Police Cops Shoot/Kill Wrong Man

[Moshe]

Well, I look at it this way:

1. I wasn't there.

2. It is a horrible feeling to almost shoot the wrong person.  I am sure it is worse to actually do it. I am haunted by a kid I almost shot for carrying a realistic looking 1911, when I was chasing and I all I saw was, hands feet and firearm.

3. The Mall hasn't been looted or burned.

4. I can't Monday Morning Quarterback something that comes from snippets of media, that invariably get things sideways.  For instance, Fox and Friends this morning saying the Nixons were at the George Bush Sr. memorial?  They had to quickly fix that, but that is a really bad error to make, considering Nixon is long dead.

[Wyzz Kydd]

The autopsy was paid for by the victim's family and the attorney they retained was involved in both Ferguson and Zimmerman.  I wouldn't take anything he says at face value.  I can easily imagine a scene where an officer operating in good faith shoots this guy in the back.  

1. Cops get a shots fired at the mall call.

2. Cop arrives on scene and spots an armed man waving a gun around and yelling at people.

3. Cops shoots man only to find out that he was 'directing people to safety' with a gun in his hand.

 

No criminal intent here.

Edited December 6, 2018 by Wyzz Kydd

[Moshe]

3 minutes ago, Wyzz Kydd said:

The autopsy was paid for by the victim's family and the attorney they retained was involved in both Ferguson and Zimmerman.  I wouldn't take anything he says at face value.  I can easily imagine a scene where an officer operating in good faith shoots this guy in the back.  

1. Cops get a shots fired at the mall call.

2. Cop arrives on scene and spots an armed man waving a gun around and yelling at people.

3. Cops shoots man only to find out that he was 'directing people to safety' with a gun in his hand.

 

No criminal intent here.

No, there would not be, as they have to access the scene based on information provided, which in my experience is miscommunicated or not given by dispatch/LECAS correctly, as they just get the call from someone else.  You would have to be a complete idiot to waive a firearm at people as a method of directing them to safety.  As the thing directed and pointed at them does not make them safe.  In all the yelling and screaming, the guy probably didn't hear the command to drop the weapon.  So, they dropped him.  If, in fact, this is how it played out. 

If you haven't been sent somewhere to do something with shitty information, you have never walked in those boots.  Frankly, when it comes to wealthy places, no matter what Agency/Department you work for, odds are management are in bed with them, and send you sternly out there to solve a problem. 

For instance, rich people living on the Rio Grande, in a spectacular house.  Get out there, shot fired.  That is all you know.  So, you roll up,  and far enough that the squeaky door cannot be heard, that you hope to Hashem your vest can take whatever is coming your way, sneak ingup on foot, and find two good old boys, from that house, drunk, and sighting in their hunting rifles into the Rio Grande water, and wonder why the F you are their property bothering them.  You explain it was a welfare check.  They calm down, you report in, you go back to work.

 

[RenoF250]

10 minutes ago, Wyzz Kydd said:

The autopsy was paid for by the victim's family and the attorney they retained was involved in both Ferguson and Zimmerman.  I wouldn't take anything he says at face value.  I can easily imagine a scene where an officer operating in good faith shoots this guy in the back.  

1. Cops get a shots fired at the mall call.

2. Cop arrives on scene and spots an armed man waving a gun around and yelling at people.

3. Cops shoots man only to find out that he was 'directing people to safety' with a gun in his hand.

 

No criminal intent here.

 

How he was "waving the gun around" is key to getting to the bottom of this and we will likely never get that info.  The problem is, plenty of times cops have been completely in the wrong and gotten away with it.  They kicked in the wrong door  here in Reno and killed a guy in his own living room because he was holding a fire poker.  More recently that idiot ass that shot the guy he had crawling up the hall got away with it.  That cop was criminally stupid if nothing else.

[Wyzz Kydd]

32 minutes ago, RenoF250 said:

 

How he was "waving the gun around" is key to getting to the bottom of this and we will likely never get that info.  The problem is, plenty of times cops have been completely in the wrong and gotten away with it.  They kicked in the wrong door  here in Reno and killed a guy in his own living room because he was holding a fire poker.  More recently that idiot ass that shot the guy he had crawling up the hall got away with it.  That cop was criminally stupid if nothing else.

It may be true that there have been times cops have been in the wrong and gotten away with it, but that's no reason to start assuming that cops are always in the wrong or to want to persecute every cop who is involved in a shooting.

