BLM: Falcon Heights police fatally shot man

[HomerJS]

A guy who smokes pot in his car with his 4yr old (not only child abuse, illegal in Colorado, but also a disqual for ccp), matches the description of a armed robbery suspect (hasn't yet been ruled out), belongs to a crip group on fb...etc, might do something stupid?

Yeah, we probably should give equal weight to each side potentially doing something stupid until we learn more.

Matches the descriptions solely based on a nose.

Sound like complete incompetence. Most black men have wide noses

 

[LegendKiller]

Matches the descriptions solely based on a nose.

Sound like complete incompetence. Most black men have wide noses

See the two pictures side by side? Cctv and castile look pretty fucking close.

 

[brycejones]

It has absolute relevance to the thread. You statist lefties assign 100% truth to this woman's statements when she is less than ideal and has changed her story repeatedly. Yet you're willing to believe her absolutely and prosecute the cop in the court of public opinion.

Shame on you guys.

Yeah, release everything without an investigation. Are you stupid or something? Yeah, just what we need, an organization not under the auspices of the government, not elected, not representative, holding court over all.

What a fucking horrible idea. Where the fuck do you get this shit?

Yet here you are chucking the passenger under the bus. Fucking hypocrite.

 

[Subyman]

What story? The story told to you by a druggie mom? Ohh, that one. Sorry, but she's no more trustworthy than Dorian johnson and piaget crenshaw at this point.

Cop didn't know anything about his past. We don't know anything about the cops past. But we do know about lavish and castile past. We know they are quality parents who smoke dope in the car with a 4yr old. But she has a gofundme, so she's all good now.

Story hasn't been disputed by the cops or the anyone else. It is the story right now as seen on the video. Is your imaginary story better? Because someone smokes weed it means they are okay to be blasted for trying to show their ID?

 

[Darwin333]

If the gun was in his lap, and after pretty much incapacitating him, wouldn't the cop then reach in and grab it?

That's a very good point, doubly so since there was another passenger in the car within very easy reach of a gun in the suspects lap.

 

[Artdeco]

Maybe they can put the corpse on trial.

The other issue is like LF said, if you smoke pot and fill out the applications truthfully, you can't purchase a gun or hold a CC permit.

 

[bshole]

See the two pictures side by side? Cctv and castile look pretty fucking close.

Yes they do EXCEPT for that Castile has a beard that merges into a side burn. This proves beyond all doubt that Castile was NOT the robber. I explained this earlier in the thread. I bet you (and only you) will still be completely shocked when they arrest the actual robber. I don't put this down to a learning disability on your part, it is simply bias. To reject the photographic evidence when it is sitting directly in front of you, it could only be bias. Those photos prove to me beyond ANY doubt that the robber and Castile are two different people.

ArtDeco,

Guns should be outlawed in civilized society. This case illustrates the reason why perfectly.

 

[K1052]

The other issue is like LF said, if you smoke pot and fill out the applications truthfully, you can't purchase a gun or hold a CC permit.

I'm not really digging the implication that this man's murder was somehow justified or acceptable because he may have been (unknowingly to the officer involved) a law breaker or not a model father figure according to the opinions of some.

 

[Capt Caveman]

And?

You're saying that people can never have dual lives?

And how nice was the cop in his personal life that he automatically deserves to be treated as a racist murderer by the screaming liberal morons here?

Ohh, wait, you've only heard one side. The side presented by a woman who was obviously high during the shooting and smokes up when her 4yr old daughter is in the car. Such an individual would *never* lie.

And I am sure the effects of pot smoke on a child's brain could never cause developmental delays or disabilities, because a developing brain is immune to such effects. Not even to discuss the damage of the psyche, locking in of poor behaviors...etc.

Such good role models for that child.

But never mind that.

Proof? Love the character assassination but not a single comment of the cop b/c his word is truthful and not some black person's.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Lol, liberals. Defend unwedded mothers right to smoke pot in a car with a 4yr old while swearing up a storm but hammer a cake baker for not making a gay cake.

What do you care, both involve adding to the roles of big government. One by regulation, the other by added generations of welfare.

You know.. smoking pot in the car isn't actually going to hurt the kid. Pot isn't tobacco.. anymore than watermelon koolaid is the same as a watermelon martini.

It's not wise; and it's kind of trashy, but texting while driving with a kid in the car is 10000x's worse.

 

[LegendKiller]

You know.. smoking pot in the car isn't actually going to hurt the kid. Pot isn't tobacco.. anymore than watermelon koolaid is the same as a watermelon martini.

It's not wise; and it's kind of trashy, but texting while driving with a kid in the car is 10000x's worse.

You know that, for certain?

