• 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.

Flash a cop because his lights are bright and die

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
MagickMan said:
You want him to spend the rest of his life in prison w/o a chance for parole? Wow, you're one vicious little shit. 😵
Click to expand...

You only need one person to vote not guilty to go home free and there are a lot of people saying the same thing, that the father should gun down the cop. Show the video to the jury and at least one person will side with the father, especially with the sound of the kid screaming before shots were fired.
 
BeeBoop said:
You only need one person to vote not guilty to go home free and there are a lot of people saying the same thing, that the father should gun down the cop. Show the video to the jury and at least one person will side with the father, especially with the sound of the kid screaming before shots were fired.
Click to expand...

That's absurd, obviously you don't understand the legal system. In the very unlikely event such a thing happened, that would be called a hung jury, which would then lead to a mistrial, and the guy would be held in jail until there's another trial, and possibly another, but most likely it would go to trial with judicial verdict (no jury), where I guarantee no judge will let their emotions sway their decision.

So, no, the guy's father absolutely would not "go home free". Geez, where do you get that kind of nonsense? 😕
 
MagickMan said:
That's absurd, obviously you don't understand the legal system. In the very unlikely event such a thing happened, that would be called a hung jury, which would then lead to a mistrial, and the guy would be held in jail until there's another trial, and possibly another, but most likely it would go to trial with judicial verdict (no jury), where I guarantee no judge will let their emotions sway their decision.

So, no, the guy's father absolutely would not "go home free". Geez, where do you get that kind of nonsense? 😕
Click to expand...

Not Guilty
http://m.nydailynews.com/news/crime/texas-dad-accused-murdering-drunk-driver-killed-sons-found-not-guilty-article-1.1919158
 
Ackmed said:
If you think cops or anyone should take be assaulted then let loose, you're just not very smart. To be polite about it. Those two teens should be arrested, I am pretty sure it is a felony to assault a cop too in every state.
Click to expand...
They were arrested and charged

That's the thing they were arrested not shot and killed.
 
GarfieldtheCat said:
Yers, as Ackmed and the other cop apologists will tell you, you always have to do what a cops says, no matter what. Doesn't matter if it's wrong or illegal, the cops are above teh law and do whatever they want, and their fellow cops and DA's will make sure they get away with it. If they tell you to give them a blowjob, well, you better do it since they will kill you if you don't.

If a cop wants to kill you, you're dead. They can say you were not following commands fast enough, or they can say you followed commands too quickly (AKA furtive movement), or they can give you conflicting commands to guarantee that you are not following one of them. GOod shoot then to Ackmed and others, case closed, high fives for killing another "thug".

Of course to Ackmed and others, this is the way it is supposed to work. They fully support the concept of cops being above the law, and being allowed to dispense justice without the need for a judge or jury.
Click to expand...

Stop quoting me as saying things that are not true. I never said cops are above the law. In fact, in several threads I stated that they should be punished. So just stop lying. Second, the cop had the legal right to pull him over, and the legal right to ask for his license, insurance, and registration. So stop trying to claim that what happened was illegal. The only illegal acts were by the kid who wouldn't comply. I never gave a high five for this killing, I said it was a tragedy. One that didn't need to happen. So if you're going to attack me like normal, use truths and not lies. Stop putting words in my mouth that I never said. I never called this kid a thug. He probably would have been a contributing member of society.

Your hatred, lies, and obvious bias are pretty pathetic. Goes to speak of what kind of person you are. If you are going to go against what I say, feel free. But use facts and not lies.

master_shake_ said:
They were arrested and charged

That's the thing they were arrested not shot and killed.
Click to expand...

And they were not on top of the cop beating him. Comparing the two is not ideal. That female cop did a piss poor job of controlling that situation too.

BeeBoop said:
Problem with the video is that we can not tell if the teen was hitting the cop. Nor can we tell if the teen was on top of the cop. During the altercation, we only have sound of the teen screaming followed by shots. The teen was stupid not to follow orders from someone with a gun but at no time during the whole ordeal, did the teen display any aggressive behavior. The cop however was aggressive and turned a misunderstanding into cold blooded murder. He wanted to show who was boss no matter the outcome. I hope the teen's father guns the cop down.
Click to expand...

