Jump to content

Dash cam footage of Chicago shoot....


Recommended Posts

3: He was hit after he hit the ground... that's BULLSHIT and while the first shot was legit the one on the ground was a unjustified. Pre-meditated doesn't seem likely. 

 

I read (don't know if it's true), that over half of the 16 shots fired, were when he was on the ground.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the video and after initially hearing the story my thought was that the cop fucked up from the 5 second news clip I did see. Unless you know what happened, start to finish it's just an opinion. I can say my brother had 33 years on the force before he retired and PCP is a bad deal. Several stories about someone on the drug taking on multiple people with pepper spray and tasers not having much effect. Another story dealing with the use of an ASP (he preferred a baton) was that he trained to break bones with a single hit and put an end to the situation quickly. Multiple hits are easily documented to look like you were just beating on someone to inflict pain (police abuse). I think the same applies to things like this. One kill shot to the head, or a double tap is much easier to defend against than dumping your entire mag. 16 shots is going to be hard to justify. Shortly after the Brown deal in Ferguson, city coppers shot a man with a knife-in that case he told me that deadly force was justified because it's been proven that ia person with a knife 20 feet away can get to you before you can draw your weapon.

Edited by 6500rpm
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

3: He was hit after he hit the ground... that's BULLSHIT and while the first shot was legit the one on the ground was a unjustified. Pre-meditated doesn't seem likely.

I read (don't know if it's true), that over half of the 16 shots fired, were when he was on the ground.

I couldn't tell that from the video, but I could clearly see at least once shot exciting and ricochet off the road behind the fallen suspect.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of what happened at this moment, he made a series of poor decisions that put him there. Not doing PCP would have been a great idea and staying home or at least off of the street while on PCP would have been an even better idea.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, and I do believe deadly force was appropriate just maybe not in so much quantity once he was down, THOSE OFFICERS did not shoot him only THAT ONE that is being charged with murder. If they were in so much fear of their lives more than one would have likely fired. That is what will bring this guy down on charges. Not that he used deadly force but the number of shots and lack of support from other officers shows his willingness to fire on the assailant

Edited by VR6Shooter
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Officer charged with Murder yesterday. 16 shots fired. I don't recall if he was hit with all 16 or not.

 

 

 

All 16 confirmed body shots from autopsy. He wont get first degree but they'll make an example of him. Biggest issue is even with assailant having a weapon and refusing orders no other officer on scene but that one fired any shots (AKA he was the racist one)

 

Yep, I just came across the autopsy diagram of the shots.

 

attachicon.gif2015-11-19-08_20_49-Capture.png

What are the recovery marks?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

At common law, the fleeing felon rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight. Force may be used by the victim, bystanders, or police officers. According to David Caplan "Immediate stopping of the fleeing felon, whether actually or presumably dangerous, was deemed absolutely necessary for the security of the people in a free state, and for maintaining the "public security." ... " Indeed, it has been said that the social policy of the common law in this matter was not only to threaten dangerous felons and hence deter them, but was also to induce them to "surrender peaceably" if they dared commit inherently dangerous felonies, rather than allow them to "escape trial for their crimes."

 

I'm not certain of how accurate this is (wiki) but it sure makes alot of sense to me....

 

That was common law. Keep in mind that this country was founded on the conviction that sticking to unmodified Blackstone common law = oppression. That's why our country has things like Tennessee v Garner. ~ Disobeying or fleeing an officer is not a good enough reason to die. Threatening or appearing to threaten someone's life right now is.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The threat is inherent in the violent action of attacking the police car.

 

If a person was to come up to my car and violently damages it (the act of damaging it is inherently violent), I would fear for my safety.

If the person was then to proceed to further threaten me with words or actions and move towards me, I would be fully justified by the chain of events in defending myself by any means necessary to stop the threat.

 

The chain of events in this encounter lead me, and hopefully any other sane person, to believe that the deceased posed an immediate and dire threat to anyone nearby.

 

Armed, irrational, violent, refusing lawful orders from LE, damaging city property, attempting to flee LE, posing an immediate threat to officers and citizens...

