Black People Legally Murdered By White People in America

[4BillsintheBurgh]

8 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Most shooting situations are very fluid and decisions are often made incredibly fast. That is one of the reasons officers train so much - so that they, hopefully, it becomes "second nature" to them and they react accordingly in stressful situations. I don't believe any officers are trained to shoot fleeing suspects. In order to use deadly force, an officer has to be able to articulate an "imminent" threat, such as, "he raised his weapon, pointed it at me, and I believed he was going to shoot me."

 

There are situations where deadly force can be used on a fleeing suspect; however, I believe that the officer still has to articulate an "imminent" danger to others.  

This is a synopsis of the incident, very high level.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Antwon_Rose_Jr.

 

[billsfan1959]

14 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

Question — did you ever see reports of uses of deadly force where the imminent threat was claimed but did not appear justified? How rare or frequent did you personally see this? And how much do you suspect it happens nationwide? 

 

Not rhetorical; genuinely asking. 

 

It's a good question.  Yes, I have seen incidents where deadly force was used that did not appear to be supported by the evidence. I was never personally involved with any; however, I did investigate several and was aware of others. I will also say that it is difficult, or at least has been historically speaking, to get an officer charged and, in particular, convicted without clear convincing evidence. I believe there are a lot of reasons for that and it would be a long discussion for another time. There are some attorneys on this site that could offer some good insight here. The point is, there is often a different standard when it comes to convicting officers and I believe that creates problems from different perspectives.

 

As far as how rare or frequent? I guess I would qualify this with a couple of points. There are literally 50 million + interactions, per year, between law enforcement and citizens over the age of 16. In addition to that, there are approximately 10 million + arrests in this country per year and over 1/2 million of those are for violent crime. So, I would say that officer involved shootings in general are rare, based on the sheer number of contacts and arrests. Unjustified shootings are even more rare.

 

Unfortunately, when we see an instance in which someone is unjustly killed, how rare it is does not diminish the tragedy of it. When it happens to a black citizen, it then takes on the magnitude of an entire history of what the black race has gone through in this country. It is completely understandable when it does. The subsequent attention given to these instances give the impression they happen at a frequent rate, which they don't. But, they do happen more than anyone would like.

 

I think if calm, rational voices could be at the center of an honest discussion, I think real progress could be made.

[billsfan1959]

36 minutes ago, 4BillsintheBurgh said:

This is a synopsis of the incident, very high level.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Antwon_Rose_Jr.

 

 

These are the worst kind of cases. To me, it really has to be clearly evident, to any reasonable person, that somebody fleeing poses an imminent danger before deadly force is used. Honestly, there are not that many situations where that could be legitimately articulated.

[Johnnycage46]

22 hours ago, GregPersons said:

A lot of people on this board are extremely racist. They believe white people are the victims of racism. "How can white supremacy be real if my life sucks?" -- This is difficult for the @Chef Jims  of the world to understand. Yes, your individual life is a failure, even though you've had every advantage. Sorry, bud.

 

But you don't have to deal with things like this. When white people get murdered.... their deaths get investigated. When black people get murdered... it takes activism to initiate justice. 

 

George Floyd is just one of many names that white people only hear about... from other white people. 

 

 

Hey @billsfan1959 when you were a cop, how many crimes did you cover up for white people? Did you have any black coworkers? This is just another invitation for you to put your money where your mouth is and let us look at your policing career, as you have insisted it is relevant. 

 

 

 

 

Did you know that over the last 5 years more unarmed white people have been killed by police than unarmed black men have been?

 

Also, did you know that a police officer is more than 18 times more likely to be killed by a black man than an unarmed black man is to be killed by a cop.

 

You are a racist.  Your hate speech is not really fitting in here.

 

 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Johnnycage46

[4BillsintheBurgh]

1 minute ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

These are the worst kind of cases. To me, it really has to be clearly evident, to any reasonable person, that somebody fleeing poses an imminent danger before deadly force is used. Honestly, there are not that many situations where that could be legitimately articulated.

It struck me because my MIL called the outcome well before it went to trial, I think right after the officer was arrested. I don't know how much the laws change by locality but I assume there are some differences in this area. Seems like it is possible to move the law away from actions like this, just might be a correction the other way at some point.

 

I'm on the fence about it. It's certainly a sad situation and unfortunate on many levels. Really some of the change can be to reel this type of incident in by not authorizing deadly force unless there is imminent danger, but there are trade-offs obviously.  We have a citizen's review board as well because of past incidents.

 

The gypsy cop thing seems to be something that to me should be changed. It reminds me of the Catholic priest child abuse that was happening in the sense that these guys can just go from place to place as long as they don't get fired. There are some other measures that can be implemented as a baseline for all departments, someone just needs to get the list together and apply it consistently across the country.

