The police would lose an important investigative tool if this can be disclosed. What usually happens is that the police release bits and pieces of the evidence to serve their own purposes.
So I think the state atty was wrong if he so advised this.
I suspect that the stealing of the cigars would be a misdemeanor, not a felony. Hence the officer could not even have arrested the boy for this without a warrant. But either way, I don’t see that the decedent’s state of mind is relevant to whether the shooting was a homicide. Too big a jump to say this supports the officer's version that he was attacked. Interesting idea though
I had also heard that the theft would have been a felony since he acted in an aggressive, threatening and hostile way toward the store owner instead of just stuffing a few cigars in his pocket and running out of the store but not 100% sure of that.
You said in an earlier post that you felt this was leaning towards being an unjustifiable shooting. What evidence/info are you hanging your hat on to come to that conclusion?
I still have no idea either way, but like I said, this cop isnt going to say he shot this kid in cold blood. He will proly say the kid reached into his car, a struggle ensued, the gun went off either by accident or b/c he felt if he didnt shoot, the teen would have had control of the gun and he felt his life was in jeopardy.
If the autopsy/forensics back the cop up, I think worst case he is looking at is a hung jury as the prosecutor will have no choice but to charge the cop if the witnesses hold up, which is never a sure thing.
Disagree?
I recall an incident that took place in Maryland. Where an unarmed man was shot by police. After trying to cash a bad check. Look it up, think it happened in the late nineties
then you will see what happens. Why is it that cops always shoot black kids?
Shop lifting is misdemeanor not a crime for capital punishment.
"If they ain't white; FUCK EM'! "
Shop lifting is misdemeanor not a crime for capital punishment.
is that we now know that while the officer may or may not have known about the robbery, the man who was shot sure the fuck did. so did his accomplice, whose narrative should be dismissed summarily.
How did the kid know the officer DIDN"T know?
How do we know if perhaps the man, thinking he was about to be arrested thought he could bum-rush the cop, and maybe even take his gun? Eyewitnesses suggest a struggle over the gun. Why did the man try to get the cops gun? To shoot him?
If a suspect (which at this point, he is AT LEAST a suspect in assault on, or the attempted murder of an officer) tries to rush an officer, is that officer justified is using lethal force in trying to stop the threat or do we expect officers to allow themselves to be bullrushed like 5'2" store clerks?
Clearly, any use of terms like MURDER or EXECUTION are being used despite insufficent evidence.
Are THESE comments the real "rush to judgement"? MSLSD seems to traffic a lot in this rhetoric.
-- Modified on 8/18/2014 10:22:20 AM
He was shot for Walking While Black. Remember that one...LOL While walking home from seeing his Grandmother!!!
-- Modified on 8/18/2014 7:01:57 PM