View Full Version : Body-Cam Video Of Daniel Shaver Shooting
Not a cop bashing thread!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBUUx0jUKxc
What went right here, because I see a whole lot going wrong. Five cops and only one shoots and is acquitted.
"You're Fucked" on a service weapon? Really!?
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/19432f3bc338dde5374d75c9d434cbcf72ca3e24/c=207-0-3442-2432&r=x393&c=520x390/local/-/media/2016/03/29/Phoenix/Phoenix/635948868236591247-G1K1K5PW.jpg
For the record, I sat across the table, at a Thanksgiving potluck, from one of our sheriff's deputies and his now grow kids (who I watched grow up). My next CCW class will be with a local cop. I have respect for the good ones.
wctriumph
12-08-2017, 18:39
That should not have happened.
Dont like how the situation was handled.
The guy giving directions wasn't doing a good job, at all. If, as Mark says, the guy shooting wasn't the guy giving demands, I don't understand why. I can't imagine the shame of living with such a colossal fuck-up on my conscience.
I'm not sure how anyone would have handled those stupid directions any better than that poor guy did.
I guess if in doubt, just lay there with hands visible and legs crossed.
I believe the reason he was acquitted is multi-dimensional.
1. He was over-charged. Actions do not meet the definition of 2nd degree murder. On a lessor charge, he likely would have been convicted.
2. There were multiple procedural mistakes made by other officers.
3. The shooter was not the one issuing the commands, which were confusing.
This was not a lawful shooting, but the blame has to be spread out and the shooter was not charged with the actual crime he committed. That does not make it a legal shoot, but a bigger miscarriage of justice. Now the prosecutor is also complicit in this mess.
This will all get redone in the Civil suit and I will bet anyone a dollar to a donut, the win will be for the plaintiffs.
PS: Manslaughter in Arizona is : "Recklessly causing the death of another person"
No matter what it was called and tried as, that was a wrongful death.
No matter what it was called and tried as, that was a wrongful death.
Agree. I am pretty amazed at the people who have seen the video, examined the context and are still saying it was justified. Not on here, but in many other places.
Jumpstart
12-08-2017, 19:21
Murder
bobbyfairbanks
12-08-2017, 19:26
That was terrible. Unfortunately, good training aid to improve future incidents
Guess not following instructions to the letter is grounds for being killed. The one point where the officers could have been most afraid (when the guy did put both of his hands behind his back briefly) and shots weren’t fired. Not sure how they felt more threatened with the guy crawling slowly on his hands and knees.
Right, wrong, or indifferent the guy barking out the orders definitely seems like a level one douche bag.
Of course I have no idea what events lead up to the encounter in the hallway to warrant such caution and display of force on the officers part.
SMH. What were they expecting to be confronted with that had them so amped up? What were they expecting around the corner that they couldn't approach him? They had that guy so scared and confused. If I were told to crawl, I'd be doing it like he was, just like I did as a baby.
I would imagine the dust cover has something else cute printed on it in the closed position that is more tame, but that kind of crap doesn't belong on service weapon.
ETA: Read that the AR-15 was the officer's personal weapon...but it's still a bad idea.
Got a bit of info from this article as to what the officers were expecting;
Former Arizona police officer acquitted in fatal shooting captured on body camera (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-mesa-arizona-police-shooting-20171208-story.html)
There is no excuse. Period.
The eight-member jury also found Brailsford, 27, not guilty of a lesser charge of reckless manslaughter.
“If this situation happened exactly as it did that time, I would have done the same thing,” Brailsford testified, according to the Arizona Republic.
Yeah.......
TEAMRICO
12-08-2017, 21:04
Fuck that cop. He should be in jail.
3. The shooter was not the one issuing the commands, which were confusing.
Not being argumentative but who was giving the commands? The vid made it look like one person was in "control". Motions, in the vid, looked like the body cam was barking orders.
It doesn't matter who was giving instructions. Period.
The guy giving instructions escalated a relatively harmless situation into that hot mess.
I've been following this for awhile. Mark Geragos is the family attorney. It is the citizens who are paying for this bullshit. Are these ass-hats "operator gamers"? Completely unprofessional, even if no one shot. Would it have turned out different if they used handguns? Likely. Was that full auto? This needs at least as much media coverage as recent cop involved shootings. How he got off is amazing.
"Of course I have no idea what events lead up to the encounter in the hallway to warrant such caution and display of force on the officers part."
It doesn't matter what events led to the encounter in the hallway.
The lack of situational awareness and lack of personal discipline indicate the police were not suited for that line of work.
No amount of training can fix stupid, incompetent, sociopathic behavior.
The guy giving instructions escalated a relatively harmless situation into that hot mess.
Agree. Still looks like the lead gun is giving the instruction. That said, as a drunk/drinking/stoned/stupid person, too many instructions to comprehend.
Taze, trank, stun, kick or what ever... The man on the floor was not a threat. The room door was closed. If there was a threat, the front cop would take the shot.
"Of course I have no idea what events lead up to the encounter in the hallway to warrant such caution and display of force on the officers part."
It doesn't matter what events led to the encounter in the hallway.
The lack of situational awareness and lack of personal discipline indicate the police were not suited for that line of work.
No amount of training can fix stupid, incompetent, sociopathic behavior.
Police called for a suspected rifle sticking out of a balcony window.
Loss of life + lots and lots of loss in city treasury $$.
I am not going to sit on armchair and Monday morning quarterbacking. Very sad incident. I think this and MN ccw guy incident was pretty bad.
Police called for a suspected rifle sticking out of a balcony window.
Irrelevant. They were in a hallway.
Loss of life + lots and lots of loss in city treasury $$.
I am not going to sit on armchair and Monday morning quarterbacking. Very sad incident. I think this and MN ccw guy incident was pretty bad.
You need to Monday morning quarterback. It's necessary for learning and correcting negligent behavior.
Irrelevant. They were in a hallway.
Not questioning why they were there. Questioning what happened when they walked into the hallway.
Yes. LE were not educated for the situation. Why not? Deescalate before killing an innocent. Is this a hard concept?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and disagree with most of you.
The officers were called to the scene due to multiple reports of a man with a long gun aiming it at pedestrians in the parking lot and the surrounding areas.
People typically are not forced out of their room at rifle point for anything less serious then this type of call.
