Video of California police shooting spurs investigation

[elder999]

Exactly. When did either become ethically acceptable in our society? That could be the topic of a good research paper for Sociology.

It's questionable whether the are ethically acceptable. The fact remains that they are legally acceptable-and, more to the point, expected. If it wasn't the first thought upon receiving the news, for most Americans, it was surely the second thought that "That's gonna co$t!"

 

[Carol]

Most politicians are lawyers so attempts for tort reform get crushed by lawyers protecting their own.

"Tort law is the name given to a body of law that addresses, and provides remedies for, civil wrongs not arising out of contractual obligations."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort

 

[Archangel M]

If they shoot an unarmed, restrained, prone suspect? Yes.

Based on what? An internet video? There are many situations where what we saw may have been justified.. a gun in a waistband..a movement not visible via a cell video.

The cop should be placed off-duty while an investigation takes place and if the DA determines it needs to go to a grand jury and they "yes bill" it because it looks like a "bad shoot" then its up to the DA to determine if bail is appropriate.

Not because a bunch of yahoos on the internet or on the street demand it or start riots.

 

[elder999]

Based on what? An internet video? There are many situations where what we saw may have been justified .

Nope, sorry. It looks like it wasn't justified to the cops standing right next to him. It sounds an awful lot, since he resigned, and his commander has reported him as being "inconsolable," like it wasn't justified to the officer that did the shooting. Frankly, it's growing more and more obvious, based on eyewitness statements, the video, and the behavior of the authorities, that it wasn't one of those "many situations" you speak of.Hard to imagine that it was any of those, since one thing that is clear from the videos available is that the person who was shot was compliant, prone, and in the process of being restrained, and the one thing that is clear from the aftermath is that he was unarmed.

 

[Carol]

Study Explores Threats Posed By Prone Suspects

One of the most dangerous positions a suspect can assume on the ground is prone with his hands tucked under his body, either at chest or waist level. What’s hidden in those hands? And if it’s a gun, how fast can he twist and shoot if you’re approaching him?


This month [1/09], the Force Science Research Center, in cooperation with Indiana University and the Northeast Wisconsin Technical College, will launch the first study of its kind in an effort to clearly define your risk and, hopefully, identify your best approach tactics in dealing with this common street problem.


The results may also help explain to civilians why officers sometimes react with what may seem like exceptional violence when trying to control a downed offender whose hands are concealed beneath him.

“When a prone suspect resists showing his hands when an officer orders him to or attempts to pry them out, officers become very suspicious and fearful about what his motive is. And justifiably so,” says FSRC’s executive director, Dr. Bill Lewinski. “FBI research has shown that suspects with concealed weapons most often carry them to the front of their bodies. So, when prone, they may have easy access to a weapon or already be holding one.


“Until the hands are controlled, officers are very vulnerable in this circumstance, and they often use a fairly high level of force to gain control of the hands because of their concern. They may deliver strikes with batons or flashlights that to naïve civilians watching a video clip on TV may look like malicious outbreaks of rage and vindictiveness.”

More info on link.

 

[elder999]

Study Explores Threats Posed By Prone Suspects


More info on link.

THe other thing that's clear from the video is that the subjects hands were controlled, or at least within sight and grasped. It appears as though the officer who did the shooting has actually handcuffed him before drawing his weapon and firing, but you can't be certain-though, in the clip Cruentus posted, they do roll him over and his hands remain behind him, which seems to support this notion.....

This is just a bad, bad, bad thing. The cop ****ed up, pure and simple, whatever the "reason."

 

[Archangel M]

Nope, sorry. It looks like it wasn't justified to the cops standing right next to him. It sounds an awful lot, since he resigned, and his commander has reported him as being "inconsolable," like it wasn't justified to the officer that did the shooting. Frankly, it's growing more and more obvious, based on eyewitness statements, the video, and the behavior of the authorities, that it wasn't one of those "many situations" you speak of.Hard to imagine that it was any of those, since one thing that is clear from the videos available is that the person who was shot was compliant, prone, and in the process of being restrained, and the one thing that is clear from the aftermath is that he was unarmed.