[ASH]

wow ,  i know one thing i dunno how many times ive heard  in conversations  with friends , others and cops .  say  hey  if they are breaking in your house or throwing out threats  make sure you dont shoot them in the back .  if it was a civilian you shoot someone  going away from  your ass is going to jail period.   but there are apparently 2 sets of rules.   kinda like if you em  make sure you drag em   on the porch ,or house.  

if you shoot someone in the back , you are not in danger  if they are going away from you , just means you are a p***y

 

thankfully  NC  now has Castle  doctrine 

[Mike]

8 hours ago, Wyzz Kydd said:

It may be true that there have been times cops have been in the wrong and gotten away with it, but that's no reason to start assuming that cops are always in the wrong or to want to persecute every cop who is involved in a shooting.

Until cops police there own, that is exactly what EVERYBODY needs to do. Blueline my ass, if you took a job to uphold the law then do not allow your fellow cop to piss all over it. 

Every shooting they are involved in needs to be investigated by an outside group and if the cop did wrong they should be held to a least the same standard than Joe Public. Blind trust is why there are so many worthless cops.

Also to correct your first line "it may be true" is wrong, "It is true" should be what you write. Here is a link to one if you want an example, I can offer many more if you really want them.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kameron-prescott-family-demands-justice-child-killed-police-schertz-texas/

 

[steve4102]

5 hours ago, ASH said:

if it was a civilian you shoot someone  going away from  your ass is going to jail period.

Generally, but not always and not "period".

In most if not all states, deadly force (shooting) is justified if one is in fear of his/her life or great bodily harm or that of another. 

Example.

A BG with a weapon breaks into your home, he turns and runs away from you.  Can you shoot him in the back as he runs away?

What if he is running away from you, but down the hall to your daughters bedroom wear she is sleeping. Can you shoot him in the back before he gets to her door?

What if he makes it outside and starts running towards another victim. like your neighbor waiving a knife?  Can you shoot him in the back before he gets to your neighbor?

[Wyzz Kydd]

15 hours ago, Mike said:

Until cops police there own, that is exactly what EVERYBODY needs to do. Blueline my ass, if you took a job to uphold the law then do not allow your fellow cop to piss all over it. 

Every shooting they are involved in needs to be investigated by an outside group and if the cop did wrong they should be held to a least the same standard than Joe Public. Blind trust is why there are so many worthless cops.

Also to correct your first line "it may be true" is wrong, "It is true" should be what you write. Here is a link to one if you want an example, I can offer many more if you really want them.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kameron-prescott-family-demands-justice-child-killed-police-schertz-texas/

 

So you're saying that if a cop is involved in a shooting EVERYBODY should assume they were in the wrong and EVERYBODY should persecute them.

 

I foresee a distinct shortage of cops if we follow that path.

16 hours ago, ASH said:

wow ,  i know one thing i dunno how many times ive heard  in conversations  with friends , others and cops .  say  hey  if they are breaking in your house or throwing out threats  make sure you dont shoot them in the back .  if it was a civilian you shoot someone  going away from  your ass is going to jail period.   but there are apparently 2 sets of rules.   kinda like if you em  make sure you drag em   on the porch ,or house.  

if you shoot someone in the back , you are not in danger  if they are going away from you , just means you are a p***y

 

thankfully  NC  now has Castle  doctrine 

Really?  So you're at a stop and rob and a bad guy comes in and puts a gun to the head of the clerk.  The bad guy's back is to you and you're armed.  You shoot the bad guy in the back of the head and that means you're a p***y and you're going to jail.

I think you guys have a preordained outcome and you interpret the facts in ways that get you to that outcome, ie cops are bad.

I have no idea what happened during this shooting.  Maybe the cop is a racist, saw a black man with a gun and figured here's my chance.  Or maybe he responded to a call for an active shooter, encountered a man with a gun waving it around and shouting at people and figured he was saving lives by putting him down.  

Either of those are possible, but the second one seems more plausible to me.

Edited December 7, 2018 by Wyzz Kydd

[steve4102]

5 minutes ago, Wyzz Kydd said:

Really?  So you're at a stop and rob and a bad guy comes in and puts a gun to the head of the clerk.  The bad guy's back is to you and you're armed.  You shoot the bad guy in the back of the head and that means you're a p***y and you're going to jail.

Right, turning ones back or being behind a BG from the get-go, does not mean there is no "threat".

Most laws state that once the threat has been eliminated, SD justification has also been eliminated. 

