no criminal charges against officers in tamir rice incident

[brianmanahan]

a grand jury in cuyahoga county decided not to bring criminal charges against the 2 officers involved in the tamir rice shooting

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/inde...e_decision_no_indictm.html#incart_maj-story-1

i'm glad i don't have to go into cleveland for another week

 

[ivwshane]

Did you honestly expect anything different?

The grand jury process is extremely flawed. The prosecutor in this case was already of the thinking that there wasn't any evidence of a crime and considering he is the one that presents whatever facts he wants and tells the jury whatever he wants this outcome doesn't surprise me one bit!

 

[werepossum]

Every police shooting should be investigated and if necessary prosecuted by the next higher level of authority. That way more people would have confidence in the verdicts.

As to this case, seems to me that putting yourself directly in front of a suspected but unconfirmed gunman so that you must shoot him in self defense before you can even note that he is just a child seems like negligence to me.

 

[TheSiege]

While I agree, what the cops did wasn't criminal. Possessing a gun and being black shouldn't be a death sentence. If they are called to a situation with a possibility of someone being armed, shouldn't they pull up at safer distance than say 3 feet and maybe stand behind their car and establish communication first?

 

[TheSiege]

Every police shooting should be investigated and if necessary prosecuted by the next higher level of authority. That way more people would have confidence in the verdicts.

As to this case, seems to me that putting yourself directly in front of a suspected but unconfirmed gunman so that you must shoot him in self defense before you can even note that he is just a child seems like negligence to me.

Exactly what I was thinking. "Guy with a gun?, lets drive our car right in front of him and come out guns blazing"

 

[Subyman]

What this really brings to light is that there are not enough laws protecting citizens from police who refuse to follow policy.

 

[woolfe9998]

Every police shooting should be investigated and if necessary prosecuted by the next higher level of authority. That way more people would have confidence in the verdicts.

As to this case, seems to me that putting yourself directly in front of a suspected but unconfirmed gunman so that you must shoot him in self defense before you can even note that he is just a child seems like negligence to me.

The incident was reported to them as a guy with a pistol who was scaring people. Although whoever reported it said it was probably a kid and a fake gun, those details were not conveyed to the officers here. If anything, it was the dispatcher not conveying those details who was negligent.

Given what they knew, I don't see any problem with their approach. This in their minds was a situation which had to be confronted directly and neutralized because it could have been dangerous not only for them but for civilians as well. If we want police to undertake the correct approach in every situation, officers need to be given accurate information including everything that was reported by the citizen who made the call.

Even assuming, however, that there was some negligence on the part of the police here, a criminal case has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Although the grand jury was only looking for probable cause, they had to consider whether the case had a reasonable chance of success at trial. Given what the officers knew going in and the fact that the toy gun didn't have the identifying orange cap, there is reasonable doubt here and because of that a trial would have been a waste of tax payer money.

 

[Subyman]

The incident was reported to them as a guy with a pistol who was scaring people. Although whoever reported it said it was probably a kid and a fake gun, those details were not conveyed to the officers here. If anything, it was the dispatcher not conveying those details who was negligent.

Given what they knew, I don't see any problem with their approach. This in their minds was a situation which had to be confronted directly and neutralized because it could have been dangerous not only for them but for civilians as well. If we want police to undertake the correct approach in every situation, officers need to be given accurate information including everything that was reported by the citizen who made the call.

Even assuming, however, that there was some negligence on the part of the police here, a criminal case has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Although the grand jury was only looking for probable cause, they had to consider whether the case had a reasonable chance of success at trial. Given what the officers knew going in and the fact that the toy gun didn't have the identifying orange cap, there is reasonable doubt here and because of that a trial would have been a waste of tax payer money.

What happened to pulling the cop car up about 100ft from the subject and using the PA system to say "drop the weapon?" Give the kid a chance.

 

[woolfe9998]

What happened to pulling the cop car up about 100ft from the subject and using the PA system to say "drop the weapon?" Give the kid a chance.

The officers claimed that they shouted multiple times imploring the kid to drop the gun before firing. Even if that isn't true, it's what they said and I don't know of any conflicting evidence before the grand jury.

 

[MrPickins]

The officers claimed that they shouted multiple times imploring the kid to drop the gun before firing. Even if that isn't true, it's what they said and I don't know of any conflicting evidence before the grand jury.

Have you seen the video?

There wasn't time for them to shout, even once.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Have you seen the video?

There wasn't time for them to shout, even once.

It was under 2 seconds.

 

[Double Trouble]

This is really a tragic case. The officers didn't get the right information that was critical to have known: that it was a kid with probably a fake gun. After being told that some guy was scaring people pointing a gun at them, they were overly aggressive to make sure the threat was neutralized. The guy who shot him was a rookie cop, so I'm sure his adrenaline was pumping. Sad all around, it could have been avoided, but I don't think criminal charges against the cops (for murder) would have been warranted. I'm sure the cop didn't set out to shoot some guy that day, it was not intentional, and I'm sure the cop will have a heavy burden to carry for the rest of his life. The family of the kid lost a loved one, and he can't be brought back either. I can't think there's any way a jury would have been unanimous in convicting the cop anyway.

Very unfortunate.

 

[master_shake_]

business as usual.

apples? yeah there are bad ones.

stupid juries? yup.

 

[Iron Woode]

are we going to go through this shit again?

the lack of indictment was the correct choice.

Regardless of what Victorian "I'm a troll" Gray has to say, when a cop tells you to raise your hands, don't go for your gun instead if you don't want to be shot.

it's really that simple.

many here can't seem to grasp the simple statement - do what the police tell you to do. Or in other words cooperate with the officer(s).

