From the video i can not tell if the driverside window was down or if the suspect was trying to open the door.  I also dont know the reason for this police contact with the subject or why the subject went from the squad car back to his vehicle.  Thst is highly unusual. There is alot i dont know.  I dont really know enough to draw a final conclusion.  Im not ready to condemn either party.  The point to my previous post is to say that there is or could be valid reasons this ended up being a deadly force situation.

My opinions are clearly going to be slanted but ill try to discuss your opinions without bias. 

As far as the dashcam goes, it is my personal feelings that police are not filmographers.  They do have there place and benifit.  Alot of departments cant afford them, mind included.  Alot of them are royal pos.  The audio is terrible.  They only work half the time.  Also if you use them on every instance the technical aspect of them can be very time consuming depending on the model and how the department handles maintaining their records. Idk why she didnt have hers on if she had one.  If it is against policy she would likely get reprimanded in this case.  However it is a minor infraction.  Sort of like you showing up for work late.  Mistakes are made by humans.  Cops are mostly human.  I highly doubt she got out of her squad car with the mind frame that she was going to shoot this guys and decided it best to leave her camera off.  Also there was dashcam video of this situation.  It wasnt a very good view as they often are not.   Having her dashcam on in no way shape or form weighs in on if this was a good shoot or bad. 

As far as her exchange, im not sure what she could have said that would make this subject act how he did.  I cant imagen what there would be to lie about. Or what a female officer could have said that made this large subject not comply.  Respect the police but also respect women.   

Deadly force, force in general and tasers are widely misunderstood by the public.  I dont think she ever planned on shooting this guy untill he placed himself in a position that put officers in fear for their lifes.  If she wanted to do that she would have shot him prior to him reaching in his vehicle.  She certainly didnt make that decision prior to backup arriving as you stated.

Tasers, god i get frusterated with the publics obsession with this tool as a fix all for every situation.  I explained this in the debate on the ferguson deal but i will again.  Im a fairly large guy but this subject would have been much more then id want to go one on one with.  Possibly id pull my taser but i dont fault this LADY for opting with deadly force.  Id assume she had a taser, as all women should carry one, but we dont even know that.  Still the fact remains she was out sized and that alone gives her the right to protect herself with deadly force.

Ill explain the limitations of a taser.  First they are one shot.  If you miss you are fucked.  Not only did you miss but now you have a object in your hand that does you no good.  How can you miss?  Well point two, in order for the taser to be effective you have to get both probes in the person.  If it hits their belt, coat or any artical that it is hard to penitrate you wont get good contact or shock.  I once had a guy simply grab it while it was shocking him and pull it off cause of poor contact.  Thats a, well fuck that didnt work, moment.  Third point ill make is that tasers recommendation  (i hight disagree with) is that you aim below center mass.  This puts the bottom probe hitting at the legs in most situations.  Legs move and are easy to miss or glance.  Also ill point out that tasers shoot in a manner that the spread of the two probes get wider as the distance increases.  Most have a suggested limit of 21ft.  Most of this footage takes place at the far end of this distance.  This makes accuracy harder.  Id never fault an officer for choosing deadly force in a deadly force situation.  This was definitely a deadly force situation for this female police officer.  It would have been for alot of males as well.  Police are allowed to respond to force a level higher then the subject that they are addressing.  The public should understand that this isnt the movies.  We die when we fail to act in a more aggressive or physical manner then the suspect.

I feel that once backup arrived they should have confronted this person with a taser or physically before he reached his vehicle.  There was enough officers to have multiple shots with a taser and deadly force cover.  Also the physical threat that this subject would cause would be minimized by having multiple officers.  Not addressing this subject at that point was a tatical mistake that caused this shooting.  However ive never seen police faulted for a lack of use of force.  You cant criminally charge for not using force.  Ive already explained what has caused the hesitation to use justified force.  Ultimately this man caused his own death by not complying with orders.  He was disrespectful to authority and a women.  I think the general publuc needs to understand the risk of not complying to orders and stop putting police in a situation that they dont want to be put in.  The public needs to be aware that if you put the police in a deadly force situation it is likely you will die.  The world can be a ugly place and the bedroom communities of America have a hard time dealing with things that dont fit inside their idea of what the world is.  The pendulum needs to swing the other way for awhile...thats my opinion.

AP, 

We definitely disagree on the dashcam. The footage seemed fine from the other car. Because her cam was not turned on (and lets face it, when you see a car with the doors open in the middle of the road, that's the first thing you should do, if it's not on for your entire shift...), we have no idea what happened now and are left to guess, or take her at her word. I'm not ready to do that.

The reason the dashcam is there is transparency that the police are not being racist profiling piles of trash. It provides an unbiased accounting of everything in front of the car. Doesn't catch everything, but having it on could have provided answers to this. If she "didn't want to record the stop" for whatever reason, she'd have also left the camera off. So the fact that it was never turned on is a bit damning. The camera is there to protect officers integrity, provide evidence of the interaction where necessary, and it's terrible that this was not turned on. 