There were two people in that hallway that were not police officers, one of them was shot and the other was not. Why was the female not harmed? Because she followed the instructions of the officer-in-charge who was a Sergeant with the Mesa PD. The the male suspect Mr. Shaver failed to follow officer instructions. Keeping in mind that this was not a simple normal everyday routine contact with a law enforcement officer responding to a noise complaint, smell of marijuana, underage drinking, doing donuts in the parking lot, or prank calling the front desk of the hotel repeatedly. The officers were within reason to be a bit amped up.
I'm not in any way saying that the Mesa PD, and particularly the Sergeant couldn't use better Verbal Judo skills and a better SOP to arrest / detain suspects. I'm also not saying that I I'm glad Mr. Shaver was shot and killed by law enforcement, but I feel like some of the posters on this forum might have felt a bit differently if they found themselves in the same situation, holding someone at gunpoint with the reasonable suspicion that the person was armed and dangerous.
I am suprised by the rush to crucify this guy when many of us have not walked a mile in his shoes.
What the guy had engraved on his dust cover is irrelevant. Let the PC Hippies worry about that garbage.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
https://youtu.be/RrKDrUF-R8w
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
I can't crucify the shooter, either. That was a hot mess of a situation. At the moment when Shaver moved that right arm back, there's two voices expressing sounds of concern which likely influenced the shooter to act (he's taking in what he sees and what he hears).
That kid sounded scared shitless. But to say he wasn't a threat... he's not a threat until he's detained/restrained. In my mind, if you decide someone is not a threat then you run the risk of letting down your guard.
It's unfortunate. I think of my own kid who gets so discombobulated when he gets nervous or stressed, that he would fail to be able to focus well enough to comply exactly with instructions in such a situation. It chokes me up a little just thinking about it.
The shooter didn't make it to 2nd base in the fuck-fuck games, ML. He was a shitbag and got fired for other reasons later on. Let's not blue line of silence this as some stand up guy like so many of the members here, and not here, who made a split decision or can be faced with that. The situation was copulated unceremoniously. There was no reason they couldn't advance and detain. Introduction of complexity necessarily complicates the situation. Loss of control occurs when one introduces action into a situation that is not controlled by the person in charge. What do I mean? I mean playing Simon Says with someone who is not the one in control.
As other more experienced posters have said, the only reason this wasn't in the bag is because the Prosecution went too long on the ball.
And yes, his ejection port does matter because it indicates a mentality which is not conducive to a service profession. The dude wasn't some veteran street stomper. He was a 1 year cherry chump. He was a trigger happy idiot. He got his wish. I hope he can live with it, because the other guy died for it.
I can't crucify the shooter, either. That was a hot mess of a situation. At the moment when Shaver moved that right arm back, there's two voices expressing sounds of concern which likely influenced the shooter to act (he's taking in what he sees and what he hears).
That kid sounded scared shitless. But to say he wasn't a threat... he's not a threat until he's detained/restrained. In my mind, if you decide someone is not a threat then you run the risk of letting down your guard.
It's unfortunate. I think of my own kid who gets so discombobulated when he gets nervous or stressed, that he would fail to be able to focus well enough to comply exactly with instructions in such a situation. It chokes me up a little just thinking about it.
Despite all Iraqis going through English as part of school, we never approached them as native speakers. Short. Sweet. To the point. "Stop" (Awgaf), Awgaf terra armee (stop or I'll shoot"), etc. Nothing complex. Stress is a language barrier. Keep it simple. No math. No science. No complex instructions or actions (simple+simple+simple in short succession= complex). Stop. Lay Down. Detain. Done.
https://youtu.be/T6xie0NfZEA
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
The shooter didn't make it to 2nd base in the fuck-fuck games, ML. He was a shitbag and got fired for other reasons later on. Let's not blue line of silence this as some stand up guy like so many of the members here, and not here, who made a split decision or can be faced with that. The situation was copulated unceremoniously. There was no reason they couldn't advance and detain. Introduction of complexity necessarily complicates the situation. Loss of control occurs when one introduces action into a situation that is not controlled by the person in charge. What do I mean? I mean playing Simon Says with someone who is not the one in control.
As other more experienced posters have said, the only reason this wasn't in the bag is because the Prosecution went too long on the ball.
And yes, his ejection port does matter because it indicates a mentality which is not conducive to a service profession. The dude wasn't some veteran street stomper. He was a 1 year cherry chump. He was a trigger happy idiot. He got his wish. I hope he can live with it, because the other guy died for it.
Well put. I know nothing about being a cop, but sure looked like a whole lot of wrong to me.
hollohas
12-09-2017, 09:13
Despite all Iraqis going through English as part of school, we never approached them as native speakers. Short. Sweet. To the point. "Stop" (Awgaf), Awgaf terra armee (stop or I'll shoot"), etc. Nothing complex. Stress is a language barrier. Keep it simple. No math. No science. No complex instructions or actions (simple+simple+simple in short succession= complex). Stop. Lay Down. Detain. Done.
^This is a VERY important point. Thank you posting this. If soldiers can use techniques that are more reasonable and professional in a war setting with with non-Americans who are a much higher threat, then American citizen police officers should be able to exercise at least the same amount of prudence when dealing with American civilians. Especially one who is crawling, crying and begging for his life.
This guy was clearly NOT a threat. The call was about a possible rifle...which this guy obviously didn't have. I don't care how "amped up" the officers were when they entered the floor. They should be able to calm down as soon as they get their eyes on the actual situation at hand. If police officers are unable to use their eyes and their brains to assess a situation and instead are just running on emotions based on unconfirmed possibilities from a dispatch discription, then they should find a new job.
This officer who pulled the trigger was either too sacred or too angry to wear a badge. The dust cover points to the latter. But I also guess that he was trying to compensate for the former. Because anyone who chooses to shoot a crawling, crying, begging man instead of taking the "risk" of detaining him is a coward.
^This is a VERY important point. Thank you posting this. If soldiers can use techniques that are more reasonable and professional in a war setting with with non-Americans who are a much higher threat, then American citizen police officers should be able to exercise at least the same amount of prudence when dealing with American civilians. Especially one who is crawling, crying and begging for his life.
This guy was clearly NOT a threat. The call was about a possible rifle...which this guy obviously didn't have. I don't care how "amped up" the officers were when they entered the floor. They should be able to calm down as soon as they get their eyes on the actual situation at hand. If police officers are unable to use their eyes and their brains to assess a situation and instead are just running on emotions based on unconfirmed possibilities from a dispatch discription, then they should find a new job.
This officer who pulled the trigger was either too sacred or too angry to wear a badge. The dust cover points to the latter. But I also guess that he was trying to compensate for the former. Because anyone who chooses to shoot a crawling, crying, begging man instead of taking the "risk" of detaining him is a coward.
