At somebody in his grannys backyard armed with a iphone.
Cop in America doing a bad job, again
- Thread starter Sigma
- Start date
That's not an excuse. They incorrectly thought he had a gun and continued shooting after he was down. Its not rocket science to see that this was both wrong and excessive.
Lots of people got that one all wrong in the aftermath despite the actual evidence being fairly clear.
Indeed
It's important to note that these cops had no idea it was his granny's home. They also have to take into account that an 'armed' suspect is behaving erratically in a residential neighbourhood.
There seems to be a narrative being painted that we had Mother Theresa shot going to Sunday School.
A sheriff's helicopter spotted a man at 9:25 p.m. in a nearby backyard and told officers on the ground that he had shattered a window using a tool bar, run to the front of that house, and then looked in an adjacent car.
Police added that Clark had used either a concrete block or an aluminum gutter railing to break a sliding glass door one house adjacent to where he was shot, and that they believed Clark had broken windows from at least three vehicles in the area.
Police added that Clark had used either a concrete block or an aluminum gutter railing to break a sliding glass door one house adjacent to where he was shot, and that they believed Clark had broken windows from at least three vehicles in the area.
It appears Clark was the suspect they were looking for and he behaved highly suspiciously and irrationally. Doesn't mean he deserved to be shot or die but its all part of the big picture.
He also had a good reason to run:
Clark had a criminal history, four cases in four years that included charges of robbery, pimping, and domestic abuse. Sacramento County court files show he pleaded no contest to reduced charges, spent time on a sheriff's work detail and was on probation for the 2014 robbery when he was killed.
Last edited:
Whether he was a choirboy or a 22 year old father of two with a spotty past is all irrelevant when it comes to whether or not he should've been shot to death.
Right, so they empty their clip at him? One of those bullets could well have hit someone behind the next fence... it being a residential area doesn't exactly make indiscriminately firing 20 bullets in his general direction much better.
No one is disputing that. However the cops where doing thing by the book. They said they thought he had a gun and the video confirms that. What happened in the last couple of seconds is no fully known. Hopefully lessons will be learnt on both sides and his life is not lost in vain.
They said he had a gun doesn't mean he actually had a gun. Just because they made the wrong call doesn't excuse the logic behind why they got it wrong, and it certainly doesn't excuse firing 20 rounds at an unarmed suspect.
Cops wouldn't have been aware of his record. The Meadowview area is quite a troublesome neighbourhood. I used to live not far from there in Land Park.
His record is somewhat irrelevant but it explains his behavior. Bottom line is the cops had to make a split second life threatening call. In this instance it was wrong, hindsight is wonderful.
Know the area pretty well. I used to work off of Folsom and Watt in 2015.
Not sure what the answer is. Maybe they should have more dog units in the area. In the Clark incident would the helicopter lighting him up change the outcome.
The cops obviously had eyes on the suspect by way of the helicopter, so rather than the foot patrol immediately engaging with deadly force, they should've tracked the suspect and tried to arrest him. We know that he was unarmed, so that would've been the right approach. If they tried to arrest him and he charged them, then deadly force would've been authorized. The cops unnecessarily created the circumstances that led to them having to shoot the suspect rather than deescalate by talking to him.
South Sac is not the best place. When I was Ubering I'd turn off the app if I ended up down there and head back to downtown. I wouldn't be surprised if cops were less worried about letting rounds fly because of the location.
What if he was armed and he opened the slider to that house and it ended in a deadly hostage situation?
What if he was carrying a massive dildo and a bag of chicken McNuggets ?
Let's stick to what he was actually carrying without inventing alternate realities.
You have to assume that these cops genuinely feared for their lives. I can't imagine that they would want to open up considering the implications of shooting a suspect in those circumstances.
I don't disagree with that. My point is that it was their self-generated security dilemma that created the conditions for them to use deadly force. In a nutshell, they were scared and decided to shoot him to justify their own fears of getting shot - nevermind their not having evidence he was armed.