My point was not that this situation was justified. But that arresting a cop after a shoot like this "out of hand" is a knee-jerk reaction. Police shootings are all invesitgated and handled alike. We dont just lock cops up out of hand in a situation like this unless its an obvious case of intentional murder because we may be locking up a cop who was just doing his job properly due to political pressure before a full investigation is completed.

 

[Empty Hands]

But that arresting a cop after a shoot like this "out of hand" is a knee-jerk reaction.

It's the standard that the rest of us are held to. It would be nice if the police were held to a greater, not lesser, standard in this matter than the general public. After all, as you point out, it is their job.

 

[Cruentus]

This is just a bad, bad, bad thing. The cop ****ed up, pure and simple, whatever the "reason."

Yup. And that is the case. As much as I hate to say it, I unfortunatily cannot find a justifiable defense for this particular officer. The only thing that the courts will sort out is if the lethal discharge was intentional or negligent.

 

[jks9199]

Yup. And that is the case. As much as I hate to say it, I unfortunatily cannot find a justifiable defense for this particular officer. The only thing that the courts will sort out is if the lethal discharge was intentional or negligent.

Sadly, I don't think there is a defense.

He ****ed up. I haven't been able to see the video, though I will say that it is possible for a person to be very resistive and non-compliant without really seeming to be doing much if they simply lock themselves up. The Taser can be an appropriate tool under those circumstances -- but I just don't think that there's much more to say than "he ****ed up."

I do take exception to Dr. Kirkham's comment that the Taser and the handgun are automatically distinguishable under stress conditions. The older M26 taser looks and feels and aims a whole lot like a pistol, on purpose. They kept most of that with the X26, but changed the size enough to make it more easily distinguished. I think it's telling that they did so... and that the weak-side, cross draw is encouraged for carrying the Taser. Dr. Kirkham, unlike many academics, has walked the walk (he actually, after being challenged by some students, took a leave of absence and became a cop) -- but he doesn't do so currently, and didn't work as a cop when the M26 was in use. While I'm reasonably sure he's handled one -- he hasn't tried to distinguish them on the street. It's just too big a blanket statement for him to have made. Note that I am not saying that this is what happened, nor would it excuse the officer, any more than an innocent mistake of not noticing a one-way sign would excuse someone who caused a fatal crash driving the wrong way on a one way street.

But it also doesn't mean the officer's actions rise to criminal behavior. It's going to be a hell of a mess for the prosecutor and BART civil attorney to sort out. And that's without any political pressure!

 

[Cryozombie]

Question: When did a tragic event become an acceptable means of becoming rich?

Show me some proof that this fellow would have provided 25 million to his family in his lifetime and I may agree with it.

25 million is a lot, I agree. But I do think the family should be entitled at the very least a reasonable settlement based on what could be projected income for the expected lifespan for the man killed.

But I also have to question as well, why is it acceptable if I say, fail to pay for 6 99 cent downloads of songs that's on Itunes, RIAA can hit me for 500k or more? That seems to be acceptable damages for a 6 dollar loss... so if the system can inflate things that far for a corporation, why not for an individual?

 

[sgtmac_46]

Given the fact that this department recently introduced the Taser within the last few weeks, I strongly suggest an error in thinking he was deploying a Taser as the most likely cause of this incident.

At any rate the issue is one of negligence, and the former officer will be prosecuted for negligent homicide.....and may or may not be convicted.....if he's not convicted he'll be charged in FEDERAL court as the Obama administration pushes the Justice Department to push civil rights charges.

Also, he and the department will be sued in federal court, where they'll win if there isn't an out of court settlement.......$25 million? Probably ball park at least.