+1
Once spread out they could have been quickly handcuffed and situation over. The game playing was insane. It looked like murder to me.
beast556
12-09-2017, 10:37
Shooter should be in prision!
Not being argumentative but who was giving the commands? The vid made it look like one person was in "control". Motions, in the vid, looked like the body cam was barking orders.
The Sergeant who was to the shooters left was widely reported as the one issuing the commands. He "retired" shortly after the incident.
That should not have happened.
Dont like how the situation was handled.
No matter what it was called and tried as, that was a wrongful death.
I agree.
The guy giving directions wasn't doing a good job, at all. If, as Mark says, the guy shooting wasn't the guy giving demands, I don't understand why. I can't imagine the shame of living with such a colossal fuck-up on my conscience.
I'm not sure how anyone would have handled those stupid directions any better than that poor guy did.
I guess if in doubt, just lay there with hands visible and legs crossed.
The guy giving directions was simply awful, there is no way on God's green earth he should have been in charge of the situation.
The shooter deserves everything awful that karma can deliver to him. His face should be on a full page with an "armed and dangerous" caption. The people in Arizona need to be aware of him, his carelessness, and his eagerness to go to the trigger.
I believe the reason he was acquitted is multi-dimensional.
1. He was over-charged. Actions do not meet the definition of 2nd degree murder. On a lessor charge, he likely would have been convicted.
2. There were multiple procedural mistakes made by other officers.
3. The shooter was not the one issuing the commands, which were confusing.
This was not a lawful shooting, but the blame has to be spread out and the shooter was not charged with the actual crime he committed. That does not make it a legal shoot, but a bigger miscarriage of justice. Now the prosecutor is also complicit in this mess.
This will all get redone in the Civil suit and I will bet anyone a dollar to a donut, the win will be for the plaintiffs.
PS: Manslaughter in Arizona is : "Recklessly causing the death of another person"
1. Did the DA over-charge him on purpose?
2. Those officers shouldn't be officers any more in any city in any country.
3. Agreed, they made a tough situation even worse.
I agree with your PS - ought to have been manslaughter.
I'm very pro-police but not in this situation.
Bailey Guns
12-09-2017, 11:23
The level of ignorance displayed in some of the posts in this thread is truly amazing.
That is NOT a comment on the video or the circumstances that led to the shooting. Just the ignorance on display here.
Bailey Guns
12-09-2017, 11:33
Regarding the convoluted instructions the officer gave...
When I was working the street, and especially after I became a FTO, one thing that irritated me more than anything was someone giving complicated instructions like that.
Imagine a high-risk car stop. It was typical to hear something like this, especially from rookies just out on the street:
"Driver! With your right hand reach outside the window and open the vehicle door. Exit the vehicle. Turn around, face away from me, walk backwards to the sound of my voice, get down on one knee, get down on the other knee, blah, blah, blah, do this, do that, cross your feet such and such a way, you din't say 'mother may I?', etc... It's much like using police jargon when writing reports that could be much better by using normal, layman's language.
Most of the guys recognized, after doing it that way the first time, how confusing it is not only to do, but to follow. And how much easier it was to say something like, "GET OUT OF THE CAR NOW AND LEMME SEE YOUR HANDS!", "GET ON THE GROUND AND DON'T MOVE!".
bobbyfairbanks
12-09-2017, 11:43
all of this comes down to selection, evaluation and training failures on the leadership of the PD. ITS SAD. But there really are a laundry list of people to blame for the death besides for shooter. Use the body cam footage as training aid to stop this from happening again.
hollohas
12-09-2017, 11:45
Imagine a high-risk car stop. It was typical to hear something like this, especially from rookies just out on the street:
"Driver! With your right hand reach outside the window and open the vehicle door. Exit the vehicle. Turn around, face away from me, walk backwards to the sound of my voice, get down on one knee, get down on the other knee, blah, blah, blah, do this, do that, cross your feet such and such a way, you din't say 'mother may I?', etc... It's much like using police jargon when writing reports that could be much better by using normal, layman's language.
Bailey, why was that a common way for rookies to give commands?
Bailey Guns
12-09-2017, 11:50
I have no doubt that the prosecution brought up many of the points you're making regarding Shaver's psychological profile. But the truth is, you don't know his mindset at the time of the shooting. And apparently, whatever his mindset was as presented by testimony and/or other evidence, the jury found his version to be more credible than that presented by the prosecution.
I have to say I'm in agreement with MarkCO on this one. I'm not justifying what happened at all...especially the guy shouting instructions. That stressed me just watching the video. And I'm not so sure the guy should've been acquitted, either. If I had to make a guess and speculate on why this trial ended with an acquittal I'd have to say it's because somehow, somewhere, the prosecution dropped the ball.
ETA: On the other hand, when the jury hears the officer say, "I did exactly what I was taught to do" (in so many words), and the guy responsible for training says, "he did exactly what we taught him to do"...that's some pretty powerful testimony.
Bailey Guns
12-09-2017, 11:51
Bailey, why was that a common way for rookies to give commands?
Because that's how it was taught. At least back then in the 80s and 90s. I always hated that.
I only know what I saw in the video, but when I watch I don't necessarily see someone who's native state would be considered "trigger happy." I think it's possible that when you're holding a gun on someone, and the person shouting all the commands is freaking the fuck out and losing his mind, you're probably pretty amped up at that point. "Geez, this seems to be a bigger deal than I thought, he keeps threatening to kill them, guess I'd better be ready to actually pull the trigger here so no one on my team does due to my hesitating." Obviously I've no experience with this, but I can at least see that side of why this happened. It doesn't excuse that it happened, just probably more likely than that PD having a team of blood thirsty murders out running the streets.
I only know what I saw in the video, but when I watch I don't necessarily see someone who's native state would be considered "trigger happy." I think it's possible that when you're holding a gun on someone, and the person shouting all the commands is freaking the fuck out and losing his mind, you're probably pretty amped up at that point. "Geez, this seems to be a bigger deal than I thought, he keeps threatening to kill them, guess I'd better be ready to actually pull the trigger here so no one on my team does due to my hesitating." Obviously I've no experience with this, but I can at least see that side of why this happened. It doesn't excuse that it happened, just probably more likely than that PD having a team of blood thirsty murders out running the streets.
That sort of situation is when you recognize your team mate is having an issue and step in to calm the situation.