One can reasonably assume that since the kid resisted, the cops statement, and you can hear the scuffle that the kid was on top of him. Obviously the legal system agreed. It was not a murder, the kid assaulted the cop. Being so bias as to claim that the cop injured himself is a pretty far reach.
 
Resisting arrest is not the same thing as assulting a police officer. The video does not show the officer getting assulted, just the kid trying to get away from the aggressor.
 
Yes, a scuffle can be heard but what exactly does that mean? The officer said that they landed in a ditch. How do we know that the officer's injury did not occur when they fell down there? From the video, the kid was resisting arrest obviously but he was never aggressive. Only the cop was aggressive.
 
MagickMan said:
Such ignorance. One, that's Texas, not Michigan. Two, that's an acquittal, not a hung jury. Three, there was strong reasonable doubt that the defendant (who has never owned a gun) even shot the drunk driver who killed his children, it very well could have been the uncle (who did own a gun but has never been found).

Wow, just, wow... 😱
Click to expand...


Congratulations, do you want a cookie for being technically correct?
 
BeeBoop said:
Resisting arrest is not the same thing as assulting a police officer. The video does not show the officer getting assulted, just the kid trying to get away from the aggressor.
Click to expand...

The aggressor was the kid, any dispute of that is not factual. The only conclusion that can be reached the cop was not assaulted is that he hit himself on the face. Which there is zero proof of. You can see the kid go towards the officer after tased.

You admit the kid was resisting arrest, but fault the cop for being "aggressive"? What was he supposed to be, passive? Please. I'm done with this thread, too much ignorance here and tired of going round and round.
 
I find it odd that the review was done by the same department the officer worked with. It really makes it hard to believe such a review was fair.

Also, regardless of whether the shooting was justified, I'd still fire all cops involved in these sorts of incidents. A stupid stop leads to use of force, a dead kid, a probable multi-million dollar lawsuit, and bad press for the department. Its one thing if use of force is occurring during trying to prevent a murder or robbery, but when the initial charge is something completely benign, these sorts of things are just too costly to society on so many levels.
 
Ackmed said:
The aggressor was the kid, any dispute of that is not factual. The only conclusion that can be reached the cop was not assaulted is that he hit himself on the face. Which there is zero proof of. You can see the kid go towards the officer after tased.

You admit the kid was resisting arrest, but fault the cop for being "aggressive"? What was he supposed to be, passive? Please. I'm done with this thread, too much ignorance here and tired of going round and round.
Click to expand...

Officer was aggressive when he dragged the kid out of the car knowing full well the entire incident started because the officer had defective headlights. I would not find fault with the father if he wants to make an example of this power hungry cop.
 
Last edited:
Reminds me of the jerk driving a truck towards me with 6..yes 6 super bright, blue hue headlights. I literally thought I was about to be abducted by aliens in a UFO. They were so bright I could see the individual photons as they laser dotted my cornea's.
 
TheSlamma said:
And seriously son. You really think flashing lights is suspicious behavior?
Click to expand...
Absent, say, having your brights on yes it could be suspicious, because it points at something but you don't really know what.

Okay, when I made my first post I had not seen the video, only read the article and saw the pic.

Here's the essential problem here: kid was standing up for what he thought were his rights but they weren't. I love people who don't bend over for police, but this kid simply, clearly, unequivocally didn't know what he was doing. It is the law that when a cop pulls you over you show ID upon request if you are driving.

I feel bad for the kid because he was being brave and standing up for what he thought were his rights, but he was too ignorant of it.

Agree with the post above about cops needing more de-esclation training, but come on this cop asked him a shit ton of times for ID.

Cop was being a dick for pulling over for flashed lights after already having it happen twice, but everything else is the kid's fault. Saw too many youtube videos about telling cops to piss off and thought he'd make one himself.

Not only did the cop warn him a ton of times, giving him tons of opportunities to give ID, but he warned him multiple times before tazing. I really struggle to think of a better way he could have dealt with this.

