TexasCHLforum.com

Disturbing video. A "what if" doesn't justify wielding Deadly Force here. Good thing the fired LEO was a bad shot.

rbwhatever1 wrote:Disturbing video. A "what if" doesn't justify wielding Deadly Force here. Good thing the fired LEO was a bad shot.

I wouldn't say he was that bad a shot; he hit the guy. The mortality rate from handguns is only 15% - 20%, so the chances of survival are high.

cb1000rider wrote:Yikes. He certainly moved quickly when asked for an ID.. Obviously that caused an already concerned (gun drawn) officer to make a judgement call that was incorrect. The bad judgement doesn't stop there, you probably shouldn't shoot suspects that have their hands up.

If that's a good officer, I feel bad that he made such a mistake.

Law enforcement scares me to death these days. Literally shaking. That will make zero sense to those who think that only criminals have to be afraid of the police. The nervousness causes suspicion, which doesn't help.

My solution to this situation is simple. If I'm asked for my DL, I say "my DL is in my back pocket, may I reach for it?"
For every command, I speak it back and indicate how I'm going to do it and do it slowly.
50/50 on LEOs appreciating this and LEOs demanding to search by car due to the "probable cause" provided by my acting nervous.
I do much better if I know there is a camera recording.. I relax quite a bit.

Have you had a lot of experience with cop contacts?

mojo84 wrote: Have you had a lot of experience with cop contacts?

Maybe one every 2 years, traffic related...

Those saying he had his gun out prior to the guy reaching into the truck, where are you getting that? I cannot see the cop until the victim is turned around and going into the truck, and it looks like he is finishing his draw as he comes into the frame.

To me it looks like the cop said "jump", and this guy jumped, not asking how high, and apparently too high for this skittish cop. If the cop did not want him to make any sudden moves, he shouldn't have given any commands other than "hold it right there, let me see your hands" or something. Telling someone to jump then shooting them for jumping higher than you want is wrong.

The officer totally handled the stop incorrectly. He should have asked the guy to step away from the vehicle, exited his vehicle and placed himself in between the guy and his truck. That allows the officer to observe the guy while isolating him from the vehicle. At that point the officer can asses the threat level the guy may present and then ask for ID, insurance, etc if there is no threat to him or others.

Watched the video and read all the comments on this thread.

It appears to me the driver was complying with the command given. This business about "moving too fast" is not a credible argument for justifying the shooting. How slow do you want me to move? Ultra-slo-mo? Any speed below "snail" required?

The other side of the coin is if the driver had hesitated, the officer may have interpreted that as a failure to comply and proceed with another form of physical violence.

With this trooper as skittish as he seemed on the video, the driver was apparently not going to get out of this stop unscathed in one form or another.

Kudos to the SCHP for moving fast on this and not allowing the appearance of a cover-up to be suspected.

The trooper should be on trial for this - poor judgement and poor responses. Now, as to whether a jury will convict him is another matter.

LabRat

One thing that stood out to me was the demeanor of the cool after shooting the guy. He remains relatively calm and cool. Many other cops that have shot someone were very excited and it was obvious it was a big adrenalin rush, sometimes even sorrowful/compassionate even though it was a justified shoot. This guy seemed pretty matter of fact about it without much emotion. Not that this means anything necessarily. Just an observation.

mojo84 wrote:One thing that stood out to me was the demeanor of the cool after shooting the guy. He remains relatively calm and cool. Many other cops that have shot someone were very excited and it was obvious it was a big adrenalin rush, sometimes even sorrowful/compassionate even though it was a justified shoot. This guy seemed pretty matter of fact about it without much emotion. Not that this means anything necessarily. Just an observation.

Maybe because he realized how wrong he was and could see the light at the end of the tunnel of his law enforcement career.

rotor wrote:I pretty much am going to give the LEO the benefit of the doubt- except in this case. Watching this video has me thinking that perhaps the Ferguson, Missouri case was also a bad shoot. The value of video.

Please cite the facts that support your contention.

Jim Beaux wrote:

rotor wrote:I pretty much am going to give the LEO the benefit of the doubt- except in this case. Watching this video has me thinking that perhaps the Ferguson, Missouri case was also a bad shoot. The value of video.

Please cite the facts that support your contention.

What facts do you want? I think the "has me thinking perhaps" sentence is enough. If there were no video on this case I would be arguing that the LEO should have the benefit of the doubt, after all he is a LEO trained in this kind of stuff. But then we look at the video. Perhaps if we had a video in the Missouri case I would not have been so sure the LEO was a correct shoot. Have we seen any direct evidence yet that the Missouri case was a legitimate shoot? I sure hope they can show something fast. In the meantime as long as these kinds of videos pop up (including the one in California with the LEO beating that woman), my personal faith and belief that the LEO is correct is being eroded. The three LEO in south Texas with the phony traffic citations, charges against LEO of sexual misconduct, choking case in NY killing a guy selling illegal cigarettes, all break the trust that we have in LEO. I am not bashing LEO because 99.99% would never do these things but without a video or some prooof, maybe there is a .001% chance the Ferguson shoot was bad.

rotor wrote:

Jim Beaux wrote:

rotor wrote:I pretty much am going to give the LEO the benefit of the doubt- except in this case. Watching this video has me thinking that perhaps the Ferguson, Missouri case was also a bad shoot. The value of video.

Please cite the facts that support your contention.

What facts do you want? I think the "has me thinking perhaps" sentence is enough. If there were no video on this case I would be arguing that the LEO should have the benefit of the doubt, after all he is a LEO trained in this kind of stuff. But then we look at the video. Perhaps if we had a video in the Missouri case I would not have been so sure the LEO was a correct shoot. Have we seen any direct evidence yet that the Missouri case was a legitimate shoot? I sure hope they can show something fast. In the meantime as long as these kinds of videos pop up (including the one in California with the LEO beating that woman), my personal faith and belief that the LEO is correct is being eroded. The three LEO in south Texas with the phony traffic citations, charges against LEO of sexual misconduct, choking case in NY killing a guy selling illegal cigarettes, all break the trust that we have in LEO. I am not bashing LEO because 99.99% would never do these things but without a video or some prooof, maybe there is a .001% chance the Ferguson shoot was bad.

This is what you said:

Watching this video has me thinking that perhaps the Ferguson, Missouri case was also a bad shoot.

Not wanting to dog you, but your "thinking" is biased by the actions of another. Per witness statements there are no similarities between this and the Ferguson shooting.

Keith B wrote:

rbwhatever1 wrote:Disturbing video. A "what if" doesn't justify wielding Deadly Force here. Good thing the fired LEO was a bad shot.

I wouldn't say he was that bad a shot; he hit the guy. The mortality rate from handguns is only 15% - 20%, so the chances of survival are high.

Four shots, (at least one fired when the victim clearly had his hands up) one (apparently pretty ineffective) hit, close range, no return fire, occupied gas station and busy street in the background. I'm curious where the other three bullets ended up.

(And looking at where the street, other cars at the pumps, and the windows of the gas station are, staying by his own driver side fender would have given him a much better backstop in the form of the victim's vehicle and the solid wall of the station, as well as giving him the partial cover of his engine block to duck behind.)

Each situation is unique. I think the jury is still out (literally) on ferguson.

On this.....do you want him to get his license or not. I was taught to comply immediately and without delay.....or should I wait and let him get angry because I am moving too slow. As a citizen I do not feel that an encounter with a LEO complying with his demand should be met with lethal force because he is jumpy. I should not die because I did as he asked. Unacceptable.