 

[master_shake_]

are we going to go through this shit again?

the lack of indictment was the correct choice.

Regardless of what Victorian "I'm a troll" Gray has to say, when a cop tells you to raise your hands, don't go for your gun instead if you don't want to be shot.

it's really that simple.

many here can't seem to grasp the simple statement - do what the police tell you to do. Or in other words cooperate with the officer(s).

how could a cop yell raise your hands then shoot in 2 seconds.

it was literally 2 seconds.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2014/nov/26/cleveland-video-tamir-rice-shooting-police

the cop car barely stopped before he was dead.

 

[ivwshane]

are we going to go through this shit again?

the lack of indictment was the correct choice.

Regardless of what Victorian "I'm a troll" Gray has to say, when a cop tells you to raise your hands, don't go for your gun instead if you don't want to be shot.

it's really that simple.

many here can't seem to grasp the simple statement - do what the police tell you to do. Or in other words cooperate with the officer(s).

Grasp this: you are a fucking moron!

 

[tweaker2]

It was under 2 seconds.

I think the principle behind the "practice" is that you don't let the obviously armed perp get a chance to get off a single shot at you when you and your fellow officer's lives are in imminent danger in the confrontation. It makes sense from a logical point of view.

Sort'a like "If I shoot first I'd probably be the last man standing."

Morally or ethically though, the waters get pretty muddy, especially from those who support the victims of such shootings.

edit - Then there's this idea where "is the armed perp's life more valuable than the officers who are attempting to detain him? Should the officers risk their lives above and beyond the call of duty to protect the general public from the armed individual?"

 

[brianmanahan]

i just hope people aren't making a scene when i am trying to go to work

 

[ivwshane]

I think the principle behind the "practice" is that you don't let the obviously armed perp get a chance to get off a single shot at you when the you and your fellow officer's lives are in imminent danger in the confrontation. It makes sense from a logical point of view.

Sort'a like "If I shoot first I'd probably be the last man standing."

Morally or ethically though, the waters get pretty muddy, especially from those who support the victims of such shootings.

Show me a cop or a trainer who thinks the correct course of action in this situation is to pull up right next to a person with a gun and I'll show you a cop or a trainer who will/can/and has said anything to support cops who have killed citizens.

 

[Blanky]

Black person does something stupid
White cops kill him (sometimes deservedly, sometimes not)
Something happens in a court room
Protests

---

This is happening so much it's really hard to keep track of it all.

 

[Victorian Gray]

are we going to go through this shit again?

the lack of indictment was the correct choice.

Regardless of what Victorian "I'm a troll" Gray has to say, when a cop tells you to raise your hands, don't go for your gun instead if you don't want to be shot.

it's really that simple.

many here can't seem to grasp the simple statement - do what the police tell you to do. Or in other words cooperate with the officer(s).

Under 2 seconds and the car had barely come to a stop. And don't forget, the 'gun' you claim he was reaching for was a toy.

There might be a troll here, it ain't me.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Black person does something stupid
White cops kill him (sometimes deservedly, sometimes not)
Something happens in a court room
Protests

---

This is happening so much it's really hard to keep track of it all.

Black person does something stupid?

A 12 year old kid was playing with a toy gun. So, a kid playing what kids have been playing since kids have been playing is now "doing something stupid"?

 

[DrPizza]

The incident was reported to them as a guy with a pistol who was scaring people. Although whoever reported it said it was probably a kid and a fake gun, those details were not conveyed to the officers here. If anything, it was the dispatcher not conveying those details who was negligent.

Given what they knew, I don't see any problem with their approach. This in their minds was a situation which had to be confronted directly and neutralized because it could have been dangerous not only for them but for civilians as well. If we want police to undertake the correct approach in every situation, officers need to be given accurate information including everything that was reported by the citizen who made the call.

Even assuming, however, that there was some negligence on the part of the police here, a criminal case has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Although the grand jury was only looking for probable cause, they had to consider whether the case had a reasonable chance of success at trial. Given what the officers knew going in and the fact that the toy gun didn't have the identifying orange cap, there is reasonable doubt here and because of that a trial would have been a waste of tax payer money.

The cops choice of tactics was very poor. And that choice led to the boy's death. I don't think that choice was necessarily criminally negligent. If you think about it, there have been other situations where there was an actual shooter where the police were criticized for not going right in and confronting the perpetrators. E.g., Columbine. It seems that people want police to take their time when it's a fake gun, but react swiftly when it's a real threat. And, given what information we know the officer actually had, he probably thought it was a real threat.

 

[JSt0rm]

cops are stupid individuals. They seriously look like mouth breathers. We should not expect them to think before they act under the current system. I doubt they can even really think about an issue that is outside their training.

 

[DrPizza]

Black person does something stupid?

A 12 year old kid was playing with a toy gun. So, a kid playing what kids have been playing since kids have been playing is now "doing something stupid"?

I can't recall the last time I saw a toy gun that didn't at least have an orange tip on it, or wasn't colored like a toy gun. Any toy gun I ever saw at the store while shopping for toys for my own kids had those tips. And now, I'm purchasing toys for my grand kids. I'm not naive enough to say that if it had been a white child with a replica gun that it would have turned out the same way - I don't think it would have. There's a lot for our country to discuss and things to fix. I'll take the easy one: it should be a crime to have a replica gun that isn't clearly marked as a toy gun. The hard one: why do police approach possible black criminals differently than possible white criminals?