So if assaulting someone because of their job is grounds to be considered a hate crime, does that apply to every job? Does it apply to health care workers, for instance?
I would be up for that. If you could determine the reason for assault and it was because of their job, sure. When a cop is assaulted wearing a uniform I think it is pretty same to come to the conclusion it was because he was a cop. Especially if it was an ambush assault. Someone who is pro-life attacks an abortion doctor, lock them up with a hate crime. I'm fine with that.
In my experience, the vast majority of what is termed assault on police officers is due to people resisting arrest, and is pretty low-level. Of course you can say it’s because of the job, but only because no one else is legally allowed to detain you. In most of those cases if the officer didn’t forcibly pursue an arrest then there would not have been an assault. I don’t view that as a hate crime at all, and sure don’t see it as worthy of hate crime level incarceration.
I see your point. I know it does not take much at all to be considered resisting arrest. I don't think that qualifies as assault though. You are probably right that there would still be some small/minor cases that would still qualify. There would probably need to be a strict definition of what qualifies as an assault, or that a certain level of injury occured to the officer. More than just not cooperating, but something that resulted in documentable injuries.
“Resisting arrest” and “assault peace officer” go together like bacon and eggs. Even so much as pulling forcefully away can be considered assault, and if you make contact at all while you flail or push, then it’s a certainty.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Is the expectation of police officers to refrain from using any force until things get 'really physical'... or until they are in 'real danger'?
In other words, can police proactively ward off the escalation of intense physical resistance to arrest or detainment by definitively and actively taking action to ensure things do not escalate to the point where they are in danger?
When the cops are there... the gig is up. Don't resist. What good can come of resisting?
I just read comments from a police officer in our local newspaper online. The context is different - he's talking about whether there should be an expectation that police have photographic evidence of acts such as texting and driving for a finding of guilt (if the driver disputes a ticket and takes it to court). Apparently there are new scopes that can allow officers to see and photograph drivers from more than 650 metres away.
The officer argues that the court should not expect photographic evidence because his word is enough - "because I’m a sworn officer, I’m sworn to tell the truth." He goes on to say “If every traffic cop gets one, it becomes unaffordable. I’m better off with my $99 scope and the court trusting what I saw.”
So essentially he is arguing that the court should accept the word of police officers for conviction even when there is no other evidence. This is a fairly minor crime, of course, but if the principle is valid then it holds for major crimes, too. It's not a principle I can agree with, knowing what we know simply about the inherent errors in eyewitness testimony, let alone all other factors.
I also note the phrasing of his argument - "I'm better off.....". Of course the officer is better off if his or her word isn't questioned, but that's not really the point of the legal system.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I just read comments from a police officer in our local newspaper online. The context is different - he's talking about whether there should be an expectation that police have photographic evidence of acts such as texting and driving for a finding of guilt (if the driver disputes a ticket and takes it to court). Apparently there are new scopes that can allow officers to see and photograph drivers from more than 650 metres away.
The officer argues that the court should not expect photographic evidence because his word is enough - "because I’m a sworn officer, I’m sworn to tell the truth." He goes on to say “If every traffic cop gets one, it becomes unaffordable. I’m better off with my $99 scope and the court trusting what I saw.”
So essentially he is arguing that the court should accept the word of police officers for conviction even when there is no other evidence. This is a fairly minor crime, of course, but if the principle is valid then it holds for major crimes, too. It's not a principle I can agree with, knowing what we know simply about the inherent errors in eyewitness testimony, let alone all other factors.
I also note the phrasing of his argument - "I'm better off.....". Of course the officer is better off if his or her word isn't questioned, but that's not really the point of the legal system.
That has pretty much always been the case. I can see both sides of this argument. It is frustrating that it is sometimes just his word and I would have to prove my innocence. I've received a ticket I didn't deserve. I fought it and won, but it was more of a clerical error on the part of the DMV why I won rather than me proving my case. On the other side, if photographic evidence was needed to give a ticket, there wouldn't be any tickets and therefore really no enforcement of traffic laws. If a cop needed a video of me running a stop sign to give me a ticket for it, it would become nearly impossible to enforce that.
So then my question is how do you enforce basic traffic laws if the cop's testimony is not enough? Even though sometimes they are enforced for revenue, they are all written for safety. Stop signs, speed limits etc are all there for safety, so enforcing them is saving saving lives.