While kind of an aside, I recall when my TC (SSG) reached the portion in a gunnery table where the gunner goes black and TC has to initiate a mock call for fire mission. He started wigging out and totally screwing up the call for fire. My wingman TC, a SGT, broke in the sequence on the net and started issuing corrections and proper call for fire procedures. SSG literally threw down the mic and whined, "he's stepping on my toes". No, he was saving our evolution while SSG pissed all over his own face for the world to hear.
No one is perfect all the time. It's ok to step in, even if junior, to correct a situation spiraling out of control.
That sort of situation is when you recognize your team mate is having an issue and step in to calm the situation.
While kind of an aside, I recall when my TC (SSG) reached the portion in a gunnery table where the gunner goes black and TC has to initiate a mock call for fire mission. He started wigging out and totally screwing up the call for fire. My wingman TC, a SGT, broke in the sequence on the net and started issuing corrections and proper call for fire procedures. SSG literally threw down the mic and whined, "he's stepping on my toes". No, he was saving our evolution while SSG pissed all over his own face for the world to hear.
No one is perfect all the time. It's ok to step in, even if junior, to correct a situation spiraling out of control.You care to reiterate that in layman's terms?
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Bailey Guns
12-09-2017, 12:38
I only know what I saw in the video, but when I watch I don't necessarily see someone who's native state would be considered "trigger happy." I think it's possible that when you're holding a gun on someone, and the person shouting all the commands is freaking the fuck out and losing his mind, you're probably pretty amped up at that point. "Geez, this seems to be a bigger deal than I thought, he keeps threatening to kill them, guess I'd better be ready to actually pull the trigger here so no one on my team does due to my hesitating." Obviously I've no experience with this, but I can at least see that side of why this happened. It doesn't excuse that it happened, just probably more likely than that PD having a team of blood thirsty murders out running the streets.
That seems like a perfectly reasonable view of the situation.
That sort of situation is when you recognize your team mate is having an issue and step in to calm the situation.
<snip>
No one is perfect all the time. It's ok to step in, even if junior, to correct a situation spiraling out of control.
What did you see in the video that leads you to believe the shooter was having an issue or spiraling out of control?
crays -
We were doing gunnery and the SSG had to call for fire. Got flustered. Junior NCO stepped over him on the net to complete the evolution and SSG got pissy about it, but Junior NCO did the right thing.
Bailey Guns -
I was replying to Irving who was talking about the state of mind of the shooter potentially being amped due to the other officer getting out of control with his commands. It is my understanding the shooter was not the one giving commands. It's the responsibility of everyone to maintain their own head and to assist with control of the situation.
Bailey Guns
12-09-2017, 12:51
I gotcha. You're talking about someone telling the sgt (who seems to have been doing all the screaming at the guy) to maybe take it down a notch or two? Agreed.
Bailey Guns
12-09-2017, 12:59
This article, in my opinion, is a reasonable explanation of possible reasons the jury acquitted the officer:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/jury-wisely-acquits-arizona-cop-in-killing-of-unarmed-man/article/2642978
I'm anxious to hear what one or more of the jurors had to say about this trial. I hope they choose to talk about it.
That sort of situation is when you recognize your team mate is having an issue and step in to calm the situation.
While kind of an aside, I recall when my TC (SSG) reached the portion in a gunnery table where the gunner goes black and TC has to initiate a mock call for fire mission. He started wigging out and totally screwing up the call for fire. My wingman TC, a SGT, broke in the sequence on the net and started issuing corrections and proper call for fire procedures. SSG literally threw down the mic and whined, "he's stepping on my toes". No, he was saving our evolution while SSG pissed all over his own face for the world to hear.
No one is perfect all the time. It's ok to step in, even if junior, to correct a situation spiraling out of control.
I agree, but not everyone, especially newbs are going to say anything. Crappy, but certainly understandable human nature to let some asshole's fury stay pointed at someone else. Especially if they felt that the already out of control situation would only get worse trying to step in. I'd like to think that were I in the shooter's position, I probably wouldn't have said anything, but wouldn't have fired.
hollohas
12-09-2017, 13:34
I think it's possible that when you're holding a gun on someone, and the person shouting all the commands is freaking the fuck out and losing his mind, you're probably pretty amped up at that point. "Geez, this seems to be a bigger deal than I thought, he keeps threatening to kill them, guess I'd better be ready to actually pull the trigger here so no one on my team does due to my hesitating." .
This brings up an interesting point. It seems sometimes these sorts of situations, when regular street officers respond in groups to potentially dangerous contacts, that the situation can escalate easily rather than de-escalate due to the group response. The group feeds off each other's high energy/emotions. Regular street officers don't necessarily get much team training like swat guys do. Their desire to not let the "team" down can seem to overtake the more appropriate goal of serving and protecting civilians.
(RE: look at the semi recent event in Arapahoe county where responding officers from multiple agencies, after 15 minutes of yelled commands we're ignored by a potentially dangerous individual, it escalated into the firing of something like 50+ rounds at a stopped car. One of the deputies even put 28 rounds into the top of a Trooper's car.)
I was raised by a State Patrol officer who worked a long and lonely stretch of road not far from the southern border. With backup a LONG way away. As I understand it, de-escalation becomes priority when you are all alone. Commands given are of the utmost importance to achieving that goal. Starting a fight man-o y man-o could be problematic. Especially because during much of my Dad's career radios weren't worn on their belt, so backup couldn't be called after a fight started.
Even with that in mind, the officers were not taught that shooting>hands on. Hand-to-hand was extensively taught. And officers oftentimes attempted to detain violent, unarmed bad guys, even solo. This was before modern tasers. Mace was carried but not preferred due to the possibility that it could actually harm the officer. It sounds like nightsticks were a popular tool to encourage compliance.
Point is, on the surface you would think that a solo officer would be more inclined to be jumpy and shoot, but maybe a group who's untrained in team tactics can actually snowball the situation more easily?
Lots of points of view presented, no personal attacks, and educational. Good work folks, on a bad event.
Anyone here try to crawl on your knees alone, hands in the air, with your legs crossed?
I just did, about 2" per crawl. Why subject anyone to that lengthy, difficult, and potentially painful ordeal that only exposes everyone involved for longer than necessary?
Why wasn't he instructed to STOP after starting to hand crawl? If he wasn't following instruction, he needs to be corrected, but not by shooting him.
What a hot mess.
*IF* Mr. Shaver would have had a weapon on him, but had not physically got it into play, and it had been concealed in his waistband 6 o'clock, what, I wonder, would the general consensus have been had he still been shot and killed with both his hands empty.
