Another Police Shooting, Ho Hum, Wait What The Fuck

[bluestarultor]

Armake, there are just so many things wrong with your post.

First off, even in the grainy videos, as a guy who's legally blind without corrective lenses, it wasn't so poor-quality that I couldn't tell what was going on.

Second, there is absolutely NOTHING about fight-or-flight reflexes that make an exception for authority. When you're in pain or panicked, it doesn't stop because of a badge. That would be like a deer saying, "Oh, this is your territory? Okay, eat me, then! So long as it's official! "

Third off, there's the above video. That's pretty damn clear. In color, with sound. The only shame is the doors slamming shut before any more of the aftermath could be caught.



I think it's less about what happened now and more about actually serving justice instead of trying to sweep it under the rug. The trains lied about the cameras once already, but there's plenty of video to go by, even if it IS true they didn't catch anything useful, which in turn would bring to light serious flaws in the security systems in the first place.



Edit: Oh, and on tasers? They completely shut down your entire nervous system. Pretty damn hard to resist. In fact, even lesser weaponry is generally more effective than it needs to be unless you activate those fight-or-flight responses, in which case pain doesn't register and there's a severe damper on conscious thought. But even tasers work on someone in that state.

[Solid Snake]

BART official Jim Allison stated that the Fruitvale Station cameras were not equipped to record. This claim was recanted two days later, when officials then said that the camera tapes were running, but did not pick up any of the details of the shooting.

Now that part of the article? That pisses me off. "No details of the shooting" my ass.

Seriously if I lived in Oakland right now I'd really consider joining in on some protesting. I often tend to side with the police when it's a morally complex, "shades of gray" issue but in this particular circumstance this is as black and white as it possibly can be. (Dual meaning with racial undertones fully intended, by the way.) There's no valuable justification for even tasering the guy, let alone shooting him with an actual gun. The reactions of the witnesses alone tell the story -- it's worth noting that witnesses (assuming they're not complicit) generally tend to side with cops (or similar authority figures) over criminals, so when witnesses as diverse as those you'd find on public transportation are screaming at the cops, it's a pretty good sign the cops are acting like assholes.

EDIT: Wait! I found a part of the story that somehow manages to piss me off even more!!!

Police attempted, but failed, to confiscate all witness video. Karina Vargas, a witness who recorded the shooting, boarded the train just before the doors closed. A female officer banged on the doors attempting to retrieve Vargas' recording.

...Seriously? Seriously?!?! Isn't this basically equivalent to the police just admitting they fucked up but don't want to take any blame for it?

[Armake21truth]

Originally Posted by bluestarultor

First off, even in the grainy videos, as a guy who's legally blind without corrective lenses, it wasn't so poor-quality that I couldn't tell what was going on.

I see denial, but no, I couldn't see the suspect clearly enough to see how bad he was struggling, it's as simple as that.

Originally Posted by bluestarultor

Second, there is absolutely NOTHING about fight-or-flight reflexes that make an exception for authority. When you're in pain or panicked, it doesn't stop because of a badge. That would be like a deer saying, "Oh, this is your territory? Okay, eat me, then! So long as it's official! "

It wouldn't excuse it, but it would make it more understable if he was perceived as a threat but wasn't.

Originally Posted by bluestarultor

Third off, there's the above video. That's pretty damn clear. In color, with sound. The only shame is the doors slamming shut before any more of the aftermath could be caught.

Yeah, clear that people were shouting at the cops and that the suspect may have been resisting.

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by Armake21truth

It wouldn't excuse it, but it would make it more understable if he was perceived as a threat but wasn't.

What could possibly be threatening about this man? He's unarmed, surrounded by cops. What could he possibly do to them? Maybe squirm a little bit and make it take an extra minute to handcuff him? Does that adequately qualify as a "threat?"

And again, if the cop's actions were even remotely justifiable, why attempt to confiscate all the witness recordings? Why try to coerce the metro system into pretending a recording conveniently does not exist? It's obvious the cops were justifiably scared shitless that this story would be released to the public for a pretty darn good reason.

[Azisien]

Okay, even if this Grant guy was spinning like a turbine he was squirming so much, that isn't justification to shoot him dead.

[Armake21truth]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

What could possibly be threatening about this man? He's unarmed, surrounded by cops. What could he possibly do to them? Maybe squirm a little bit and make it take an extra minute to handcuff him? Does that adequately qualify as a "threat?"