[Dante]

21 hours ago, GregPersons said:

 

If you think what Nazi Germany did to their Jewish population was bad for 10 years... just wait until you find out how America built itself for 250 years. 

 

Wait but did America have concentration camps? Oh yes buddy. They were called plantations. Some of your piget little cousins might've even gotten married in one.

And America really just killed these people legally? Oh yes buddy. They would chase them down. Hang them in trees. They'd do it for years and years and years.

 

And then, Americans just would continue to pretend it didn't happen? Up to and through June 7, 2020, this was still "debatable" 

 

 

Unforgiven later tonight:

 

Before you get on America's case too much look into a couple things.

1. Who sold out their own people to be slaves? In other words, who was the supplier?

2. Do a little research,  worthless indoctrination at whatever University doesn't count. Look up how many slaves Brazil has had over the years. You may find that country might be a richer target for your commie subversion.

[Koko78]

2 hours ago, Cinga said:

Don't ruin it! If you don't have one, get a good grill, fire it up super hot, and sear that baby!

 

I use my Weber almost every night over the summer. Gotta get an old fashioned charcoal to use once in a while, but the propane Weber is soooooo convenient! 

Oh, and edit to add the asparagus!

 

I don't remember where my propane grill is...

 

Either way, it doesn't matter. I have a herniated disk in my neck that is flaring up, and did not feel like cooking. Had Raisin Bran instead.

 

Of course, that was after I apparently legally murdered some black people on the way home.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Koko78

[3rdnlng]

46 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

I don't remember where my propane grill is...

 

Either way, it doesn't matter. I have a herniated disk in my neck that is flaring up, and did not feel like cooking. Had Raisin Bran instead.

 

Of course, that was after I apparently legally murdered some black people on the way home.

You're an attorney. Up until a few hours ago I had thought it was legal to kill blacks based on this thread. Then that Tasker guy came along and stated things differently. If this guy I know used a black family for target practice but only sent 2 of them to their maker wouldn't I he be given a pass due to GregPerson's initial assertions? Since he only got 2 of them it's obvious he needed the practice. Wouldn't that be extenuating circumstances? 

[Koko78]

40 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

You're an attorney. Up until a few hours ago I had thought it was legal to kill blacks based on this thread. Then that Tasker guy came along and stated things differently. If this guy I know used a black family for target practice but only sent 2 of them to their maker wouldn't I he be given a pass due to GregPerson's initial assertions? Since he only got 2 of them it's obvious he needed the practice. Wouldn't that be extenuating circumstances? 

 

Actually, I think that's a sentence enhancement. Piss poor marksmanship, when legally killing black people, will not be tolerated.

 

Ignore that Tasker guy with his 'laws' and 'morality' nonsense.

[Motorin']

4 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Hey Motorin', sorry for not immediately responding. I needed to watch the video and I also read through a report on the shooting that I found at:

 

https://da.lacounty.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/JSID_OIS_05_2019_Ross.pdf

 

I will preface my response with the following: I don't like to provide an assessment of a crime without having the ability to review the entire case file and all related evidence. I have no idea if the extraneous information being provided alongside the videos is accurate or not.

 

After watching the video and reading the report, without any other information I would say the following:

 

1. I believe Kenneth Ross was involved in the shooting for which the police were chasing him.

     a.  He was identified at the scene and literally pointed out, by a witness, to a police officer as Mr. Ross was running from the scene. Another officer, Officer Colon sees him on the corner and you see him take off running as Officer Colon follows in her vehicle. 

     b. In the video, when they approach Mr. Ross, after he was shot, there is a point where it is pointed out that there is no gun in his left pocket.

     c. In the report, it was reported that a gun was found in Mr. Ross' front left pocket, a 9mm semiautomatic.

     d. As I said in the video they say there is no gun. However, the close-up they show is of the back of the shorts, implying because there is no "bulge" there can be no weapon. But, as the video continues and as they are handcuffing him, you can see that there does appear to be a "bulge" in the shorts on the left side. When they role him over, whoever edited the video put the text right over the left pocket area. Then, the video cuts off, even though they stated the camera ran the entire time. I would like to see the video unedited.

    c. A bullet, a bullet fragment, and 8 shell casings recovered from the original shooting scene were matched with the handgun police say they recovered from the body.

   

Based on the above, I do believe Mr. Ross was involved in a shooting and a handgun was recovered from his pocket.

 

2. I didn't see anything on any of the videos that suggested to me that Officers Colon and Medeiros ever acted outside of protocol. When Officer Medeiros arrives on his motorcycle, he has his handgun drawn, because he is responding to the pursuit of a shooting suspect believed to be armed. As he begins chasing the suspect, he places his gun in the holster and pulls out his taser. This tells me he did not think the suspect had a weapon in his hand.

