Have we all forgotten Blackstone's formulation? "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." It seems that the armed police no longer operate under the same policy as the rest of the justice system. They tend to presume everyone is a threat; is it any wonder that that presumption is automatically met with hostility? As has been said many times before--this is a training issue. Police are no longer trained to "serve and protect"; they are trained to "eliminate threats".
His innocence or guilt in the past has no bearing on this. He was unarmed. He was shot for absolutely no good reason, PCP or not. It's downright sad that anyone is taking the cops' side in this.
Actually, the policy was "Stop, question, and frisk", and the frisk was supposed to require probable cause, but people on both sides of the aisle routinely ignored that aspect.
Nonsense. What are the names of the cowards who trained this fascist woman to kill anyone who doesn't obey her commands? How was this police violence so predictable that her husband in the helicopter said it would happen?
There was good reason if: 1. He was high on PCP and perceived as a threat to the officers safety by disobeying police orders and reaching into a pocket, car window, boot, jock strap etc. Otherwise if not, then yes, the police officer should be terminated and charged. I'm not taking sides, I am dealing with facts and offering an alternative point of view because everyone is about to riot,loot, and destroy S2!
Innocent in the past of holding up his arms and getting murdered? What are you talking about? Nothing you say is relevant to what happened.
He had his hands up. He had no weapon. The police had tasers. You aren't making a compelling case in the least.
I don't need to make a case. You can believe what you want. But the facts will speak for themselves, and we'll see if he was high on PCP and other people will decide if he was reaching for something.
Trump on TV saying the officer choked. He is troubled. He has no clue what the officer could have been thinking. It was terrible.
The facts don't speak for themselves. If the cop gets off, she got away with murdering an unarmed man. That's too often the case, or the BLM movement wouldn't exist.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/opinions/terence-crutcher-shooting-holloway/ Under the Graham holding, the ultimate question is whether a hypothetical reasonable officer under the same or similar circumstances would have done the same thing. Here we have multiple other officers who were actually there who did NOT shoot Crutcher. That's a good sign that there was at least an error in judgment by the officer who did shoot.
Wow. That says that a policeman can murder you, no matter what your conduct is (you can already be in handcuffs, obeying orders) if he thinks you committed a certain crime: We live in a police state.
Facts ALWAYS speak for themselves. It doesn't matter if you are unarmed, you are perceived a threat when disobeying orders and reaching for shit. Go to a citizens academy for fucks sake. They will tell you how they are trained. If you don't like the training, contact your local representatives to get the laws changed.
Correct, and things will only change when the laws change. Instead of burning, rioting, looting, destroying neighborhoods, these people should be marching at their city halls, and their state capitals to get the laws changed.
Hands up, not running away, no weapon. No threat. As I just posted, none of the other cops there were threatened enough to fire their guns, and I think at least one and the guy in the helicopter were talking like it's a taser situation at most.
"A good sign" doesn't equate to fact. The other officers may have not seen what the other two officers saw, or were out of position to even fire and just offering support. A taser situation doesn't always work. Specially with people on PCP. I am not sure why you don't understand that. IF this guy was high on PCP and reaching for something then the officers will get off since this is all acceptable within procedure and law. IF this guy was NOT high and NOT reaching, then the officers will face charges.
If the taser didn't work, then the gun might, might, might, be called for. The taser wasn't tried, so you're just guessing and taking the wrong side for the sake of it. You're proving dviss1 right.