Would you trust an interrogation that was not recorded where the cops signed statements of a confession to the crime and put it through a courtroom? We've been doing a major overhaul in wrong convictions for that very reason. Cops used to make free with roughing up suspects, interrogating them for 14 hours, never giving them options for lawyers or informing them of rights they have, and boom. Here's this confession!!! What happened to him? He fell down the stairs. This is no different. If you can record the interaction, do it. It's VERY important. 

We agree on the taser. It should have been used as soon as he walked away. And yes you can finally see someone faulting officers for not using force. I'm doing it right now. They waited until he was a very real threat and she killed him. That was unnecessary. I don't care if he was on PCP, 4 officers were there and a taser was out. Take him down safely, and deal with that fallout instead of SHOOTING him 10 seconds later and having to deal with that fallout.

You blaming the whole ugliness of the shooting on the officer not having her dash cam on is a perfect example of this nations anti police attitude.  There was other dash cam videos and there was a freaking helicopter.  All you dont know is what the conversation was initially between the officer and the suspect.  Im not sure how you anything that the officer said should have resulted in the subject returning to his car.  Getting hung up on the dashcam is just scapegoating.  Got to be somebodys fault, must be the polices. We cant blame a large balck man on drugs for not following directions? But we can a little lady cop that looks like she makes a mean batch of cupcakes.  If he would have got in his car and took off causing a crash that would have been the polices fault as well.

After watching the video a few more times ill take back a majority of my criticism.  Back up didnt arrive in time to address the subject before he got to his car.  Backup did not arrive until he was nearly to his car.  The officers would have had to almost immediately tased the man.  Thats hard to expect, especially if you have ever been in a high stress situation.  The initial officer was never in a close enough position to use her taser and id advise against her doing so by herself anyway. Also him being on PCP is bad.  That makes a little man unhumanily strong.  4 officers would not have been able to safely handle him and taser might/probably be uneffective.

https://youtu.be/HcNTxZv8rhU

Society isnt going to get better untill the public starts holding itself accountable.  Everything cant/isnt the cops fault just because it isnt pleasant to watch.  This will bot result in charges on the lady cop.  She didnt break the constitution.  She didnt break a law.  The subject who is now dead did break laws.  He is to blame. 

There are bad cops and video does help provide transparency.  This lady isnt a vicious, over bearing, rude, liar but some are making those type of accusations without even knowing her, just because of her job title.  Im glad she is alive and unhurt and is still there for her family.  Im thankful she did not address this man without proper backup. I feel bad for her getting national attention for simply addresding a situation to the best of her ablities.

alz wrote:

AP 

A taser was proven in the coverage to be the necessary solution, and she fired lethal force without needing to. The initial stop was not a criminal stop. It was a stalled vehicle. She then decided he was not cooperating, called for backup and SHOT him. 

If that's the best of her abilities, then she needs a different career. She failed to turn on the camera that would have supported her decision and then used lethal force where it wasn't needed. Should he have been different? Yes, but he had car trouble and ended up dead. That's not okay.

Widely incorrect.

He disobeyed simple police commamds, put himself in a deadly force situation and ended up dead.  I showed you two videos of what can happen if a subject gets to their vehicle and gains control of a firearm.

Secondly, of course it has been reported that a taser would have saved the day.  Thats what they always say in every situation. It is pure ignorance and show a total lack of knowledge by the news media and public. The truth is nobody knows if the taser would have been effective.  I illustrated many limitations of the taser and showed a video specifically of a taser and other less then lethal tools being useless against a much smaller man on PCP.  If it is a deadly force situation, use deadly force and go home to your family.  That is how police are trained.  That is how the consituation has been defined.  Id suggest moving to iraq and enjoy the freedoms over there if you dont believe in the Constitution.

There was video.  You missed very little.  There was more video then normally required.  From her dash cam, at the angle of the car you wouldnt have seen the shooting. The dashcams they had showed the officers backs blocking the subject.  It is the helicopter that gives the best footage.  Does every cop need a helicopter?   Pointing to the short anout of time that wasnt caught on video as the reason to side with the suspect in this case is not suprising.  It is the narrow minded attitude of the public.

The problem with this case is that there was no gun.  Thats easy for all of us to say at home in our houses eating a bowl of cereal.  Not so easy when in seconds you could see your life end as deputy dinkheller did.

alz wrote:

I erased the first reply. You're welcome, it was not kind. This will be a simple request.

You need to relax. You should not post a bag full of opinions, cram them out there as facts, and then call me "widely incorrect", "ignorant", "narrow minded" or tell me to move to Iraq. 