Alternatively what if he had produced a weapon and used it, vs. not been able to use it and still been killed?
I ask these hypotheticals to get a gauge of where people's line in the sand is drawn.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
*IF* Mr. Shaver would have had a weapon on him, but had not physically got it into play, and it had been concealed in his waistband 6 o'clock, what, I wonder, would the general consensus have been had he still been shot and killed with both his hands empty.
Alternatively what if he had produced a weapon and used it, vs. not been able to use it and still been killed?
I ask these hypotheticals to get a gauge of where people's line in the sand is drawn.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
I can see the movement in the video that might have caused someone on edge to shoot.
That said, the whole events as played out are a trainwreck from the beginning - and I'll qualify by stating that my thoughts are not coming from any LE background.
For me, everyone involved was culpable to some degree for that man's unnecessary death.
Zundfolge
12-09-2017, 16:35
I understand why many folk here get pissed off when people engage in "cop bashing" ... but videos like this (and the cop's acquittal) make it hard for the average citizen to counter the anti-cop voices out there.
I can't bring myself to defend this officers actions one iota and I certainly hope that he is never allowed to wear a badge again.
Disturbing video. Sad outcome to a non-issue 911 call.
I am not LEO but I can imagine a sense of anxiety when responding to a ' man with a gun ' call. Lots of woulda, coulda shoulda here.
I would be upset over the verdict if I were a family member.
Did they mention the departed victim's race!
Did they mention the departed victim's race!
Of course not. Otherwise there may have been mayhem in the streets in protest.
(No there wouldn't)
Four officers pointing (presumably) AR-15's at him, ready to fire. In the position he is in, the average reaction time to register that he has a gun and to pull the trigger on him several times is significantly shorter than the amount of time he requires to retrieve the gun, rotate his arm forward towards the officers, and pull the trigger.
So if he produced a weapon while crawling and used it before the officers fired on him, I'd want drug tests as their reflexes would be slowed to the point to have questions.
Only when he is standing, with a hand held near the (imaginary gun) position on an (presumably open carry) could he potentially draw and fire on officers who are already aiming at him within margins of (slower) reactions if he had skill.
This is all different when an officer has his weapon holstered and is surprised. But four officers with AR's pointed on you ready to fire before you have a weapon? You've got the same chance to get a wendy's soft serve in hell as you do successfully drawing and staying alive long enough to even get it pointed over there. It isn't hollywood, this is the same reason your chance of drawing a concealed weapon is nill if someone has a gun pointed on you, finger on the trigger, much less four people drawn on you.
ETA: I guess my point is, they had such an advantage in the situation that deescalation and hesitation is appropriate. E.g. shooting because he moves? Not good enough. Shooting because they see a weapon? Justified, and still within the margins to mitigate or altogether eliminate risk to the officers.
If we're talking one officer, with a weapon holstered, and all the sudden the suspect reaches into his wasteband, it would be much more justified for that officer to draw and fire in a panic; because their is a real belief his life is in jeopardy and there wouldn't be the time to hesitate.
Someone crawling on the floor makes a mistake with four AR's pointed at them? Sorry, it's real hard for me to believe the officer had a credible belief of risk to his life in that millisecond - e.g. one where he would lose the tactical advantage or be unable to react to save life. The second a weapon was visible? Sure. But they do have the time in this situation to discern that, where in the former (lone officer, holstered weapon) does not.Makes sense, appreciate the response.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
OtterbatHellcat
12-09-2017, 19:37
I'm no expert on any of this, and I'm with Brutals assessment of the situation.
The video that I watched shows me an unnecessary death. Pretty clear to me the subject was trying to follow the messed up directions being given....even though he did start crawling on all fours.
This is a shitty shoot IMO....that guy shouldn't have died.
I do feel the directives were confusing and done in an agitated state. We all know, after the fact, the victim was not a threat. But after watching the video a few times the victim was told to keep his hands up more than once. Twice he lowered his hand(s) to behind his back. The first time, he got a "pass", which if there was a time to shoot I feel was then. The second time he paid with his life. I'm starting to feel, maybe, the shoot was good but what lead up to it was a fucked-up mess.
Zundfolge
12-09-2017, 23:14
*IF* Mr. Shaver would have had a weapon on him...
*IF* Michael Brown actually had his hands up and hadn't robbed a bodega ...
*IF* Michael Brown actually had his hands up and hadn't robbed a bodega ...?
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
trlcavscout
12-10-2017, 18:33
That is ridiculous! That “cop” should be going to prison. He is obviously way to trigger happy and unprofessional to be anything more then an unarmed mall security guard.
I also blame on a damn jurors.
This case, Zarate (ca), Ynez (mn), and that Australian women (also in mn) are worst.
Why is it? Great defense? Lack of prep from prodecutors?
DavieD55
12-11-2017, 00:13
That is homicide.
Regarding the convoluted instructions the officer gave...
When I was working the street, and especially after I became a FTO, one thing that irritated me more than anything was someone giving complicated instructions like that.
Imagine a high-risk car stop. It was typical to hear something like this, especially from rookies just out on the street:
"Driver! With your right hand reach outside the window and open the vehicle door. Exit the vehicle. Turn around, face away from me, walk backwards to the sound of my voice, get down on one knee, get down on the other knee, blah, blah, blah, do this, do that, cross your feet such and such a way, you din't say 'mother may I?', etc... It's much like using police jargon when writing reports that could be much better by using normal, layman's language.
Most of the guys recognized, after doing it that way the first time, how confusing it is not only to do, but to follow. And how much easier it was to say something like, "GET OUT OF THE CAR NOW AND LEMME SEE YOUR HANDS!", "GET ON THE GROUND AND DON'T MOVE!".
Because that's how it was taught. At least back then in the 80s and 90s. I always hated that.
Thankfully training has changed- I was taught during high-risk (felony) stops to keep your instructions short, sweet, and idiot-level simply. "Get out of the car with your hands up. Walk towards me with your hands up. Stop. Turn around. Do not move." Cuff, and move to secured position, have another officer pat down and place in car. Move on to the next occupant.
When talking about these situations, people say "Why didn't they just prone him out there and cuff?" We're always taught known vs unknown. They dominated that hall way from where they were, had ample cover to bring suspects into custody from there (whoever was in charge decided that, and I can't fault that decision). We're taught to bring the suspects to us. This is where it fell apart. I've never been taught, in all my UOF or felony stop training, to have someone go to their knees and then move to where I am. That's inviting problems. This time it ended in the worst way. It looked to me (Someone who wasn't there, wasn't in that mindset) that the kid was trying to pull his pants up, and that's the move that was interpreted as a "furtive" movement that got him shot. I think it came down to training and execution. Both were deeply flawed.