I totally support bodycams and this is a good example of why. Instead of wondering how a cop killed an unarmed small framed 17 year old, which on its face sounds crazy, we can see that the kid was acting like a total idiot and brought it upon himself. I am surprised the cop felt the need to shoot him, but there is no denying the kid was being a total shit for several minutes first and not complying with legal demands in any way.
 
I'd say the cop was acting above the law. He provoked, entrapped, people to flash their lights at him. Defectives lights are just as illegal as flashing high beams but the cop gets a pass because he's above the law.
 
Ackmed said:
One can reasonably assume that since the kid resisted, the cops statement, and you can hear the scuffle that the kid was on top of him. Obviously the legal system agreed. It was not a murder, the kid assaulted the cop. Being so bias as to claim that the cop injured himself is a pretty far reach.
Click to expand...

How can you reasonably assume a kid that just voluntarily laid flat on the ground and the only physical "resistance" in the video was him not putting his hands behind his back properly violently resisted? Furthermore, how exactly could you tell from the sound of the "scuffle" that the kid who was just lying face down on the ground somehow got the cop on the ground and then got on top of him and started beating him to the point of making him fear for his life all within a few seconds?
 
The US is a strange country filled with people who apparently all have a death wish.

Just look at all those civilians (of all ages/circumstances/backgrounds, from 12 year old kids to old men in wheelchairs) who, even though unarmed themselves, are constantly having to be shot because they are constantly attacking armed police and putting their lives in danger. Is it something in the water or food supply?

It's a damn strange country.

Thank goodness that the police involved in these incidents have no reason to lie so we know that we can always accept their word as to what happened.

Never question, always accept
 
Blanky said:
Here's the essential problem here: kid was standing up for what he thought were his rights but they weren't. I love people who don't bend over for police, but this kid simply, clearly, unequivocally didn't know what he was doing. It is the law that when a cop pulls you over you show ID upon request if you are driving.

I feel bad for the kid because he was being brave and standing up for what he thought were his rights, but he was too ignorant of it.

Agree with the post above about cops needing more de-esclation training, but come on this cop asked him a shit ton of times for ID.

Cop was being a dick for pulling over for flashed lights after already having it happen twice, but everything else is the kid's fault. Saw too many youtube videos about telling cops to piss off and thought he'd make one himself.

Not only did the cop warn him a ton of times, giving him tons of opportunities to give ID, but he warned him multiple times before tazing. I really struggle to think of a better way he could have dealt with this.

I totally support bodycams and this is a good example of why. Instead of wondering how a cop killed an unarmed small framed 17 year old, which on its face sounds crazy, we can see that the kid was acting like a total idiot and brought it upon himself. I am surprised the cop felt the need to shoot him, but there is no denying the kid was being a total shit for several minutes first and not complying with legal demands in any way.
Click to expand...

Except the refusal to provide ID is a secondary offense and the Police Officer has to show cause why he pulled the kid over in the first place. The fact that the cop was outside of his legal authority to pull him over in the first place means the kid did not need to provide ID since he had done nothing wrong to warrant being stopped.

Simply a case of "I am a cop. Do what I say or there will be consequences." I sure as shit hope that kid did give that cop the cut to the face but I think most of us will agree it was probably self-inflicted. Regardless, that cop is still a piece of shit.
 
Victorian Gray said:
Never question, always accept
Click to expand...
Or in your case, never accept, always question.
Except the refusal to provide ID is a secondary offense and the Police Officer has to show cause why he pulled the kid over in the first place.
Click to expand...
He explained that early in the video.

The logical fallacy that is being made by a disappointing number of people here is that even if we accept the cop was just baiting people with his lights and knew 100% why he was flashed (which he can't), everything after that point is the cop's fault because it all transpired as a step after the one in which he pulled the person over.

It makes no sense, and the law doesn't recognize it either because it's silly.
The fact that the cop was outside of his legal authority to pull him over in the first place means the kid did not need to provide ID since he had done nothing wrong to warrant being stopped.
Click to expand...
I think some of you need to brush up on what rights police have.