I do not believe that a badge entitles you to use deadly force when you could of used non-lethal instead. I do not believe a cop issuing a command and it not being obeyed entitles an officer to kill you. I've looked and neither of those are in this constitution that I spent time in the military defending, but according to you I may not believe in it. 

You may think otherwise, and on some things we agree, but there's a core suspicion here and many movements. Cities are being set on fire, and the need for transparency is huge. I will perfectly admit that I do not believe all most or even half of the cops are bad. I believe it's like any group of humans, a few bad apples. Mistakes however are magnified and I believe it is our duty as Americans to question and second guess EVERY TIME an officer decides they have to pull that trigger. This should not be an easy reaction for them to make, they are killing someone. It better be right. 

If you wish to discuss this difference in opinions with a civil tone, I'm happy to talk to you about how this feels to me. If you offend me again, my replies will stop being nice. 

Lol, okay then.  We will see.  I bet charges are not brought up.  I bet if they are they are not convictions.  There for it will be deemed justified.  People dont understand that because they cant get passed the ugliness and as you say look at the fact.  Here is the case.

1. How did the subject behave to make the officer believe she was in danger.  The fact that he was on the most dangerous drug for physical aggressiveness will play heavely in her favor. As well as her being female and for a majority of the call by herself.

2. Was the subject refusing to obey commands and reaching into the car cause for deadly force.  This will be the biggest factor.

Things that wont legally matter.

1. Her camera being off.  Not agaimst the law

2.  Her not using her taser

I'm not positive about charges or convictions. There's no way to know the 5 minutes of events that occurred, because she did not turn on the camera. It could have exonerated her. Indeed if she is who you say she is, she should be furious with herself for this failure. Instead of if being clear that she reacted the only way she could to a guy clearly out of his mind, she's going to have to rely on a toxicology report alone, and the testimony of officers who had less than 30 seconds of involvement. 

There is no point to the dash cam if it is not turned on, if it is not a required procedure that all cops turn it on for all stops, it needs to be. The units are not cheap and were not purchased so they could be left off while officers shot people. For any officer to neglect this (anyone post Ferguson) and find themselves in this position is enough for a termination in my opinion.

Now for charges? How on earth do you prove that? AP, even if she was the most bigoted racist pile of trash since Hitler, how in the hell do you prove it when she doesn't roll the camera? That's the elephant in the room. There's questions that do not need to be here that are here because she was a moron. Because now we don't know what happened. We don't know how this guy made himself such a danger, or whether she was accurate in judging him so. I don't know what he said or did. Neither do you. He's dead now, so we can't ask him what happened. That's why the camera is a big deal. The transparency is completely shit on, and it's CRUCIAL to be able to trust someone with a gun and a badge. 

Whatever he should have done differently? He paid dearly for it. Whether she needed to be the executioner is the question to me, and if that answer is anything less than "Absolutely" then her badge needs to get pulled. I don't want officers killing people who might have needed to die. I want officers like the guy in Minnesota who draw and fire when someone DEFINITELY needs to die. It's very difficult to say it was needed when 4 officers are there, 2 did nothing, and the other one shot with non lethal force. Out of 4 individual threat assessments, she's the only one who decided to kill the man. We should definitely question that every time. 



 

The fact her camera was not on has no legal baring.  Zero, none!  Police are not legally required to have cameras or turn them on.  And it does not matter what she said or did at that point in time because nothing she could have said or done justifies his actions or effected him reaching into his car causing a deadly force situation.  Its ugly.  But i thank her for ruining her life just by doing her job.  Your faulting her for a very human mistake.  You also dont know why her camera wasnt on.  Did she have one?  Was it broke?   We dont know.  You are assuming fault.  I am basing my opinion off the facts i see.

No charges mean justified.  Police can kill alot of people and choose not to sometimes causing their own death. 

Cameras are not that simple.  You want to invade an officer privacy in there car, talking to there wife, picking their nose.  Also the data storage is already unreal.  The cost is crippleing.  Body cameras are required to be taping when used in alot of states.  Indiana passed a new law that effected the data storage and departments have discontinued use because of the cost and maintenance.  It is a real world problem.  Money, time, manpower....3 things the law enforcement community is short on.  An unfunded mandate does not fix a thing.

Not to interrupt a good argument, but I have a simple question since there weren't dashboard cameras when I was working--does the cop have to turn it on? I assumed those things were rigged to come on when the lights came on. If it relies on the cop, that's stupid because there are times you may not have time to stop and think about turning on the camera.

Don't tell me what to argue, someone died, and it's very possible they didn't HAVE to. That should be a concern to anyone. I'm sorry it doesn't bother you on any level that an officer might have killed someone who they didn't have to, but it should. You should never allow that to go unquestioned. It's in the constitution that you're constantly bringing up that every one of these comes with a mandatory investigation. Every time an officer fires it should be fully challenged at all levels. AP you keep mentioning the constitution. There is nothing in the constitution that says officers have carte blanche when they kill someone. 