Personally, after seeing the video, and seeing what the officer had on his rifle- he might have been unstable and looking to get into a shooting. Warning sign #1. His demeanor and attitude should have been noticed prior to this incident, and that's on his command/supervisors. You usually notice warning signs that officers are probable liabilities. What they say in the locker room, what they do in training. In this day-and-age some parts of the job require a level of aggressiveness. But also the job requires a level head during stressful situations. That's my $.02.
That sort of situation is when you recognize your team mate is having an issue and step in to calm the situation.
No one is perfect all the time. It's ok to step in, even if junior, to correct a situation spiraling out of control.
This! Nothing says you can't stop things and say "Hey, let me handle this from here." If it appears like your partner is getting too amped, or stressed, or what have you.
Bad shoot.
However, to those that say the cops should have just cuffed him where he lay, the cops were likely concerned about whether or not there was a gunman still in the room. They wanted to remain out of sight of the peep-hole.
Then again, they seemed to just wander up to the door after the shooting, so all-around piss-poor Mesa police tactics on display.
All of my dust covers say things like "I'm sorry," or "I wish things could have been different," or "I never wanted this." Some of them even say things like "See that game last night?" and "On your left!"
Bailey Guns
12-11-2017, 18:00
For some strange reason I believe you. [Coffee]
Scanker19
12-11-2017, 18:15
All of my dust covers say things like "I'm sorry," or "I wish things could have been different," or "I never wanted this." Some of them even say things like "See that game last night?" and "On your left!"
Where do you get these? I would actually have these hahahahaha
I believe I want one that says"Close before flight"...
OtterbatHellcat
12-11-2017, 18:56
Hell, I don't think I want anything like that on the dust cover. If they can read it, they most likely killed you and now have your weapon.
Why not something like "Eff off", or "I hope you die choking on a dick"?
https://youtu.be/_AQndX39JMs
I've been waiting for this video, I think this is an excellent break down of the legalities surrounding the recently-concluded criminal court proceedings.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
https://m.facebook.com/taprack.tactical/posts/1883248931985963
Bill Blowers assessment of this unfortunate incident. If you don't know who Bill Blowers is, well then go square yourself away.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/d4ca20578ffdbfbceb2e7626788ed1cf.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/23f50539c78b84118a2f8faf67b7af40.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/68bd93d931e1a2c67707bab4e823ef27.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/ee0c43017c7101d20e6282726d2c6b57.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/a250e618866e6b5e90397b7499666cd1.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/38a3cc22c7762841191d7b0b81ce825c.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/4e0b26b7ea9ecb2377849f0124f83aac.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/c864859176496f3c7a75fae7840936ba.jpg
https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Flmgcorporate.com%2Fphxdigital %2Fnews%2F3-29-16%2FLaQuintaOIS_PolicePaperwork.pdf&h=ATNCW7OGv_NtwQI975eC9lClu4PBC3a9IL3ywgOzFFu0dhh4 CGXBJhN8A7-QCyqqNYl-4DTI_eGiCX9cHzUqbnaKsHc1HMOu76lmyR1lZzcaZjhxv5y5VB RUT7duk-fLkTGh6VZo02pvb83D&enc=AZOLv0tl1Cx1nGHAqjjIEZsDPHf6yuSB7Pmx_89Hn034NP vI1g0vGmLd5psAvda0usJbrDEV89mHdXaACmRCMltlDqGalm_K czmUUQIeIhWHtnIzsSxfk9QBSE7KwtPt8QwkbiLECfHtEZQusb gqjPu-IDM_2TLGWFRKkVZcY0S6x2QZszKAvl-YSRMFqn5ldxo&s=1
We can all see what he's saying from the video. But rewatch it. "Keep your hands up" immediately followed by orders to crawl. Well, which is it? That's contradictory and complicates matters. What was up with the holier than thou tone of voice and peppered phrases adopted by the Sergeant, in combo with the increased tension in his voice, raising to freak out levels? Why the fast and complicated instructions that contradict. The whole thing was utterly retarded and did not have to go the way it did. Both come out together, but female first. Why? Because of ambiguous instructions. This complicates their detainment plan. He makes a guess that they would have had her walk backwards, hands up, and then detained. And then they would have had him exit the room, walk backwards, hands up, and then detained. After the female was detained, what prevented them from executing the original supposed plan? Fields of fire were clear.
We can all see what he's saying from the video. But rewatch it. "Keep your hands up" immediately followed by orders to crawl. Well, which is it? That's contradictory and complicates matters. What was up with the holier than thou tone of voice and peppered phrases adopted by the Sergeant, in combo with the increased tension in his voice, raising to freak out levels? Why the fast and complicated instructions that contradict. The whole thing was utterly retarded and did not have to go the way it did. Both come out together, but female first. Why? Because of ambiguous instructions. This complicates their detainment plan. He makes a guess that they would have had her walk backwards, hands up, and then detained. And then they would have had him exit the room, walk backwards, hands up, and then detained. After the female was detained, what prevented them from executing the original supposed plan? Fields of fire were clear.Did the events leading up to the shooting suck?
Yes.
Was the shooting legally justified?
Yes.
Should Mr. Brailsford face imprisonment or the death penalty because the Sergeant in charge was a prick?
No.
Should he face imprisonment or the death penalty because he shot and killed Mr. Shaver?
No.
Should Mr. Brailsford have been in Law Enforcement in the first place?
Probably not.
Should the Mesa PD adopt and enforce simpler detainment/arrest SOP's?
Yes.
Did Mr. Shaver make several dumb decisions the day he was killed? Absolutely.
Guns + Alcohol. Not a good mix.
Pointing guns out of windows not good.
Lying about being drunk to Police. Also not good.
Lying about being able to follow instructions. Not good.
Disobeying Law Enforcement commands. Also not good.
As an aside if my wife found out I had been drinking in a hotel room with a woman that was not her, being shot and killed by Police would be the least of my worries. Hell hath no fury and all that. Not saying he deserved to be killed, just looking at it objectively.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
Everyone knows that you're supposed to just agree with police in the street to not make them mad. So what does it matter if he lied about being drunk, or lied at all?
Also, he probably could have followed orders, if they weren't designed for failure.
Did he actually have a gun? Was he actually pointing it out the window? <-- I really don't know.