That is a long chain of events, a chain which needed breaking before anyone got hurt.

Edited by ChileRelleno
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Careful there, Chili... you're making sense again.   ;)

 

I don't believe anyone has mentioned the "Tueller Drill," which proved that a man armed with a knife who is 21 feet away or less IS a LETHAL threat.

Of course, you won't hear about that on any of the news outlets, of course.  :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Careful there, Chili... you're making sense again.   wink.png

 

I don't believe anyone has mentioned the "Tueller Drill," which proved that a man armed with a knife who is 21 feet away or less IS a LETHAL threat.

Of course, you won't hear about that on any of the news outlets, of course.  rolleyes.gif

Post #25 mentioned it

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Careful there, Chili... you're making sense again.   wink.png

 

I don't believe anyone has mentioned the "Tueller Drill," which proved that a man armed with a knife who is 21 feet away or less IS a LETHAL threat.

Of course, you won't hear about that on any of the news outlets, of course.  rolleyes.gif

 

 

That drill is based off of a holstered pistol. NOT drawn and sighted like in the video. The Tueller 21ft drill is irrelevant in this instance.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Careful there, Chili... you're making sense again.   wink.png

 

I don't believe anyone has mentioned the "Tueller Drill," which proved that a man armed with a knife who is 21 feet away or less IS a LETHAL threat.

Of course, you won't hear about that on any of the news outlets, of course.  rolleyes.gif

 

 

That drill is based off of a holstered pistol. NOT drawn and sighted like in the video. The Tueller 21ft drill is irrelevant in this instance.

 

Yes and no.

 I agree that the 21 foot rule is in regard to a holstered pistol and not one drawn and leveled on target.

That said the suspect is arguably close to lunging distance..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah and this was just an accident.

 

http://www.chicoer.com/general-news/20151210/paradise-officer-wont-face-charges-for-shooting-dui-suspect

 

The video

http://revolution-news.com/accidental-no-charges-for-unwarranted-police-shooting/

 

*sighs* When the hell comes down just remember why it happened. Accident my old white ass

Only ones accidental enough

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Careful there, Chili... you're making sense again.   wink.png

 

I don't believe anyone has mentioned the "Tueller Drill," which proved that a man armed with a knife who is 21 feet away or less IS a LETHAL threat.

Of course, you won't hear about that on any of the news outlets, of course.  rolleyes.gif

 

 

That drill is based off of a holstered pistol. NOT drawn and sighted like in the video. The Tueller 21ft drill is irrelevant in this instance.

 

Yes and no.

 I agree that the 21 foot rule is in regard to a holstered pistol and not one drawn and leveled on target.

That said the suspect is arguably close to lunging distance..

 

I don't understand the "Yes and no"? The "drill" is not an argument in favor, it just doesn't pertain to this shooting. The distance was close, the officer was drawn. It's irrelevant.

Edited by Mullet Man
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Careful there, Chili... you're making sense again.   wink.png

 

I don't believe anyone has mentioned the "Tueller Drill," which proved that a man armed with a knife who is 21 feet away or less IS a LETHAL threat.

Of course, you won't hear about that on any of the news outlets, of course.  rolleyes.gif

 

 

That drill is based off of a holstered pistol. NOT drawn and sighted like in the video. The Tueller 21ft drill is irrelevant in this instance.

 

Yes and no.

 I agree that the 21 foot rule is in regard to a holstered pistol and not one drawn and leveled on target.

That said the suspect is arguably close to lunging distance..

 

I don't understand the "Yes and no"? The "drill" is not an argument in favor, it just doesn't pertain to this shooting. The distance was close, the officer was drawn. It's irrelevant.

 

I just mean that the lethality of the knife is not negated by the simple presence of a firearm. Leveled or not, you may shoot the suspect, but that doesn't guarantee his knife won't penetrate you too. 

Watch the following video and notice how quickly the man with the knife kills the first cop. Skip to minute 7:25 for the carnage to begin.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...