• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

BLM: Falcon Heights police fatally shot man

Page 22 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
JSt0rm said:
2nd amendment rights are for whites only
Click to expand...

Found this to be an interesting statement:

"However, Officer Yanez will not be returning to work for the City of St Anthony police department.

A statement on the city's website said it had "concluded that the public will be best served if Officer Yanez is no longer a police officer in our city".
 
I felt from the beginning that the girlfriend's account was questionable. She says that after the officer stopped them, he asked for license and registration, then shot him when he reached for his wallet. However, before that, she says Castile told the officer he had a gun on him. When a police officer is informed that a person they have stopped is in possession of a firearm, they do not then ask for license and registration. They immediately tell the person to freeze, then they disarm the person, then they may ask for license and registration. No officer on the planet would have asked for ID after learning of a gun without first disarming the man. Her story doesn't add up. What's more likely is that the officer asked for license and registration first, before being aware of the gun, then when he saw (or was told) about the gun, he immediately told him to freeze. Castile then reached either for his wallet or the gun, and the officer shot him.

In any event, because the video doesn't show the actual incident, it's a he said, she said, which means reasonable doubt.
 
Last edited:
Victorian Gray said:
Found this to be an interesting statement:

"However, Officer Yanez will not be returning to work for the City of St Anthony police department.

A statement on the city's website said it had "concluded that the public will be best served if Officer Yanez is no longer a police officer in our city".
Click to expand...

What does the union have to say about that?
 
woolfe9998 said:
I felt from the beginning that the girlfriend's account was questionable. She says that after the officer stopped them, he asked for license and registration, then shot him when he reached for his wallet. However, before that, she says Castile told the officer he had a gun on him. When a police officer is informed that a person they have stopped is in possession of a firearm, they do not then ask for license and registration. They immediately tell the person to freeze, then they disarm the person, then they may ask for license and registration. No officer on the planet would have asked for ID after learning of a gun without first disarming the man. Her story doesn't add up. What's more likely is that the officer asked for license and registration first, before being aware of the gun, then when he saw (or was told) about the gun, he immediately told him to freeze. Castile then reached either for his wallet or the gun, and the officer shot him.

In any event, because the video doesn't show the actual incident, it's a he said, she said, which means reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...

They could have video of shooting him without cause and he wouldnt be convicted. I'm shocked it took this long to find him not guilty.
 
Victorian Gray said:
Found this to be an interesting statement:

"However, Officer Yanez will not be returning to work for the City of St Anthony police department.

A statement on the city's website said it had "concluded that the public will be best served if Officer Yanez is no longer a police officer in our city".
Click to expand...
Do you think that says more about him or about the appearances of him continuing to serve?
 
alcoholbob said:
The cop wasn't white, so are you saying there's a conspiracy by cops of all races only to allow white people to carry?
Click to expand...

Not white? (for those who don't know, dead guy is the one on the left)

castileyanezcastile.jpg
 
alcoholbob said:
The cop wasn't white, so are you saying there's a conspiracy by cops of all races only to allow white people to carry?
Click to expand...

Just a point of fact; studies have been done that show cops of many racial backgrounds have racial biases against black people, even black cops.

If a legal carrying gun owner who isn't white is more likely to be shot by a cop, I'd say that there just might be a conspiracy there.
 
According to testimony from the officer, there was an armed robbery suspect on the loose with dreadlocks and a "wide set nose." As Officer Yanez passed Philando's car, he believed Philando matched the description and said as much when he radio'd in. Since he was potentially about to confront an armed robbery suspect, the officer was more on edge than usual, especially being only a 2 year veteran.

At the stop Philando informed the officer he was carrying a gun. The officer probably drew his weapon at this point. Unfortunately either the officer did not make himself fully clear or Philando didn't completely understand and he may have taken his gun out. The cell phone video appears to show the gun sitting on his lap, however first responder testimony say it was still in his pocket. Either way, if he was reaching towards the vicinity of the gun, was ordered not to, yet still did, the end result is what we have before us now.

Philando was a great guy and his death is unnecessary and tragic. There is no way he was reaching for his gun to harm the officer. However, mix one jittery, young cop with someone reaching for their gun, even to innocently hand it over because they may have misunderstood the officer's orders, and the end result is never good.

This doesn't make the officer a murderer or a racist. The prosecution failed to demonstrate Officer Yanez intended to kill Philando and failed to demonstrate he recklessly discharged his firearm. They may have had a better case for negligent homicide, but that may have had trouble sticking since the reckless firearm discharge did not. What did happen here is an unfortunate series of events that didn't need to occur.

Our next steps should not be to "demand justice," block interstates, or march in protest, it should be take a hard look at police procedure, better train our police on how to handle stops like this with people legally carrying a firearm, and to continually reinforce and remind legal gun owners on how police are trained to handle them, what the police will ask of them, and exactly how to comply during a traffic stop.

Officer Yanez is not a murderer, Philando Castille was a good guy who didn't deserve to die, and it's incumbent on all of us to read, listen, and analyze the facts before rushing to judgement or taking action.
 
Last edited:
buckshot24 said:
This had nothing to do with 2nd amendment rights
Click to expand...
Of course it does.

Because of the 2nd amendment, half your country walks around with guns. Everybody knows this. Everybody is scared. Even your police force is scared of the people they are supposed to protect. Americans are the biggest pussies on the planet. And the only solution they have for their fear is to shoot before "the other guy" shoots. The problem is nobody knows in advance who "the other guy" might be, so people shoot as soon as they get scared.

The sad thing is that most of Americans do not realize how this vicious circle works. And they keep buying more guns. And everybody gets more afraid. And scared people get even more trigger happy. Including your police-officers.

Everybody in the world understands this. Only Americans don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top