Guns and alcohol not mixing is irrelevant if he didn't fire a gun while being drunk.
https://youtu.be/_AQndX39JMs
I've been waiting for this video, I think this is an excellent break down of the legalities surrounding the recently-concluded criminal court proceedings.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
With what I've seen and with the additional info, I think Brailsford's verdict was probably correct. I also wonder if the Zarate verdict might of had an affect on this verdict. Arizona, being fairly conservative, maybe telling liberal California: How can we convict an American, killing in the line of duty, when you let an illegal walk. Far fetched?
Probably
Everyone knows that you're supposed to just agree with police in the street to not make them mad. So what does it matter if he lied about being drunk, or lied at all?
Also, he probably could have followed orders, if they weren't designed for failure.
Did he actually have a gun? Was he actually pointing it out the window? <-- I really don't know.
Guns and alcohol not mixing is irrelevant if he didn't fire a gun while being drunk.There were two high powered air rifles in room 502. Multiple eyewitnesses from the ground saw at least one male pointing a long gun out of a window.
Had Mr. Shaver not have gotten to a 0.29 BAC , he might not have been pointing an Air Rifle out a hotel room window. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. If I start pointing guns on my front porch, or out my window, I would imagine the Police show up. If I was almost 4 times over the legal limit to operate a motor vehicle, what do you think my chances of going into custody completely unharmed would be?
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
So there were rifles at least. I agree, don't be that drunk around guns. None of that has anything to do with him being killed though.
So there were rifles at least. I agree, don't be that drunk around guns. None of that has anything to do with him being killed though.
Disagree. It's what got the situation started.
The air rifles could have been easily confused for something larger. If they stayed in their cases, multiple hotel guests don't raise the alarm which started this shit storm.
Master of the Obvious statement from me on this situation - Windows work both ways.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/5bd078311904cb07454b8470ddce0273.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/e574b25ad6fb9f00377c12e5ade90030.jpg
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
palepainter
12-12-2017, 09:49
Been a while since I have chimed in on anything, But why didn't they simply detain him when he was down responding to commands in the way in which he was being ordered? This officer needs to be offline and gone. Frankly, should have been charged. If you make someone play twister long enough, they are going to put the left hand on the red circle at sometime.
Been a while since I have chimed in on anything, But why didn't they simply detain him when he was down responding to commands in the way in which he was being ordered? This officer needs to be offline and gone. Frankly, should have been charged. If you make someone play twister long enough, they are going to put the left hand on the red circle at sometime.
Modern LE training teaches that when you're in a tactically advantageous position, you bring the suspect to you, not go to them, for officer safety reasons. The execution of this was problematic (I've never been trained to have them do this on their knees or crawling, but I wasn't there, so I can't speak to their reasons) in this particular case.
The argument isn't whether or not Daniel Shaver made any bad decisions. He clearly did. Some of those preceded and even precipitated the police presence. The worst decision he made was to comply with instructions that made no sense. The job of the police was to deescalate the situation and detain an individual to determine if a crime had taken place. They did exactly the opposite of that with no necessity.
The police made worse decisions than Daniel Shaver: overcomplicated instructions, overcomplicated detainment procedures, having him crawl (unorthodox) vs standing and walking slowly with hands raised, unnecessarily escalating by tone of voice and demeaning comments, unnecessarily agitating the stress level of the individual by repeatedly threatening him if he makes a single mistake, etc.
Not even 45 seconds into the interaction we have the police accusing them of failing to comprehend simple instructions (assumedly for the female to come out first -- which is not simple, but ambiguous).
Following that, immediately, he states if they make another mistake there is a "very severe possibility you are both going to get shot". OK, so now he has escalated the stress factor with no need.
They attempt clarification and he starts with the verbal hershey squirts, verbally thumping his chest like some sort of wannabe Corporal. He continues to escalate and engage in a complex monologue.
The male rests his head on his arms and the sgt immediately blurts "For one thing, did I tell you to move young man?" At which point the male puts his arms straight fwd assuming he wants him to have his hands fwd, and gets another round of being told not to move, followed by new instruction: put his hands on top of his head and interlace his fingers, cross left foot over right.
We're not even a minute into this video and already the sgt has no control of the situation, talks unnecessarily with a tone of voice which is more condescending than it is authoritative, provides conflicting instruction, and continues to escalate the stress of the encounter. I don't even expect privates to act like this, much less a veteran police sgt.
He then asks again if anyone is in the room and is told no.
He then asks the stupidest question ever: "Are you both drunk?"
No, Sgt Dumbass. That's a subjective question and should be clarified to each individual. The question to ask is "Ma'am, have you had any alcoholic drinks tonight?" *answer* "Sir, have you had any alcoholic drinks tonight?" *answer*. This cascades into his next mistake:
He then "clarifies" whether or not they will have problems understanding anything he tells them. They agree. However, it's quite obvious that not even 2 minutes into this encounter they both seem to have problems understanding due to the fact he has seen fit to correct them several times, particularly Mr. Shaver.
Need I go on? Because this encounter so far has all the hallmarks of someone on scene who has no business being there, or at least no business giving direction. He has no control, offers conflicting instruction, etc.
And we haven't even gotten into more than 2 minutes in.
What a shit show.
Zundfolge
12-12-2017, 16:04
Those who enforce the law should be held to a more stringent standard than those who break it. Every good officer suffers because of this bullshit and the lack of any real ramifications of any kind. Our system is not one of justice however, it is an oligarchy of mere technicalities to enable biased judgments that please the king's anointed.
Agreed. Once upon a time here in America we had Peace Officers who were trained to de-escalate the situation. Today we have Law Enforcement Officers who are trained to dominate the situation.
That said we also once had a society of people that treated officers with respect and dignity, and not like they're there to be dicks and spoil everyone's fun or are the storm-troopers of the Patriarchy or Whitey or whatever idiocy people believe.
So the trade-off for our lack of a polite and genteel society is one where cops deal with trash day in and day out and innocent people get gunned down in the streets by them as a result.
Those who enforce the law should be held to a more stringent standard than those who break it. Every good officer suffers because of this bullshit and the lack of any real ramifications of any kind. Our system is not one of justice however, it is an oligarchy of mere technicalities to enable biased judgments that please the king's anointed.
Anyone who thinks air rifles in the room contributed to the suspects death... Sorry, nope. Not unless he walked into the hallway with one. The substance of a 911 call does not justify an officers actions in pulling the trigger.