I've explained that in my above posts and I'm not repeating myself, go back and read through my posts and if you still have questions, I'll be glad to answer.

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

And again, if the cop's actions were even remotely justifiable, why attempt to confiscate all the witness recordings? Why try to coerce the metro system into pretending a recording conveniently does not exist? It's obvious the cops were justifiably scared shitless that this story would be released to the public for a pretty darn good reason.

That does look suspicious, although I have to wonder if it's because they're guilty or just worry about looking guilty but aren't. If it's the latter they certainly went about it the wrong way.

Originally Posted by Azisien

Okay, even if this Grant guy was spinning like a turbine he was squirming so much, that isn't justification to shoot him dead.

Not if it was done on purpose no, but the question is was it shoot to wound gone wrong, or to kill?

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by Armake21truth

That does look suspicious, although I have to wonder if it's because they're guilty or just worry about looking guilty but aren't. If it's the latter they certainly went about it the wrong way.

So when confronted with the probability that the police are engaging in a suspicious cover-up of damning evidence of their guilt and their ineptitude, the proper assumption to make is that they're really innocent but they're afraid of being perceived as guilty?

I'm glad America's justice system doesn't actually work that way, insofar as evidence of an attempted cover-up of a crime is generally perceived as practically an admission of guilt. Men (and women) have gone to jail, guilty on murder charges, when no direct evidence existed of them having committed the actual crime, but plenty of indirect, aggravating evidence existed that "after the fact," they blatantly tried to conceal the truth and "cover up" what happened. If you're not guilty of an illegal action, it behooves you to be as forward and honest as possible. The fact that the police are being actively dishonest and manipulative sheds serious doubt on any possibility of the cop having made an innocent mistake.

Besides, if I'm a cop and I made an innocent mistake and accidentally shot a guy I didn't mean to shoot and kill? I think my most immediate instinctive action would be to profusely apologize to the public. I don't care how much crap I'd get for sticking my neck out, assuming I have a conscience and I had just killed a man I didn't intend to kill, I would not sleep at night until I had practically groveled on the floor begging for forgiveness. The fact that this has not happened doesn't sit well with me. I mean if I was a family member of the man who was killed I'm not sure if I'd ever forgive this guy even if it was an honest mistake, but hearing any honest remorse would be a nice start.

[Armake21truth]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

So when confronted with the probability that the police are engaging in a suspicious cover-up of damning evidence of their ineptitude, the proper assumption to make is that they're really innocent but they're afraid of being perceived as guilty?

No the proper assumption to make is, "Let's get to the bottom of this" as opposed to "Oh yeah, you're guilty." I'm agreeing, at least that this is cause for suspicion, I even said it looks suspicious.

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

If you're not guilty of an illegal action, it behooves you to be as forward and honest as possible. The fact that the police are being actively dishonest and manipulative sheds serious doubt on any possibility of the cop having made an innocent mistake.

That's not necessarily true, many people try to focus more on making sure they have a convincing case in their favor as opposed to being honest and letting the evidence speak for itself, especially when juries are unreliable and sometimes disregard evidence because it confuses them.

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

Besides, if I'm a cop and I made an innocent mistake and accidentally shot a guy I didn't mean to shoot and kill? I think my most immediate instinctive action would be to profusely apologize to the public. I don't care how much crap I'd get for sticking my neck out, assuming I have a conscience and I had just killed a man I didn't intend to kill, I would not sleep at night until I had practically groveled on the floor begging for forgiveness. The fact that this has not happened doesn't sit well with me. I mean if I was a family member of the man who was killed I'm not sure if I'd ever forgive this guy even if it was an honest mistake, but hearing any honest remorse would be a nice start.

That's you, not everyone. People would use that against you and say you admitted to murder when you really didn't. I know because I've seen how the public and the media conveniently interpret shit however they see fit.

[Nikose Tyris]

Originally Posted by Armake21truth

That's you, not everyone. People would use that against you and say you admitted to murder when you really didn't. I know because I've seen how the public and the media conveniently interpret shit however they see fit.

A man was shot by a police officer. The man in all available forms of evidence is shown to have not been a threat. They had lesser forms of subduing this man. They chose lethal force.

Is this fact being argued by anyone? Or is this the generally accepted "This is what went down" description?

[Kim]

Armake, I understand giving somebody the benefit of the doubt, but when you shoot someone at point blank range who is still pinned to the ground and then try to hide all evidence and cover it up, you lose any rights to that.