He should have complied. There must be more to this story. Uhh...what else...um...the cops feared for their lives...he had a, uh, thing, that looked like a, um, gun.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
This is a couple months old and the tweet does not give the whole story per usual. The cops were called because this guy and his sister and friends started an argument with the waitress. It s been a while since I read the the story so I don't remember all the details.
He should have complied. There must be more to this story. Uhh...what else...um...the cops feared for their lives...he had a, uh, thing, that looked like a, um, gun.
It appears there was one deputy who decided that punching in the back of the head repeatedly was a defensive tactic. Pretty horseshit and I would suspect that officer will face discipline. The other officers seemed to be mostly trying to get him under control the entire time to handcuff him. Obviously the male also has some severe mental health issues and was carrying a large buck knife, which would be a big concern for safety. The article also mentioned that he had already been asked multiple times to leave the area based on his interference with another incident.
This is a couple months old and the tweet does not give the whole story per usual. The cops were called because this guy and his sister and friends started an argument with the waitress. It s been a while since I read the the story so I don't remember all the details.
There typically is more to the story.
It just seems excessive- like that one above where the deputy is punching that weird guy repeatedly in the back of the head.
It would be a human rights violation to send American police out to do their job without the weapons and tools they absolutely need to survive. Besides, it isn't the weaponry that makes shithead cops let their shit shine, it's the impunity.
If the situation had a different outcome, meaning the suspect was shot dead after hurling rocks at the fallen officer, this forum would be alive with people crying 'back the blue' and all the other classics.
If the situation had a different outcome, meaning the suspect was shot dead after hurling rocks at the fallen officer, this forum would be alive with people crying 'back the blue' and all the other classics.
Damn. What a despicable piece of crap the killer is. Hit the officer in the head with a rock, took his gun once he was down and then shot him in the head and chest multiple times. Fuck. There's a 4 and 9 year old who probably can't even see their dad one last time because of that asshole. And then on top of that, some innocent old woman in her home takes a stray bullet and dies. What a terrible incident.
As to what you mentioned TB, I think you are right. It's hard for a normal citizen to understand the complexities of situations like this and how one mistake could mean an officer is incapacitated and unable to stop someone from taking their own weapon and using it against them or someone else. In another reality, there is public outcry for an officer shooting a man holding a rock. I really believe that all of the criticizing and scrutiny can affect an officer in the heat of the moment to reconsider whether their is justification for using deadly force and in this case, that cost two people's lives.
She was off duty and entered the wrong apartment after her shift. She shot a guy thinking it was a home invasion. And now... she's rightfully being charged with manslaughter. This was not an on duty officer abusing her position of power. This was an idiot that is facing charges for her idiocy.
I think that in Texas, there might be a few people from a number of professions who might have done the same thing after moronically forgetting which apartment was theirs.
She was off duty and entered the wrong apartment after her shift. She shot a guy thinking it was a home invasion. And now... she's rightfully being charged with manslaughter. This was not an on duty officer abusing her position of power. This was an idiot that is facing charges for her idiocy.
I think that in Texas, there might be a few people from a number of professions who might have done the same thing after moronically forgetting which apartment was theirs.
How does such a “moron” get hired to keep law and order over the rest of us, never mind be issued a firearm? Oh yea, right, it’s ‘Murica. Further, off duty police behavior can’t be pointed out nor criticized? If the victim had been white and the offending officer minority, there’d be pages of condemnation of the “white genocide,” I’m sure.
She was off duty and entered the wrong apartment after her shift. She shot a guy thinking it was a home invasion. And now... she's rightfully being charged with manslaughter. This was not an on duty officer abusing her position of power. This was an idiot that is facing charges for her idiocy.
I think that in Texas, there might be a few people from a number of professions who might have done the same thing after moronically forgetting which apartment was theirs.
How does such a “moron” get hired to keep law and order over the rest of us, never mind be issued a firearm? Oh yea, right, it’s ‘Murica. Further, off duty police behavior can’t be pointed out nor criticized? If the victim had been white and the offending officer minority, there’d be pages of condemnation of the “white genocide,” I’m sure.
You are asking that question?
My gawd man... look who your country elected as its president. If it's slim pickings for your president... it's really really lean for selecting police officers.