 

[MJS]

I do take exception to Dr. Kirkham's comment that the Taser and the handgun are automatically distinguishable under stress conditions. The older M26 taser looks and feels and aims a whole lot like a pistol, on purpose. They kept most of that with the X26, but changed the size enough to make it more easily distinguished. I think it's telling that they did so... and that the weak-side, cross draw is encouraged for carrying the Taser. Dr. Kirkham, unlike many academics, has walked the walk (he actually, after being challenged by some students, took a leave of absence and became a cop) -- but he doesn't do so currently, and didn't work as a cop when the M26 was in use. While I'm reasonably sure he's handled one -- he hasn't tried to distinguish them on the street. It's just too big a blanket statement for him to have made. Note that I am not saying that this is what happened, nor would it excuse the officer, any more than an innocent mistake of not noticing a one-way sign would excuse someone who caused a fatal crash driving the wrong way on a one way street.

But it also doesn't mean the officer's actions rise to criminal behavior. It's going to be a hell of a mess for the prosecutor and BART civil attorney to sort out. And that's without any political pressure!

My question is...when was the last time the Dr held a Taser? If he has either recently or in the past, fine, but if he's basing his opinion off of something he's never done...well, he should keep his opinion to himself, because its comments like he made, that paint a very bad picture in the rest of the uneducated minds.

 

[jks9199]

Given the fact that this department recently introduced the Taser within the last few weeks, I strongly suggest an error in thinking he was deploying a Taser as the most likely cause of this incident.

At any rate the issue is one of negligence, and the former officer will be prosecuted for negligent homicide.....and may or may not be convicted.....if he's not convicted he'll be charged in FEDERAL court as the Obama administration pushes the Justice Department to push civil rights charges.

Also, he and the department will be sued in federal court, where they'll win if there isn't an out of court settlement.......$25 million? Probably ball park at least.

I fear that, as well. But Eric Holder, Obama's pick for AG, might be a little more reasonable... or he might not.

 

[jks9199]

My question is...when was the last time the Dr held a Taser? If he has either recently or in the past, fine, but if he's basing his opinion off of something he's never done...well, he should keep his opinion to himself, because its comments like he made, that paint a very bad picture in the rest of the uneducated minds.

I didn't and don't know for sure. Guessing from his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he's handled one. Especially with the extent that he's been called on to be an expert witness on use of force. But handling one in a courtroom or a classroom is a far cry from handling one under pressure on the street.

 

[Empty Hands]

I fear that, as well. But Eric Holder, Obama's pick for AG, might be a little more reasonable... or he might not.

An AG aggressively prosecuting civil rights cases is unreasonable?

 

[CanuckMA]

The officer made a horrible mistake. The case will most likely focus on why his taser was on the same side as his firearm, and on whether he had cause to draw EITHER of those weapons.

Judging by the video, and I know it's not the most reliable POV, it appears that the suspect was under control. That is the crucial piece of the case. The decision to draw a weapon flows from that. The locations of the weapons on the officer's belt lead to the mistake.

 

[Cruentus]

25 million is a lot, I agree. But I do think the family should be entitled at the very least a reasonable settlement based on what could be projected income for the expected lifespan for the man killed.

But I also have to question as well, why is it acceptable if I say, fail to pay for 6 99 cent downloads of songs that's on Itunes, RIAA can hit me for 500k or more? That seems to be acceptable damages for a 6 dollar loss... so if the system can inflate things that far for a corporation, why not for an individual?

When in the world has someone been hit with 500K or more for downloading?

Your point is taken though; however it is impossible to accurately project his lifetime income. I think that going with the amount that would be awarded to an officers family killed in the line of duty based on max insurance policies generally provided. It puts the number between 500K and 1mil.

 

[Cryozombie]

When in the world has someone been hit with 500K or more for downloading?

Ok, that was a bit of an exaggeration,the most the RIAA has been awarded thusfar is 150k.

 

[jks9199]

An AG aggressively prosecuting civil rights cases is unreasonable?

Was there a deliberate act or an act so wantonly negligent that it violated civil rights?

Should a federal case be the first recourse -- or perhaps it should wait until we see what the state does? Or at least for the investigation to be complete...