Did you know that you can be pulled over for doing something that is 100% legal yet a cop thinks it isn't, and he's perfectly, and legally, able to stop you for that if he reasonably thought it was in fact illegal? That is a legal fact with precedent, and is why the ACLU recommends you never resist arrest. If you're wrongly arrested deal with it in court. Playing "fuck you I won't do what you tell me" to the cop is stupid and never, ever goes anybody's way.
 
Victorian Gray said:
The US is a strange country filled with people who apparently all have a death wish.

Just look at all those civilians (of all ages/circumstances/backgrounds, from 12 year old kids to old men in wheelchairs) who, even though unarmed themselves, are constantly having to be shot because they are constantly attacking armed police and putting their lives in danger. Is it something in the water or food supply?

It's a damn strange country.

Thank goodness that the police involved in these incidents have no reason to lie so we know that we can always accept their word as to what happened.

Never question, always accept
Click to expand...

Yup, its like all these people have rabies or something. Attacking cops who are pointing guns at them.

Kid seemed hard headed but not one to attack an officer. He was on the ground and begrudgingly complying. When the officer kicked the kid's phone out of his hand the kid drew his arms in. The cop then stood back and tazed a kid that was belly first on the ground. At that point the kid bolted. It is hard to blame someone who was just tazed. They can't quite control what they are going to do when zapped with a thousand volts. Flight or fight kicks in. The kid ran away. The cop jumped him and the dumped SEVEN rounds into the boy. That is where this goes off the chain.

Good shoot, my ass. This stuff is starting to get depressing. 17 year old unarmed, 140lb, freshly tazed boy running for his life. If that was my son, I'd probably be thinking of revenge right now for sure. Community should shame that coward. If he was a cop in my area he'd get constant flashes and fingers from me.
 
Blanky said:
Or in your case, never accept, always question.He explained that early in the video.
Click to expand...

In light of incident after incident after incident after incident where we know full well the police lied, I damn well will question this shit when it happens.

Your country's legal system has serious issues and ignoring them isn't going to help.
 
Blanky said:
Or in your case, never accept, always question.He explained that early in the video.

The logical fallacy that is being made by a disappointing number of people here is that even if we accept the cop was just baiting people with his lights and knew 100% why he was flashed (which he can't), everything after that point is the cop's fault because it all transpired as a step after the one in which he pulled the person over.

It makes no sense, and the law doesn't recognize it either because it's silly.I think some of you need to brush up on what rights police have.

Did you know that you can be pulled over for doing something that is 100% legal yet a cop thinks it isn't, and he's perfectly, and legally, able to stop you for that if he reasonably thought it was in fact illegal? That is a legal fact with precedent, and is why the ACLU recommends you never resist arrest. If you're wrongly arrested deal with it in court. Playing "fuck you I won't do what you tell me" to the cop is stupid and never, ever goes anybody's way.
Click to expand...

You are correct. However, if the police officer cannot provide reasonable cause for pulling you over, everything that occurred afterward will be dismissed, provided the arresting officer cannot provide a reason for the stop. The kid could have had eight severed heads in the back seat but they would not be able to prosecute because the cop detained him illegally and without reasonable cause.

Once the cop decided to pull the kid over without reasonable cause, everything that occurred afterward is the responsibility of the police officer. He wrongly created the situation. When questioned about the validity of the stop, he chose to ignore the kid and did the whole "I am a cop, do what I say" song and dance.

The ACLU recommends that you go with it rather than resist because it's much better publicity if you are a peaceful citizen that is wrongly arrested by a thug cop than it is to be the standoffish asshole that gets beaten by a service flashlight. One gets the sympathy of the public the other guy gets "Well, he kind of had it coming."
 
Last edited:
smitbret said:
Once the cop decided to pull the kid over without reasonable cause, everything that occurred afterward is the responsibility of the police officer. He wrongly created the situation. When questioned about the validity of the stop, he chose to ignore the kid and did the whole "I am a cop, do what I say" song and dance.
Click to expand...
This is just incorrect, both logically and legally. http://www.npr.org/2014/12/15/37099...affic-stop-ok-despite-misunderstanding-of-law

It sounds like some here are advocating that if pulled over for an illegitimate reason a cop has absolutely no sway whatsoever, period. That is clearly wrong and the courts have said so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top