You can be as critical as you want, but if this is all the news related to police abuse... the cops have had a good month.
She was off duty and entered the wrong apartment after her shift. She shot a guy thinking it was a home invasion. And now... she's rightfully being charged with manslaughter. This was not an on duty officer abusing her position of power. This was an idiot that is facing charges for her idiocy.
I think that in Texas, there might be a few people from a number of professions who might have done the same thing after moronically forgetting which apartment was theirs.
How does such a “moron” get hired to keep law and order over the rest of us, never mind be issued a firearm? Oh yea, right, it’s ‘Murica. Further, off duty police behavior can’t be pointed out nor criticized? If the victim had been white and the offending officer minority, there’d be pages of condemnation of the “white genocide,” I’m sure.
You are asking that question?
My gawd man... look who your country elected as its president. If it's slim pickings for your president... it's really really lean for selecting police officers.
You can be as critical as you want, but if this is all the news related to police abuse... the cops have had a good month.
I think the charges are justified. But I also think the personal attacks may not be. Have you never tried to open the wrong car door? Everyone has. Does that make you an idiot? It sounds stupid at first, I agree. But when you read the details she lived there about a month. It seems plausible that she got off on the wrong floor by mistake and went to where her apartment would be. I dont know what the apartment building looked like, but many are just like hotels. Once you get off the elevator it all looks the same.
I think she should be charged, but I dont think that represents any sort of slim pickings based on 1 incident, that actually probably happens all the time (without a shooting).
She was off duty and entered the wrong apartment after her shift. She shot a guy thinking it was a home invasion. And now... she's rightfully being charged with manslaughter. This was not an on duty officer abusing her position of power. This was an idiot that is facing charges for her idiocy.
I think that in Texas, there might be a few people from a number of professions who might have done the same thing after moronically forgetting which apartment was theirs.
How does such a “moron” get hired to keep law and order over the rest of us, never mind be issued a firearm? Oh yea, right, it’s ‘Murica. Further, off duty police behavior can’t be pointed out nor criticized? If the victim had been white and the offending officer minority, there’d be pages of condemnation of the “white genocide,” I’m sure.
You are asking that question?
My gawd man... look who your country elected as its president. If it's slim pickings for your president... it's really really lean for selecting police officers.
You can be as critical as you want, but if this is all the news related to police abuse... the cops have had a good month.
I think the charges are justified. But I also think the personal attacks may not be. Have you never tried to open the wrong car door? Everyone has. Does that make you an idiot? It sounds stupid at first, I agree. But when you read the details she lived there about a month. It seems plausible that she got off on the wrong floor by mistake and went to where her apartment would be. I dont know what the apartment building looked like, but many are just like hotels. Once you get off the elevator it all looks the same.
I think she should be charged, but I dont think that represents any sort of slim pickings based on 1 incident, that actually probably happens all the time (without a shooting).
Walking in and saying, "Oops. Sorry" makes the person careless, but okay. Walking in and killing a man makes the person an idiot.
She was off duty and entered the wrong apartment after her shift. She shot a guy thinking it was a home invasion. And now... she's rightfully being charged with manslaughter. This was not an on duty officer abusing her position of power. This was an idiot that is facing charges for her idiocy.
I think that in Texas, there might be a few people from a number of professions who might have done the same thing after moronically forgetting which apartment was theirs.
How does such a “moron” get hired to keep law and order over the rest of us, never mind be issued a firearm? Oh yea, right, it’s ‘Murica. Further, off duty police behavior can’t be pointed out nor criticized? If the victim had been white and the offending officer minority, there’d be pages of condemnation of the “white genocide,” I’m sure.
You are asking that question?
My gawd man... look who your country elected as its president. If it's slim pickings for your president... it's really really lean for selecting police officers.
You can be as critical as you want, but if this is all the news related to police abuse... the cops have had a good month.
I think the charges are justified. But I also think the personal attacks may not be. Have you never tried to open the wrong car door? Everyone has. Does that make you an idiot? It sounds stupid at first, I agree. But when you read the details she lived there about a month. It seems plausible that she got off on the wrong floor by mistake and went to where her apartment would be. I dont know what the apartment building looked like, but many are just like hotels. Once you get off the elevator it all looks the same.