First off with this camera. I have found no specs on the dash cams the Tulsa PD uses so I don't know if it turns on with the lights. Every police force out there went to get their own systems. What I know for certain though is she had one and it was not recording. I am trying to find out if that's because of it not being functional or if she just didn't turn it on. If she couldn't turn it on, I will stop calling for her badge, but I've read nothing that says it was broken. For these memory issues and other tech whining? No don't believe the hype AP. I'm in tech. They could have these bluetooth connect directly to the computer in the car if they wanted, and have that computer automatically backed up in a cloud of some kind.

To me, this is the single most important thing a police officer can do to mend the problems we have. I do believe that a lot of it is dumped on their face without reason. The camera rolling would justify a lot of things and shut a lot of people up. At the core AP, you'd be surprised how much I'm pro-cop, but if that camera wasn't on because she just didn't turn it on? Sorry but in the present day, the need for all available evidence is paramount for these stops, and I don't need any officer out there who's too stupid to turn on the camera. 

Why? Two reasons. If there's any hope of removing officers like that shithead in South Carolina I want it rolling. Also, if an officer is actually put under duress and has to kill someone, I want every available piece of evidence to back them up. The fact that this is no big deal to you just astounds me. 

Yes I believe society has an obligation as well to recognize the job an officer has and to use respect. Often I see law students intentionally go through DUI checkpoints, film it, and stand up for their rights not to be detained. Stone sober, just daring police to make a wrong move. I hate that. I think it's insane to intentionally try to ruin someone's life when they are having problems with people killing each other because of drunk driving and doing everything they can to minimize those fatalities. 

You cannot get people to trust officers are primarily there for public safety without evidence in the cases where they have to fire. You saw 20 seconds of coverage in a 5 minute altercation and have decided that the officer should get a medal.... I want to know about the other 4 and a half minutes. Because it started with a stalled car, ended up with 4 officers and a helicopter, and one of those 4 officers (not all 4, just 1) decided to kill the guy. To me, that needs evidence and explaining, and if she didn't turn the camera on? Fired. Sorry, but we needed that and you have no business with a badge if you can't be bothered to turn that camera on. It is that important to me. It's clear you're totally okay with cops blowing people away for no reason whatsoever, but I'm just not comfortable with it. God help us if someone who's deaf gets a command from an officer when they can't see the lips moving, or they are gonna get smoked, and you're going to be patting that officer on the back....

I hold police officers to the same limits the supreme court does.  Yes this shooting should be investigated.  As you said they all are.  I never said it shouldnt be.  Im just telling you how it will likely end up and why.  Which you agree with.  Ill also agree that the video isnt definitive, as they usually are not. 

As far as the data aspect of this technology, it is a very real problem.  Im telling you it is.  Maybe jot for all departments but for some.  And the technology you say departments can easily use cost money.  Police departments are cutting people because of budget concerns.  Affording luxury of some fangled data storage system isnt at the top of the spending list.  But you know, im sure you know best or what the real trurh is.  The public always has all the answers.

Im just looking at what i see.  The available evidence i have and applying the law to it, likely a viewpoint that favors the police.  Thats what the states attorney will do.  Thats what the department of justice will do.  Your playing the waht if game.  What if they tased him (which i have counter argued).  What if she had her camera on (legal she doesnt have to, plus there was cameras, and knowing the beging of the call doesnt change the legality of the ending).  I find it annoying that the public will what if the police to death in ever circumstances like they could do the job better.  Where is the people what iffing the subject that was on drugs, disobeyed orders, disrespected a women and broke the law?   

Even in the case in Carolina the subject wouldnt have been shot if he wouldnt have fought the police.  That was a horrible shooting and the officer is paying the price.  Im not debating his actions.  Im just saying, this attitude that it is okay to disobey the police needs to stop. This nations issue with authority has been handed down for generations and every generation is more anti authority.  Stuff like this will undoubtedly keep happening when officers are placed in high stress situations that involve deadly force.  It happens 100x a fay and the police dont pull the trigger, and they could.  When they do pull the trigger they are bad guys.  No poilce officer comes on shift wanting to murder someone, justifiably kill someone, use an improper amount of force, forget to turn on a camera or anything else.  You go to work and make mistakes as all humans do.  It will happen in law enforcement as well.  The nature of the job means the police can pay dearly for thier mistakes.  This lady surely isnt an ice cold killer.  If she made a mistake (i believe criminally it will be found that she did not) it doesnt make her a bad person.  It is hard for me to judge her for a high stress situation that i wasnt in.  I also respect that she made her decision based off what she thought was best.  She loses either way.  Darren wilson isnt a cop, he lost his job and his life changed for the worst.  It did so because of the job he did and the decision he had to make because of someone elses action.