 

3. Officer Robbins arrives and sees the suspect running. He gets out and immediately trains his rifle on the suspect and yells for him to stop or he'll shoot. Mr. Ross continues running behind a small utility building and out the other side, at which point Officer Robbins fires two shots and kills Mr. Ross.

 

4. Based soley off the video, I would have a hard time justifying Officer Robbins' use of deadly force. He stated that he believed the suspect "looked" toward him and "cocked his arm," prompting Offficer Robbins to believe Mr. Ross was "about to draw down and shoot me." It is hard to see Mr. Ross' movements clearly in this video and it is difficult to judge actual distances between people. I would like to have all of the videos to review in their entirety and crime scene sketches/diagrams to determine distances. However, based on what I saw, it looked like Mr. Ross was continuing to run away from all the officers, including Officer Robbins.

 

Based soley on this video, I do not believe Mr. Ross posed an iminent threat to Officer Robbins and do not believe the shooting was justified and believe he should have been charged.

 

I will say that I think whoever put this video together was not being honest about the weapon. With that said, it doesn't change the fact that I do not believe Officer Robbins was justified in shooting Mr. Ross and should have been charged.

 

I do see how people can look at a incident like this and feel the problem is systemic. There is no doubt that incidents like this do occur. People are human beings and sometimes fail to do the right thing. I also believe that each and every incident of violence, by the police or anyone else, should be evaluated based on the facts specific to that incident.

 

Incidents like this will always occur. It is an unfortunate aspect of our society that we literally have law enforcement officers and civilians armed and interacting with one another in emotionally charged situations.

 

I believe in looking at new and innovative ways of improving law enforcement. I also believe  the vast majority of law enforcement officers truly are trying to do the right thing and are not represented by the bad apples or those who engage in willful ignorance. Just as I do not think those violent offenders in black communities represent the vast majority of the citizens in those communites.

 

I don't know if this answers your questions. Feel free to follow up.

 

 

Thanks for the detailed reply. I searched for raw video of the Hawthorne PD bodycam but couldn't find it posted publicly. The first time I watched this video, I did not see a gun. Looking again with your input, I'm not convinced either way. One of the reasons why bodycam policy was enacted was to provide transparency in the course of police work. 

 

It's troubling that the shooting officer's PD requests all bodycams turned off prior to the search of the suspect, who is on the ground and deceased. It would provide clarity on the situation if the search of Mr. Ross happens on camera. 

 

I'm wondering if there is a longer version available that shows the pockets being searched, or was the last bodycam turned off prior to that search?

 

On the one hand, if the video does exist, and it shows a gun being pulled from the pocket, the people who produced the video should be held accountable and should be sued for defamation. 

 

On the other, if all cams go dark prior to the search of his pockets, it appears like both police departments are providing cover for the shooting officer in the event that no gun is found on Mr. Ross. Why request to turn off all cams prior to the search? 

 

 

Edited June 9, 2020 by Motorin'

[Ralonzo]

Two variables result in a 2x2 matrix with four data points.

[billsfan1959]

8 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

Thanks for the detailed reply. I searched for raw video of the Hawthorne PD bodycam but couldn't find it posted publicly. The first time I watched this video, I did not see a gun. Looking again with your input, I'm not convinced either way. One of the reasons why bodycam policy was enacted was to provide transparency in the course of police work. 

 

It's troubling that the shooting officer's PD requests all bodycams turned off prior to the search of the suspect, who is on the ground and deceased. It would provide clarity on the situation if the search of Mr. Ross happens on camera. 

 

I'm wondering if there is a longer version available that shows the pockets being searched, or was the last bodycam turned off prior to that search?

 

On the one hand, if the video does exist, and it shows a gun being pulled from the pocket, the people who produced the video should be held accountable and should be sued for defamation. 

 

On the other, if all cams go dark prior to the search of his pockets, it appears like both police departments are providing cover for the shooting officer in the event that no gun is found on Mr. Ross. Why request to turn off all cams prior to the search? 

 

 

 

Yeah, I really don't know why they would request all cameras be turned off before approaching. It is that kind of thing that just begs for scrutiny and suspicion. It really is difficult to get a definitive view on that video regarding the gun in the left pocket. I believe there was a bulge in the front left pocket. Beyond that, I didn't find any evidence that the other officers were untruthful in any way when they provided their statements. Just understanding what is involved regarding evidence collection, submission and laboratory analyses, and the number of people involved in that process, my assessment is the gun was in his pocket. I hope that entire video exists.

 

But, again, that really has no bearing, to me, when I evaluate the legitimacy of the shooting. My assessment could change if I was able to read the entire case file and saw something I am not aware of at this point. But as it stands, I did not see anything that justified the shooting. I wish the family the best in their civl suit.