I think she should be charged, but I dont think that represents any sort of slim pickings based on 1 incident, that actually probably happens all the time (without a shooting).
Walking in and saying, "Oops. Sorry" makes the person careless, but okay. Walking in and killing a man makes the person an idiot.
Very good point. Big difference. I agree then, she's an idiot for that part of the story.
This story is very fishy, top to bottom. Much of the information circulating is unverified, but reports are saying she was pounding on the door and screaming, and that he opened the door, which makes sense because people don't often leave apartments unlocked. In more verified territory, she was also still in uniform, and she wasn't arrested immediately (which is, of course, a massive abuse of police discretion) and tested for inebriating substances. She wasn't charged for three days. The prosecutor was presented with a witness and a video recording that did not include the shooting.
Shooting someone under these circumstances isn't just a mistake, it's a fucking Freudian slip. You don't just open fire on an unknown person unless you've been itching to pull a trigger already. That's my firm opinion whether it's some Alabama hillbilly or a Dallas police officer.
This story is very fishy, top to bottom. Much of the information circulating is unverified, but reports are saying she was pounding on the door and screaming, and that he opened the door, which makes sense because people don't often leave apartments unlocked. In more verified territory, she was also still in uniform, and she wasn't arrested immediately (which is, of course, a massive abuse of police discretion) and tested for inebriating substances. She wasn't charged for three days. The prosecutor was presented with a witness and a video recording that did not include the shooting.
Shooting someone under these circumstances isn't just a mistake, it's a fucking Freudian slip. You don't just open fire on an unknown person unless you've been itching to pull a trigger already. That's my firm opinion whether it's some Alabama hillbilly or a Dallas police officer.
Maybe RG...
But you're making quite a leap to assert such so 'firmly'. I think she was more scared than 'itchy'.
This story is very fishy, top to bottom. Much of the information circulating is unverified, but reports are saying she was pounding on the door and screaming, and that he opened the door, which makes sense because people don't often leave apartments unlocked. In more verified territory, she was also still in uniform, and she wasn't arrested immediately (which is, of course, a massive abuse of police discretion) and tested for inebriating substances. She wasn't charged for three days. The prosecutor was presented with a witness and a video recording that did not include the shooting.
Shooting someone under these circumstances isn't just a mistake, it's a fucking Freudian slip. You don't just open fire on an unknown person unless you've been itching to pull a trigger already. That's my firm opinion whether it's some Alabama hillbilly or a Dallas police officer.
Maybe RG...
But you're making quite a leap to assert such so 'firmly'. I think she was more scared than 'itchy'.
I think that's what she would love for everyone to believe, that's everyone's story when they murder someone on accident. I don't buy it, ever.
This story is very fishy, top to bottom. Much of the information circulating is unverified, but reports are saying she was pounding on the door and screaming, and that he opened the door, which makes sense because people don't often leave apartments unlocked. In more verified territory, she was also still in uniform, and she wasn't arrested immediately (which is, of course, a massive abuse of police discretion) and tested for inebriating substances. She wasn't charged for three days. The prosecutor was presented with a witness and a video recording that did not include the shooting.
Shooting someone under these circumstances isn't just a mistake, it's a fucking Freudian slip. You don't just open fire on an unknown person unless you've been itching to pull a trigger already. That's my firm opinion whether it's some Alabama hillbilly or a Dallas police officer.
Maybe RG...
But you're making quite a leap to assert such so 'firmly'. I think she was more scared than 'itchy'.
I think that's what she would love for everyone to believe, that's everyone's story when they murder someone on accident. I don't buy it, ever.
If your version is true then I'd agree with you. I've heard several different stories from the little I read. That the door was unlocked, to it was already open, to he opened it while she was trying to unlock it. I think those circumstances could change how harsh the consequences should be, and definitely if she was banging on the door and yelling then that is one of the worst case scenarios for her.
This story is very fishy, top to bottom. Much of the information circulating is unverified, but reports are saying she was pounding on the door and screaming, and that he opened the door, which makes sense because people don't often leave apartments unlocked. In more verified territory, she was also still in uniform, and she wasn't arrested immediately (which is, of course, a massive abuse of police discretion) and tested for inebriating substances. She wasn't charged for three days. The prosecutor was presented with a witness and a video recording that did not include the shooting.