Please show studies.

Trashy? You are driving under the influence of a controlled substance. Even in CO that is illegal.

 

[bshole]

You know.. smoking pot in the car isn't actually going to hurt the kid. Pot isn't tobacco.. anymore than watermelon koolaid is the same as a watermelon martini.

It's not wise; and it's kind of trashy, but texting while driving with a kid in the car is 10000x's worse.

And has fuck-all to do with whether the cops actions rose to the level of manslaughter.

This case illustrates the absolute necessity for following the procedure when conducting a felony stop. This was a felony stop as evidenced by the cops call just a minute before pulling the subject over. He did not follow procedure and an innocent person ended up dead. At the very least, his job should be lost. However, given the gravity of the result, he really needs to stand trial for manslaughter. His negligence contributed to this death.

1. Initial Tactics
Radio vehicle plate, description, occupant info
Communicate high-risk stop decision to other units
Pre-plan location for stop
Initiate stop & position units (Contact / Cover)
2. Initial Instructions (Contact Officer)
Assume position of cover
Announce:
• “Turn off engine”
• “Don’t move”
• “Throw keys out window”
• “Driver / Passenger: put your hands against windshield”
• “Backseat: put hands on back of front seat”
Approach in a manner to reduce risk to officer(s)
3. Removal of Occupants (Contact Officer)
Announce (begin with driver)
• “Reach your hand out the window and open the door from the outside”
• “Step out of the car”
• “Put your hands up”
• “Put your hands behind your head”
• “Kick the door shut”
4. Control (Contact Officer)
Maintain cover & announce:
• “With your hands up, walk backwards toward the sound of my voice” (have subject move to left / right as necessary)
When positioned correctly instruct subject to kneel
• “Lie flat on your front w/arms out to sides”
• “Palms up”
• “Cross your feet at the ankles”
5. Custody From Prone Position (Cover Officer)
Instruct to turn head away from custody officer
6. Clear Vehicle (Contact & Cover)
“You in vehicle — we know you are there — sit up now”
Clear vehicle — maximize officer safety
Clarity of audio

 

[bshole]

I should add, the officer put his own life at risk by not following procedure. If this was the real robber and he had a gun on him, there is fairly good chance he could have taken out the officer. The officer failed to protect himself with cover throughout the encounter. There is a reason is a reason for the procedure. It protects BOTH the officer and the suspect. I believe the negligence in this instance rises to the level of manslaughter.

 

[MongGrel]

redacted, the thread isn't worth commenting in anymore.

 

[TechBoyJK]

You know that, for certain?

Please show studies.

Trashy? You are driving under the influence of a controlled substance. Even in CO that is illegal.

The fact that you're asking for studies for something that is common sense is very telling of where you're at mentally.

CO has limits. Not a blanket 'can't do it' law.

Anyways, based on your comments, you're not worth debating with because you're already stuck in your delusions and are holding onto them. Really, you're just here to shove your delusions down our throats. So no thanks.

 

[TechBoyJK]

redacted, the thread isn't worth commenting in anymore.

Yea, my thoughts exactly. exiting thread.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

I should add, the officer put his own life at risk by not following procedure. If this was the real robber and he had a gun on him, there is fairly good chance he could have taken out the officer. The officer failed to protect himself with cover throughout the encounter. There is a reason is a reason for the procedure. It protects BOTH the officer and the suspect. I believe the negligence in this instance rises to the level of manslaughter.

Until the proper evidence etc comes to light and official action (or not) on this, e.g. court cases. What I'm about to say is just CONJECTURE!

Unfortunately the police officer(s), may have tried to do 2 things at the same time. Check out the faulty rear lights (cracked ?) and/or investigate their suspicions because at some point, before or during the stop, at least one of the policemen noticed a similarity with the armed robber suspect (and driver (and maybe passenger) ).

As you just said in your posts, he should have followed procedure, which early indications are that he DIDN'T.

So the police officer, might have asked for the ID (as part of the "cracked" rear light issue), then while potentially genuinely trying to reach for his ID, the police officer reacts to the gun and/or mention of the gun (concealed permit etc).
Panicking, and shooting the victim/suspect.

tl;dr
This may have been a terrible mess up, and as you suspect, procedures may not have been followed correctly.

I'm disappointed that the police officer was NOT wearing a body camera. Given the significant unrest round the country (e.g. 5 police officers getting gunned down + more injured).
In this day and age, the video evidence would have helped quickly resolve what happened one way or the other.
If the police officer was innocent, they could have released extracts of the video, to reassure the general public, that what happened was unavoidable and NOT because of any fault of the police.

 

[bshole]

Until the proper evidence etc comes to light and official action (or not) on this, e.g. court cases. What I'm about to say is just CONJECTURE!

