Do I think he will go to jail? Most likely not based on the almost impossibility of hold LEO's to account for killing civilians. Should he go to jail? Absolutely.
Cop in America doing a bad job, again
- Thread starter Sigma
- Start date
Do I think he will go to jail? Most likely not based on the almost impossibility of hold LEO's to account for killing civilians. Should he go to jail? Absolutely.
Thanks for the clarification.
Ah, yes that's very true. Those people are "patriots"
You're right, they are absolutely not solely the GOP, although the first two are mostly the right-wing media and social amplified rhetoric.
sounds stupid right? Especially considering the fact that the whole thing started about a dispute over an ex-boyfriend stealing a social security check? Could it be possible there was a tweet with incorrect information and in fact it wasn’t a 15 year old boy that someone had described as a man in a race fueled stereotype?
The 15 years probably comes from it being that long ago and the person writing the tweet was mistaken.
I don't get it. Why would you ask the kid to put his hand up if as soon as he did you were going to piss your pants and shoot him dead? To me the officer ought to somehow get some punishment for shooting an unarmed kid. The parents are not going to accept an Oopsie my bad. Yes he shouldn't be running around with a gun in the middle of the night in the first place but he wasn't aiming it at them so thats no reason from him to be shot dead by the police.
Young 13 year old man. Christ. And you know it's not a mistake, he deliberately used the word man.
And on Hannity’s show, that abhorrent cnut Pam Bondi called Rittenhouse ‘a seventeen year old boy...’
https://meaww.com/sean-hannity-says...yle-rittenhouse-called-little-boy-on-his-show
This guy always manages to override my hate limit.
They do love their fever dream fairytales.
The video is literally there though. He can say all he wants wouldn't make it excusable, he's at fault for being trigger happy.
He could be discharged. It's not like jail time is the only punishment. I don't know what kind would really be appropriate, I'm certainly more sympathetic than what the parents would be, but the fact that a kid who surrendered gets to die and he gets to shoot another stupid kid the next day doesn't sit right with me.
This is the kind of video that people watch and prefer to run for dear life rather than surrender.
If only there was a video.
Zach was speaking truth 3 decades ago.
It’s hilarious when the predictable right wing outrage sprouts up occasionally decrying them as being ‘reactionary left wing political tropists.’
They’ve been rightfully saying this shit for almost as long as I’ve been alive.
Who's Zach?
Zack de la Rocha from RATM.
Again, he put his hand up as requested and was unarmed. The law allows deadly force in this situation ? Why would any criminal ever choose to surrender?
I don't know that bit. I expect that the cop will argue that he thought the kid was about to shoot him and didn't see him drop the weapon. I think until a suspect is cuffed and in control that they are allowed to use force on him.
Did the cop know he was unarmed though? The kid turned around to face the cop.
IMO another fault of the cop here is his orders. He should have clearly told the kid not to turn around so he could determine he was unarmed.
Freeze was always the command in cop shows. Wheeling around is easily interpreted as an aggressive motion, especially if you haven't clearly seen the weapon be discarded.
Yeah hands behind you head drop to your knees etc all the other stuff I see in the movies... But just shooting him in the process of him following your instruction is just poor and he gets to continue with his life like nothing happened.
Smacks exactly of the poor guy in the hotel hallway trying to comply with the psychopath cops screaming at him divergent orders while he was already on his knees, hands on his head, & facing them.
I agree that it's problematic for the cop, but it's at night, he's been running, adrenaline is pumping so there's that to consider. I just don't think there's enough to convict and it doesn't look to me like the cop intended to murder the kid. I think it's self-preservation and will be considered legally justified.
It's nothing like the kid in the hotel which was cold-blooded murder by a psychopath.
The lad was with someone who had shot at a car and also had a gun that he dropped a split moment before raising his hands, it’s all on video. It’s tragic to hear of a young lad losing his life but if you run around with a gun and hang around with people shooting at cars then you are putting yourself in mortal danger. It’s a messed up world when kids are running around with guns.
The police have an impossible job on their hands, he clearly made a mistake but I understand why he made it.
The police have an impossible job on their hands, he clearly made a mistake but I understand why he made it.
But, for me, the inability to accurately assess a threat by a cop is at the core of the unnecessary violent policing in this country. Sure, state of awareness is obviously heightened & a bit skewed at night after a foot chase with an armed perpetrator, but that still doesn’t absolve what we saw last night.
In neither scenario was the threat at the time of the shooting accurately assessed. There were obvious differences in each event, but the end result is the same.
Both cops will ultimately receive far less punishment than they should.
Cops have to do better, it as simple as that. It goes beyond racism, it’s the ‘everything looks like a hammer’ mentality. End qualified immunity, tie in reductions in federal funding due to inappropriately violent policing, reduce the militarization of the cops vis à vis equipment & mentality, & redirect some funding to more appropriate venues (mental health, youth outreach, gun buy back, etc.), we might start seeing some light at the end of the tunnel.
Actions have consequences as WI said, but the consequences for violent policing actions have been far too muted & facile to stem the true nature of this epidemic. The parameter of what’s legally justified for a cop kill needs to be radically altered.
I will always favor outcomes that see cops survive over criminals or nobody will do the job.
The problem is that people are getting killed over things that aren't deserving of death. The attitude of 'criminal bad, good dead now' means that these incidents will continue. This isn't an issue where the people should be taking a side. This is policing and it could be any of us in these situations; at a traffic stop, walking home at night, or in a shop suddenly subject to inappropriate levels of force and winding up dead. Everyone who's not a cop, and some that are, should be concerned and asking how can things be done better?
Agree. It was only a matter of time before George Floyd escaped and killed the policeman doing such a fine ass job
And Adam Toledo was definitely about to murder everyone has he followed the order to raise his hands
How exactly are you defining a 'criminal'? Jaywalkers are criminals.
How can someone be found to be a criminal in the eyes of the law, if they're not brought to court?
Imagine watching an unarmed 13 year old get shot and killed and that being your reaction.
I feel like if the job so frequently involves killing unarmed people over stuff that really doesn't matter a whole lot, then having nobody do the job doesn't sound so bad.
What’s considered frequent out of the 10 million-ish arrests made each year, and countless other interactions that don’t involve an arrest but another form of contact?
And how many of those arrests are both of the right person, and also for something the majority of people would deem worth worrying about? Or what about the perfectly safe arrests they could make but don't because the people are too rich or the crime is too complicated to bother solving? Maybe people amped up and armed to the teeth actually aren't the ones we should be employing to do the job by and large.
Of course you're right overall. What struck me about this one is that the person did exactly what he was told and got shot due to doing that. Surely that's either got to be a problem with the instructions given (which the police would be culpable for) or the instructions were correct and we're talking manslaughter or worse?
If you do what you're told and get shot for it how are people supposed to react?
So you didn’t actually have a good point then. Gotcha, my mistake.
Well thought out line of reasoning there.
That’s not how frequency works.
The instructions should have been clearer. And when giving them you should expect that they may not do EXACTLY what you’re asking. Pausing a video and playing it screen by screen shows clearly he was unarmed. At night with a strobe light flashing and a kid raising his arms and turning towards you who had a firearm is far from ideal circumstances to try and make a split second life or death decision. I don’t want to try and rip it all apart but In hindsight he probably should have slowed down at that point. He has time on his side now, there’s no reason to rush. Give slow deliberate commands and maybe use the environment, find cover (if possible) or have him put his hands on the wall and that way you give yourself time. Having him out his hands up is the norm, but when he turns at the same time raising his hand it creates that moment of doubt of what’s happening.
Again, not to say someone still shouldn’t be held accountable if things go wrong.