Shooting someone under these circumstances isn't just a mistake, it's a fucking Freudian slip. You don't just open fire on an unknown person unless you've been itching to pull a trigger already. That's my firm opinion whether it's some Alabama hillbilly or a Dallas police officer.
Maybe RG...
But you're making quite a leap to assert such so 'firmly'. I think she was more scared than 'itchy'.
I think that's what she would love for everyone to believe, that's everyone's story when they murder someone on accident. I don't buy it, ever.
If your version is true then I'd agree with you. I've heard several different stories from the little I read. That the door was unlocked, to it was already open, to he opened it while she was trying to unlock it. I think those circumstances could change how harsh the consequences should be, and definitely if she was banging on the door and yelling then that is one of the worst case scenarios for her.
I don't see any scenarios where she had a legitimate reason to be scared enough to shoot someone. If you are that threatened, then it's self defense. If you aren't being legitimately threatened, why the fuck you shooting? Because you have an itchy trigger finger and a disgusting "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality.
Has anyone read any accounts of how many shots fired?
This story is very fishy, top to bottom. Much of the information circulating is unverified, but reports are saying she was pounding on the door and screaming, and that he opened the door, which makes sense because people don't often leave apartments unlocked. In more verified territory, she was also still in uniform, and she wasn't arrested immediately (which is, of course, a massive abuse of police discretion) and tested for inebriating substances. She wasn't charged for three days. The prosecutor was presented with a witness and a video recording that did not include the shooting.
Shooting someone under these circumstances isn't just a mistake, it's a fucking Freudian slip. You don't just open fire on an unknown person unless you've been itching to pull a trigger already. That's my firm opinion whether it's some Alabama hillbilly or a Dallas police officer.
Maybe RG...
But you're making quite a leap to assert such so 'firmly'. I think she was more scared than 'itchy'.
I think that's what she would love for everyone to believe, that's everyone's story when they murder someone on accident. I don't buy it, ever.
If your version is true then I'd agree with you. I've heard several different stories from the little I read. That the door was unlocked, to it was already open, to he opened it while she was trying to unlock it. I think those circumstances could change how harsh the consequences should be, and definitely if she was banging on the door and yelling then that is one of the worst case scenarios for her.
I don't see any scenarios where she had a legitimate reason to be scared enough to shoot someone. If you are that threatened, then it's self defense. If you aren't being legitimately threatened, why the fuck you shooting? Because you have an itchy trigger finger and a disgusting "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality.
Has anyone read any accounts of how many shots fired?
I agree. I think the difference for me though would be how serious the charges, like negligent manslaughter to murder though depending on the scenario. Banging on the door yelling demonstrates one state of mind that other scenarios might not.
Comments
In other words, can police proactively ward off the escalation of intense physical resistance to arrest or detainment by definitively and actively taking action to ensure things do not escalate to the point where they are in danger?
When the cops are there... the gig is up. Don't resist. What good can come of resisting?
The officer argues that the court should not expect photographic evidence because his word is enough - "because I’m a sworn officer, I’m sworn to tell the truth." He goes on to say “If every traffic cop gets one, it becomes unaffordable. I’m better off with my $99 scope and the court trusting what I saw.”
So essentially he is arguing that the court should accept the word of police officers for conviction even when there is no other evidence. This is a fairly minor crime, of course, but if the principle is valid then it holds for major crimes, too. It's not a principle I can agree with, knowing what we know simply about the inherent errors in eyewitness testimony, let alone all other factors.
I also note the phrasing of his argument - "I'm better off.....". Of course the officer is better off if his or her word isn't questioned, but that's not really the point of the legal system.
I can see both sides of this argument. It is frustrating that it is sometimes just his word and I would have to prove my innocence. I've received a ticket I didn't deserve. I fought it and won, but it was more of a clerical error on the part of the DMV why I won rather than me proving my case.
On the other side, if photographic evidence was needed to give a ticket, there wouldn't be any tickets and therefore really no enforcement of traffic laws. If a cop needed a video of me running a stop sign to give me a ticket for it, it would become nearly impossible to enforce that.
So then my question is how do you enforce basic traffic laws if the cop's testimony is not enough? Even though sometimes they are enforced for revenue, they are all written for safety. Stop signs, speed limits etc are all there for safety, so enforcing them is saving saving lives.