The standard some of you want to justify is "mere constructive possession of something that looks like a weapon justifies killing you, even if not on your person when police respond" or alternatively, "the uneducated hearsay assertions of a 911 call justifies killing you, even if the person was blatantly lying when calling 911". Guess what, you guys signed your own death certificates.
Yeah, lets incrementally become even more like North Korea, mmmkay? How about the ones justifying this standard are the ones that it gets applied to, and the rest of us have a constitutionally objective standard. Sounds great to me.
Related:
https://youtu.be/0XYNOTUWfHE?t=80
You sound very cynical and slighted by the justice system. Officers can only respond with the information given, and in this case that information was from multiple witnesses who stated observing a rifle pointed out of a window of a hotel room. To say that that didn't play a factor at all in how the officers responded is ignorant at best. Up until the moment of attempting to get the male suspect (the deceased) into custody, the response to this situation was by the book. Officers were responding to a report of an individual armed with a rifle. Does the information once officer arrive change? All the freaking time. The call had already involved weapons, and the responding officers tailored their response to the potentiality of a lethal situation. By the law of averages where there is one gun, there is probably two. This is the direct result of the individual's actions. Him being shot is a completely different aspect to the situation, but criticism of the response up to initiating contact with suspect(s) is completely unwarranted from the lay public. Sorry you had a bad experience, but as I stated, up to the point of initial contact with the suspect, I cannot find fault in the response. Does it justify killing someone? Maybe, maybe not, that's all dependent upon the totality of the circumstances. But the individuals actions prior to law enforcement arrival definitely warrant a heightened state of alertness in the response to what was reported.
I had to watch this with my teen and explain to him how to deal with police. Not the conversation about how to comply but instead how and when to just go still and freeze.i don't know what else this poor kid could have done as had had no path to comply.
OtterbatHellcat
12-12-2017, 20:22
With some slightly more subjective input....I have to say that I'm PRO COP damn near all the time. Not always, but damn near.
I originally voiced an opinion that this was a "shitty shoot". I just watched a loop from hands straight up to last shot fired about 20 times.
For a short bit, I thought he might have been going for the bag in the middle of the floor....clearly not the case.
NOW I see the right hand motion he made behind his back, and started to bring his hand forward again....that is when the officer did what I believe to be procedure/training response.
While I still think that it sucks the subject was killed in the process of trying to follow seemingly odd directions being given....I also now see a clear and obvious window where that officer was on auto pilot relying on his training to neutralize a potential threat. Had I not seen the subject right hand motion behind and then forward, I would still call this a "shitty shoot".
That poor judgement with his right hand is what sealed his fate IMO......the rest of his poor decisions aside.
ETA:...that officer didn't have the benefit of watching it happen 20 times.
OK,
Now I really want to know is when are we getting a popcorn smiley. Could use one here right about now.
His poor judgment was necessitated by an idiot screaming contradictory orders and having him crawl, while intoxicated, in a hallway which had an object in his way, while continually being told if he made a mistake he would be shot. It was a shitty shoot because Sgt. Charles Langley wanted to play bad ass and engage in unnecessary repartee, instead of doing a simple job in a cool and collected manner.
OK,
Now I really want to know is when are we getting a popcorn smiley. Could use one here right about now.
[Pop]
OtterbatHellcat
12-12-2017, 20:35
I won't disagree with you Cav.
The idiot screaming is an idiot IMO. The officer that fired was operating on training I believe.
OtterbatHellcat
12-12-2017, 20:36
Damn, I ain't had popcorn in a long time.
[Pop]
Why couldn't I find that?
We've had one for years. You just have to cross your left leg over your right leg, AT THE KNEE, behind your back, close your left eye, keep my right eye open, crawl forward eleven paces using only the peaks of your hips and your chin, raise your credit score by 6 points on Experian and 2 points in Equifax, open a free checking account at Chase bank, load three .40S&W cartridges with 9.5 grains of Titegroup, use a 1.5" chisel to hand carve a dovetail into a rubber doorstop, legally take an elk with a .38 special at 77 yards, and vote your conscientious at the next election, while selecting the smiley from the drop down menu under the Go Advanced tab. You have till I can count down from ten to zero and if you make a mistake I'll fucking kill you.
OtterbatHellcat
12-12-2017, 20:40
It's in the "smiley thing"....tard.
[werdo]
His poor judgment was necessitated by an idiot screaming contradictory orders and having him crawl, while intoxicated, in a hallway which had an object in his way, while continually being told if he made a mistake he would be shot. It was a shitty shoot because Sgt. Charles Langley wanted to play bad ass and engage in unnecessary repartee, instead of doing a simple job in a cool and collected manner.
Need that like button too.
OtterbatHellcat
12-12-2017, 20:42
You know....I've always liked Irving.
vectorsc
12-12-2017, 21:27
This was very professionally handled -none of you get an opinion on it. You weren't there. The body cam footage is inconclusive. It was a good shoot.
This officer was trained in de-escalation techniques to include the use of assault rifles, rocket launchers, and fragmentation grenades. Just because his pre-cursor to using a de-escalation technique on this dangerous animal of a subject was insulting, sprinkled with gleeful promises of a pending de-escalation, and had to be the most confusing series of commands ever uttered by anyone, just means you folks are all ignorant. You can't understand what its like to confront a compliant drunk in a hallway when your assault rifle hasn't ever killed anyone...how lonely your rifle must be and how much it needs to be used in it's de-escalation role.
Think about the officer safety - if officers didn't lethally de-escalate the situations they escalated to begin with, the deaths of innocent people could possibly in some small percentage of cases become the death of officers!
OtterbatHellcat
12-12-2017, 21:32
Who falls forward when on all fours, and reaches a dominant hand back to his waist, even if intoxicated?
theGinsue
12-12-2017, 21:43
We were doing well in this thread with exchanging ideas and information on both sides without getting personal. Now things have gotten personal and it's time for this discourse to conclude.
THREAD CLOSED
OtterbatHellcat
12-12-2017, 21:47
Watch 4:12 to 4:30 repeatedly. At 4:25/6 subject deliberately reaches right hand back, (out of shooting officers view) and brings right hand back forward again.
I don't give two shits if my opinion is worthless in everyone elses eyes or not, I know the asshole yelling is an idiot.....and I sincerely believe that the officer that fired was operating on his training.
theGinsue
12-12-2017, 22:04
My first lock attempt failed (too button pushing happy). It's locked now.
As we move forward from this thread remember what we have in common and try to value that others may have differing opinions on some things but it doesn't deserve a personal attack.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.