It's bad decisions all round. Nobody will be satisfied by the outcome of this 6 months down the road.
Classic victim blaming. The same argument lawyers would use to convince the jury in someway to say, “he had it coming”.Why should his past matter in any case.
I understand you are trying to argue that the cops did everything by the “book”. But incidents like these happening other week really begs the question whether the “book” needs change and certainly it does. Officers trained to shoot at even the slightest of movement are nothing but cowards and shouldn’t be in the force in first place.It’s just an easy excuse to cry “fear”.
It doesn't matter. Nor does that fact he was shot in his grannies garden. And a lawyer can't usually interject his past record in a trail. That is just for the judge to consider when sentencing.
I agree with all of that. Every incident should be investigated. Keep what works and change the training/procedures when things are flawed.
After I watched the video I understand now why they shot him after all they are looking for someone and he run away, everything dark around the house -must be because the crazy electricity rates tgey have in California. Idon’ t understand why he ran from them and why he didnt said anything.
The new footage of Sterling's arrest is a tough watch.
Not sure if it's the right thread, but just came across this:
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/30/...ly-excused-of-murder-released-trnd/index.html
It's the story about Richard Philips who's spent 45 years wrongfully in prison. What's almost as staggering is that already in 2010 his co-defendant told a parole board that he had lied when he was arrested and that Philips was innocent. Despite this knowledge it took four years until someone tipped off the Innocense Clinic and after that four more years before Philips was finally acquitted. Now that he's free he can potentially get a maximum of 2.250.000 usd in reparations.
Imagine spending 45 years in prison for something that you didn't do and learning that a parole board didn't act on it when they heard of your innocense eight years ago. And that spending 45 years in prison is only worth 2.250.00 usd.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/30/...ly-excused-of-murder-released-trnd/index.html
It's the story about Richard Philips who's spent 45 years wrongfully in prison. What's almost as staggering is that already in 2010 his co-defendant told a parole board that he had lied when he was arrested and that Philips was innocent. Despite this knowledge it took four years until someone tipped off the Innocense Clinic and after that four more years before Philips was finally acquitted. Now that he's free he can potentially get a maximum of 2.250.000 usd in reparations.
Imagine spending 45 years in prison for something that you didn't do and learning that a parole board didn't act on it when they heard of your innocense eight years ago. And that spending 45 years in prison is only worth 2.250.00 usd.
Is this ICE a criminal organisation or what?
Its just an acronym for Immigration & Customs Enforcement.
That is horrific, poor guy. His entire adult life wasted sitting in prison based on the testimony of a lying criminal. Wonder why the other guy even bother lying. He said he didn't know Philips, why the hell drag a totally innocent guy into the mix.
He should definitely go after the prison system and parole board for not immediately escalating the situation in 2010.
yes
It was posted a couple of times already. I think this is far worse than the Clark case. It was broad daylight and the guy had his shorts around his ankle. It was very obvious he was unharmed. What sort of pussies are some of these cops when they can't use a baton to subdue an unharmed aggressor. Surely they have enough training to take care of themselves in those situations. Pulling a firearm and shooting should be an absolute last resort when you seriously fear for your life.
If you feel like getting irrationally angry at someone, here's a nice quote from Antonin Scalia about innocence and punishment:
This was the context: Writing that "[t]his court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is ‘actually’ innocent," Justice Scalia opposed reviewing the innocence claim presented by Troy Davis (In re Davis) after 7 eyewitnesses had recanted their testimony.
Full article about his bloothirstiness: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ration_scalia_s_embarrassing_question_is.html
BBC Editorial on the Baltimore cops
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/when_cops_become_robbers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/when_cops_become_robbers
It's always easy to say this when the person who's dead has absolutely nothing to do with you. And besides I don't know what you're trying to insinuate here. Even though he knew they were cops and a helicopter was overhead, I still don't see the need for the police to take his life away.