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2018/06/video_of_marion_county_deputy.html
He should have complied. There must be more to this story. Uhh...what else...um...the cops feared for their lives...he had a, uh, thing, that looked like a, um, gun.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Columbus-2003
Cincinnati-2006
Columbus-2010
Wrigley-2013
Cincinnati-2014
Lexington-2016
Wrigley 1 & 2-2018
There typically is more to the story.
It just seems excessive- like that one above where the deputy is punching that weird guy repeatedly in the back of the head.
Besides, it isn't the weaponry that makes shithead cops let their shit shine, it's the impunity.
https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2018/07/15/weymouth-police-officer-michael-chesna-fatally-shot
If the situation had a different outcome, meaning the suspect was shot dead after hurling rocks at the fallen officer, this forum would be alive with people crying 'back the blue' and all the other classics.
As to what you mentioned TB, I think you are right. It's hard for a normal citizen to understand the complexities of situations like this and how one mistake could mean an officer is incapacitated and unable to stop someone from taking their own weapon and using it against them or someone else. In another reality, there is public outcry for an officer shooting a man holding a rock. I really believe that all of the criticizing and scrutiny can affect an officer in the heat of the moment to reconsider whether their is justification for using deadly force and in this case, that cost two people's lives.
http://m.cnn.com/en/article/h_9e2ed612a2c457f274962c4a859ba87b
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/09/09/amber-guyger-police-officer-named-in-dallas-fatal-shooting-shot-suspect-in-2017-report.html
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Is this a 'policing' incident?
She was off duty and entered the wrong apartment after her shift. She shot a guy thinking it was a home invasion. And now... she's rightfully being charged with manslaughter. This was not an on duty officer abusing her position of power. This was an idiot that is facing charges for her idiocy.
I think that in Texas, there might be a few people from a number of professions who might have done the same thing after moronically forgetting which apartment was theirs.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
My gawd man... look who your country elected as its president. If it's slim pickings for your president... it's really really lean for selecting police officers.
You can be as critical as you want, but if this is all the news related to police abuse... the cops have had a good month.
But I also think the personal attacks may not be. Have you never tried to open the wrong car door? Everyone has. Does that make you an idiot?
It sounds stupid at first, I agree. But when you read the details she lived there about a month. It seems plausible that she got off on the wrong floor by mistake and went to where her apartment would be.
I dont know what the apartment building looked like, but many are just like hotels. Once you get off the elevator it all looks the same.
I think she should be charged, but I dont think that represents any sort of slim pickings based on 1 incident, that actually probably happens all the time (without a shooting).
Walking in and saying, "Oops. Sorry" makes the person careless, but okay. Walking in and killing a man makes the person an idiot.
I agree then, she's an idiot for that part of the story.
Much of the information circulating is unverified, but reports are saying she was pounding on the door and screaming, and that he opened the door, which makes sense because people don't often leave apartments unlocked.
In more verified territory, she was also still in uniform, and she wasn't arrested immediately (which is, of course, a massive abuse of police discretion) and tested for inebriating substances. She wasn't charged for three days.
The prosecutor was presented with a witness and a video recording that did not include the shooting.
Shooting someone under these circumstances isn't just a mistake, it's a fucking Freudian slip. You don't just open fire on an unknown person unless you've been itching to pull a trigger already. That's my firm opinion whether it's some Alabama hillbilly or a Dallas police officer.
Blood was drawn at the scene, results not yet released.
But you're making quite a leap to assert such so 'firmly'. I think she was more scared than 'itchy'.
I've heard several different stories from the little I read. That the door was unlocked, to it was already open, to he opened it while she was trying to unlock it. I think those circumstances could change how harsh the consequences should be, and definitely if she was banging on the door and yelling then that is one of the worst case scenarios for her.
Has anyone read any accounts of how many shots fired?
Rodney King
Amadou Diallo
Trayvon Martin
Walter Scott
Phillip White
Eric Garner
Sean Bell
Freddy Gray
Aiyana Jones
Sandra Bland
Tamir Rice
Kimani Gray
John Crawford
Michael Brown
Miriam Carey
Emmet Till
Tommy Yancy
Jordan Baker
Botham Jean
https://eji.org/national-lynching-memorial
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©