Unfortunately the police officer(s), may have tried to do 2 things at the same time. Check out the faulty rear lights (cracked ?) and/or investigate their suspicions because at some point, before or during the stop, at least one of the policemen noticed a similarity with the armed robber suspect (and driver (and maybe passenger) ).

.

The police officer pulled him over because he suspected him of armed robbery. The rear light story was just what he told the driver. From the cops own lips, we know this was a felony stop.

 

[LegendKiller]

The fact that you're asking for studies for something that is common sense is very telling of where you're at mentally.

CO has limits. Not a blanket 'can't do it' law.

Anyways, based on your comments, you're not worth debating with because you're already stuck in your delusions and are holding onto them. Really, you're just here to shove your delusions down our throats. So no thanks.

Again, you made the claim that it is fine for kids. Common logic of having kids stuck in a closed environment with smoke, especially drugs that alter brain chemistry, has no effects on a developing brain.

So please, show that study so we can all consider these people upstanding citizens that don't poison their kids brains.

But in reality, you are dodging because you know it's wrong. You know it probably isn't good, but you're probably pro pot anyway, so fuck it. That and you're a liberal, so it's all good.

Amazing how far people will go to back up people who fuck up kids.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

The police officer pulled him over because he suspected him of armed robbery. The rear light story was just what he told the driver. From the cops own lips, we know this was a felony stop.

I'm NOT too familiar with US policing operations.

Apparently (simultaneously) BOTH police officers approached BOTH front windows/doors of the "suspects" car.

Presumably ?
That way of doing things, does NOT occur, for a simple driving (misdemeanor ?), such as a suspected faulty rear light (cracked maybe).

I.e. Does that tactic sound more like handling a SUSPECT/Felony kind of stop (armed robbery suspect) ?

tl;dr
Is there any significance to the fact that BOTH police approached the car simultaneously ?
Or might that happen, even for just a slightly faulty/busted tail/rear light ?

 

[dank69]

Again, you made the claim that it is fine for kids. Common logic of having kids stuck in a closed environment with smoke, especially drugs that alter brain chemistry, has no effects on a developing brain.

So please, show that study so we can all consider these people upstanding citizens that don't poison their kids brains.

But in reality, you are dodging because you know it's wrong. You know it probably isn't good, but you're probably pro pot anyway, so fuck it. That and you're a liberal, so it's all good.

Amazing how far people will go to back up people who fuck up kids.

I don't feel like reading the whole thread. Did you post proof that she was high or that she smoked weed in the car with the kid with the windows rolled up?

LK before you answer, I want to make it abundantly clear that you are a fucking retard. You just say whatever the fuck you want about this woman as if it is fact and expect us to defend her against your made up allegations. Eat a bag of dicks.

 

[Subyman]

I'm not seeing how any weed being involved gives the cop a free pass to blast a guy for trying to show ID, which the cop asked for. No media outlet or police station report that I have seen has refuted this story so far.

 

[LegendKiller]

I'm not seeing how any weed being involved gives the cop a free pass to blast a guy for trying to show ID, which the cop asked for. No media outlet or police station report that I have seen has refuted this story so far.

And here you go again, putting out a one sided narrative from a likely drugged up woman.

 

[Subyman]

And here you go again, putting out a one sided narrative from a likely drugged up woman.

"likely" drugged up? Again, her story is worse than your fantasy story you made up?

As I've said, show me anything that refutes her story. Not even the police are refuting it.

 

[LegendKiller]

I don't feel like reading the whole thread. Did you post proof that she was high or that she smoked weed in the car with the kid with the windows rolled up?

LK before you answer, I want to make it abundantly clear that you are a fucking retard. You just say whatever the fuck you want about this woman as if it is fact and expect us to defend her against your made up allegations. Eat a bag of dicks.

There is a video of her smoking up while her daughter was in the back seat, then driving.

Let me be clear to you, I don't give a flying fuck through a rolling donut what you think of me. You and your liberal goon squad run around declaring a cop to be racist and fanning the flames of violence merely because you can. You have no fucking clue what happened other than from a questionable eyewitness. One that has contradicted herself, changed her story, has a checkered past, an obvious reason to hide the truth. How many times will you goons rip down cops in the name of your racist agenda based upon initial biased witness reports?

How many fucking times are you going to believe a Dorian johnson or crenshaw?

How many fucking times are you going to try cops online, fanning riots and getting people killed?

How many fucking times are you not going to wait for the truth to come out?

My response is a mirror reflection of yours. Look in the mirror fuckstick, because what you claim I am doing is nothing more than what your goon squad does every fucking time this stuff happens.