TexasCHLforum.com

Glockster wrote:Unbelievable is just about the only label that fits this. I can't believe that any DA or Grand Jury could come to any conclusion other than murder, or (somehow) at least manslaughter.

The guy he shot is not dead but alive and paralyzed from the waist down so it's not murder or manslaughter.

I believe the guy was drunk and didn't stop for the cop. Even so, pulling a gun and shooting the guy and not calling for ambulances and help leads me to believe the guy was in the wrong. Still researching though.

VMI77 wrote:

Glockster wrote:Unbelievable is just about the only label that fits this. I can't believe that any DA or Grand Jury could come to any conclusion other than murder, or (somehow) at least manslaughter.

The guy he shot is not dead but alive and paralyzed from the waist down so it's not murder or manslaughter.

Ok, how about attempted murder.

Full report right here:

http://www.actionnewsnow.com/files/final_report.pdf


I guarantee if a citizen had shot and paralyzed someone, the DA could find a charge. Odd that somehow they aren't so creative when its "one of their own".

VMI77 wrote:

Glockster wrote:Unbelievable is just about the only label that fits this. I can't believe that any DA or Grand Jury could come to any conclusion other than murder, or (somehow) at least manslaughter.

The guy he shot is not dead but alive and paralyzed from the waist down so it's not murder or manslaughter.

Dang, hate it when things won't load. Didn't see anything other than the video and didn't see the guy still alive at that point. T'anks.

Do you really think an LEO would shoot a citizen needing help?

I don't, but I'm convinced you don't have the facts leading up to the shooting, I have faith
in LE, if you don't rethink...

Abraham wrote:Do you really think an LEO would shoot a citizen needing help?

I don't, but I'm convinced you don't have the facts leading up to the shooting, I have faith
in LE, if you don't rethink...

Abraham, I hear what you are saying. Nonetheless, how do you know this is a typical cop? A typical good cop would not have just shot someone exiting a vehicle that was overturned. He also would have shown more urgency in rendering aid and calling for help.

We can't as far as to blindly accept whatever a cop does is just and ok. We cannot accept streetside justice even though the guy that was shot was believed to be drunk and had a previous record.

Sometimes, things really are what you see. The cop shot an unarmed guy trying to craw out of an overturned vehicle and a woman laying on the street dead or dying while the cop was looking for something instead of calling and rendering aid.

mojo84 wrote:

Abraham wrote:Do you really think an LEO would shoot a citizen needing help?

I don't, but I'm convinced you don't have the facts leading up to the shooting, I have faith
in LE, if you don't rethink...

Abraham, I hear what you are saying. Nonetheless, how do you know this is a typical cop? There are comments the guy that was shot was drunk and had a previous record. A typical good cop would not have just shot someone exiting a vehicle that was overturned. He also would have shown more urgency in rendering aid and calling for help.

We can't as far as to blindly accept whatever a cop does is just and ok. We cannot accept streetside justice.

Sometimes, things really are what you see. The cop shot an unarmed guy trying to craw out of an overturned vehicle and a woman laying on the street dead or dying while the cop was looking for something instead of calling and rendering aid.

Even IF the driver was somehow a "bad guy" (and not saying that justified the shooting), was the woman also known to be "bad" or was she just in the truck. That bothers me a lot -- even IF he didn't think that he'd shot the guy, and even if he was not dead, what about checking the woman. Aside from that....we have audio on the tape, and we see what can be presumed to be an unedited dash cam video. And that shows the LEO arriving, then walking to the truck, then shooting the guy, and ONLY THEN does he radio about the guy refusing to get out of the truck. Where/when was that conversation supposed to have taken place? It certainly doesn't appear to me to be on the video.

The city is going to be paying some damages.

This does look pretty bad, and the city will probably have to pay a settlement. Also, the officer shouldn't be on the force. But after reading the report and watching the video again, I can see where an accidental discharge could be possible. I can also see why he may have drawn his weapon. And that's because what we don't see in the video is the victim pulling out of a parking lot at high speed and running a red light, which screams bad guy in the officer's mind. If you notice in his first call to the dispatcher when he arrives on the scene he seems out of breath, like his adrenaline is going.

Maybe the officer is not up to the rigors of policing, and the city will pay for that.

mojo84 wrote:What about all that talk that we citizens are responsible for every bullet that leaves our guns. I'm confused.

One wonders if the situation were reversed and the guy in the car had accidentally shot the officer, if he'd get the same free pass.

mojo84 wrote:What about all that talk that we citizens are responsible for every bullet that leaves our guns. I'm confused.

You mean you expect government officials and employees to be as accountable for their actions as the government expects us to be accountable for our actions?

The Annoyed Man wrote:

mojo84 wrote:What about all that talk that we citizens are responsible for every bullet that leaves our guns. I'm confused.

One wonders if the situation were reversed and the guy in the car had accidentally shot the officer, if he'd get the same free pass.

Exactly!!

I wish I was the wordsmith you are, TAM.

He was probably just using one of those dangerous M&P 9mms that go off on their own, and also apparently draw themselves from holster.

I read the prosecutor's "lay" report (http://www.actionnewsnow.com/files/lay_report.pdf), and I don't buy it. They claim the guy flinches when the gun goes off, as if he's surprised. It looked to me like he very calmly fired, and when the man disappeared back into the car, he holstered his weapon and walked toward the car. He paralyzed the guy. He shot him deliberately. He should be thrown off the force. I guarantee he will lose a huge civil law suit, as will the city.

I'd be very interested to hear from some of our LEO members. After reading the lay report, do you agree with their conclusions? If so, why?