TexasCHLforum.com

E.Marquez wrote:

VMI77 wrote: They LIED in their report, the guy they shot did not advance towards them

Outstanding .. I was not aware the report had been released for us to read..

Can you post a link to it?

Thanks

I freely admit to basing my opinion on the information that is now in the public domain, and I freely admit it may be incorrect --but it's all I can go by for now. If information develops that indicates something different happened then I will change my opinion as appropriate. If they didn't lie in their report, then they're apparently only guilty of murder. However, I admit to being a little doubtful that their report is going to read they shot the guy as he stood nearly motionless in the street.....as the video shows he did. If so, good for them. If both their reports say that the guy took steps toward them then the cop who didn't shoot is an accessory after the fact. If one told the truth and the other didn't, good for the one who told the truth.

E.Marquez wrote:

rbwhatever1 wrote:Update: (Disclaimer - This could be WFAA Media lies) Those pesky affidavits & video cameras.

A police affidavit detailing the incident says Bennett “took several steps toward them with the knife raised in an aggressive manner.”

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/C ... 91301.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Footage from a surveillance camera pointed at the street where officers shot a mentally ill man in the abdomen earlier this week shows the man never walked toward police nor raised a knife to them, disputing a police officer’s narrative provided in a sworn affidavit.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/s ... 52551.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I must have missed it.. Where are the affidavits ? or links to them? Im not seeing them at either of those two link you provided.

Thanks

I would think at this point if the affidavits did not exist the dept would have issued a statement stating such. Not looking good for the shooter or the dept. absent a coverup, time will tell.

jmra wrote:

E.Marquez wrote:

rbwhatever1 wrote:Update: (Disclaimer - This could be WFAA Media lies) Those pesky affidavits & video cameras.

A police affidavit detailing the incident says Bennett “took several steps toward them with the knife raised in an aggressive manner.”

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/C ... 91301.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Footage from a surveillance camera pointed at the street where officers shot a mentally ill man in the abdomen earlier this week shows the man never walked toward police nor raised a knife to them, disputing a police officer’s narrative provided in a sworn affidavit.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/s ... 52551.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I must have missed it.. Where are the affidavits ? or links to them? Im not seeing them at either of those two link you provided.

Thanks

I would think at this point if the affidavits did not exist the dept would have issued a statement stating such. Not looking good for the shooter or the dept. absent a coverup, time will tell.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.
I am not alleging, inferring, supposing or guessing the affidavits do not exist

I keep seeing folks state as fact,,, the affidavit states, says, or the officer said in the affidavit... yet, no one but the media has had access to them for us to know what they say.

I have a total distrust for what the media reports, they will add, delete, misquote, mix up different sections and post them as if there were a continuous paragraph, take things out of context and insert words or partial statements among other words or partial statements, all in the name of making a more entertaining article.

Im not supporting the officers actions, nor denouncing them..because I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY SAID...or did not say in an affidavit I have not seen. I do not know what transpired on scene that a security camera did not capture. Have not seen the officer video or audio if there is some.

I admit, based on media reports I do not trust as fact, and the whole truth... it looks not good for the officer that engaged.

Pawpaw wrote:FBI investigating Dallas PD shooting of mentally ill man

Hmmm.... Very interesting!

Pawpaw wrote:FBI investigating Dallas PD shooting of mentally ill man

Nothing wrong with that. This way regardless of the outcome, hopefully people will think the investigation was unbiased.

I thought they called the Texas Rangers and to do investigations like that.do you think they called the FBI because they are saying it's a civil rights violation?

mojo84 wrote:I thought they called the Texas Rangers and to do investigations like that.do you think they called the FBI because they are saying it's a civil rights violation?

Who is "they"?

jmra wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I thought they called the Texas Rangers and to do investigations like that.do you think they called the FBI because they are saying it's a civil rights violation?

Who is "they"?

Usually the internal affairs of the department that has to investigate their own.

mojo84 wrote:

jmra wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I thought they called the Texas Rangers and to do investigations like that.do you think they called the FBI because they are saying it's a civil rights violation?

Who is "they"?

Usually the internal affairs of the department that has to investigate their own.

In that case I doubt "they" called the FBI because a federal civil rights conviction against a Dallas PD officer means the dept pays millions if not tens of millions to the victim.

jmra wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

jmra wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I thought they called the Texas Rangers and to do investigations like that.do you think they called the FBI because they are saying it's a civil rights violation?

Who is "they"?

Usually the internal affairs of the department that has to investigate their own.

In that case I doubt "they" called the FBI because a federal civil rights conviction against a Dallas PD officer means the dept pays millions if not tens of millions to the victim.

You may be right. I don't know that much about the inner workings of such. That's why I asked? I do know "they" call on the Rangers sometimes when " they" decide "they" need to make sure an investigation is unbiased or more complicated than what "they" are set up to handle.

mojo84 wrote:

jmra wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

jmra wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I thought they called the Texas Rangers and to do investigations like that.do you think they called the FBI because they are saying it's a civil rights violation?

Who is "they"?

Usually the internal affairs of the department that has to investigate their own.

In that case I doubt "they" called the FBI because a federal civil rights conviction against a Dallas PD officer means the dept pays millions if not tens of millions to the victim.

You may be right. I don't know that much about the inner workings of such. That's why I asked? I do know "they" call on the Rangers sometimes when " they" decide "they" need to make sure an investigation is unbiased or more complicated than what "they" are set up to handle.

That would make a lot of sense and I hope "they" ( ) have already done so.

Generally, the larger departments, like Dallas, will handle their own investigations of officers. They might request assistance from another agency if they have a reason to think their investigation is compromised or serious corruption is involved. In the case of corruption, a department will ask either the Rangers or FBI for assistance. The deciding factor is almost always if the corruption involves drugs, in which case they go with the FBI to get federal time. Anything else will almost always be handled by the Rangers. This is because, again as a general rule, most police officers (including the chiefs) don't really like the FBI or trust them. Smaller departments generally ask the Rangers for help with shootings and any serious offense involving officers.

One of the reasons that cops don't like the FBI is that the FBI goes after cops. A second reason is the way they step in and take over cases that the local officers have handled.

But the FBI will almost always step in when they think there is a civil rights violation. They can be asked in by the department, local politicians, the public, or anyone. They have been known to step in when they see a commotion in the news. I believe that this case is being investigated by the FBI on their own just because the news releases don't mention anyone asking for them and politicians will almost always take the credit for asking for that type of investigation. And it doesn't really mean anything to the case, IMO, since there are no allegations of anything being race related or departmental.

Interesting. Thanks Steve

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/C ... 25411.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Officer fired. Partner placed on restricted duty.