Turning ones back does not automatically reduce or eliminate a "threat".

[Moshe]

On ‎12‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 11:16 AM, RenoF250 said:

 

How he was "waving the gun around" is key to getting to the bottom of this and we will likely never get that info.  The problem is, plenty of times cops have been completely in the wrong and gotten away with it.  They kicked in the wrong door  here in Reno and killed a guy in his own living room because he was holding a fire poker.  More recently that idiot ass that shot the guy he had crawling up the hall got away with it.  That cop was criminally stupid if nothing else.

Doesn't matter.  A firearm is not a beacon, you don't point it anything you don't plan on destroying or killing.  So, if he was waiving a firearm around at all, it is pure stupid.  Sometimes stupid actions have stupid prizes.  Imagine if it had been blue on blue?  Would anyone be as upset?  Say a plain clothes guy is waiving a handgun around, stupidly, and fails to call out he was on the job?  The Uniform would probably dust him.

[ASH]

i think some misconstrued , ofcourse  some of the senarios  listed  are fine for shot in the back ,  i was speaking if you hear someone breaking in your house they here you  they  jump out and start running away from you and you shoot them in the back  you are gonna get charged.  if the threat  is widening between you and a bad guy  there is no  i was scared for my life .  

[Mike]

3 hours ago, Wyzz Kydd said:

So you're saying that if a cop is involved in a shooting EVERYBODY should assume they were in the wrong and EVERYBODY should persecute them.

 

I foresee a distinct shortage of cops if we follow that path.

 

Yes, within reason.  Its been a couple weeks since the mall shooting, would a non cop be in the same spot the cop is?

Every cop I see treats me like they assume I am guilty of something, what's good for the goose...…….. Why are you ok with the multiple standards?

 

As to your comment about there being a shortage of cops; why wouldn't you want a group of people being paid to do the right thing to know that they know they will go to jail if they do not?  

Let's revisit this in a year. My guess is there will still be 2 armed killers on the street, the difference is one will still be wanted for the murder and unless enough people complain the other will be still the employee of the city.

 

Also you forgot to tell me how the GROUP of cops that shot at an unarmed person in the link I provided and at least one killed a ******* child inside the building in the process are still getting paid almost a year later? 

 

 

[ASH]

whats going on with the  austrailian lady who called the cops , walked down to talk to cops in car  and got shot ?  

[janice6]

58 minutes ago, ASH said:

whats going on with the  austrailian lady who called the cops , walked down to talk to cops in car  and got shot ?  

IIRC, that officer has been charged with either Manslaughter, or Murder.

It's important to the case to remember that, that officer was fast processed to get a ME representative on the force.  The city decided to forego stricter testing to ensure "diversity" because they feared Psych testing would reduce the Diverse base of candidates. 

The push for "Diversity" on the Police force was more important to the city government than ensuring the best candidate for the position.

[TBO]

IIRC, that officer has been charged with either Manslaughter, or Murder.
It's important to the case to remember that, that officer was fast processed to get a ME representative on the force.  The city decided to forego stricter testing to ensure "diversity" because they feared Psych testing would reduce the Diverse base of candidates. 
The push for "Diversity" on the Police force was more important to the city government than ensuring the best candidate for the position.

Arrested, facing 1st degree murder.

Sent from my Jack boot using Copatalk

[Moshe]

18 hours ago, ASH said:

whats going on with the  austrailian lady who called the cops , walked down to talk to cops in car  and got shot ?  

He is facing murder charges.  The situation reminds me of the Hispanic guy, whose skin was like leather, and he had a machete to cut down brush.  He had a small cattle ranch, and the hood grew up around him.  He was always tense when he saw a lighter skinned Border Patrol Agent, as their Spanish was often deplorable.  He mumbled a lot so, you had to listen carefully.  But, he had a lot of firearms drawn on him, telling him to drop the weapon.  He he saw me, he flinched.  I just waived at the guy, he recoiled liked, "Not this again."  I came up and we talked quite awhile in Spanish, and he gave me the lay of the land, his life story, how he hated the "narcos" because they had killed a couple of his sons in Nuevo Laredo.  He was a great source of information about the trails and the coming and goings of smugglers.  There are a lot of ways to handle something.  Most of it doesn't involve shooting someone.  But, you mix crap training, just to get someone in a job profession that everyone hates you, and now people are out to assassinate you.  That makes for a toxic combo.

[steve4102]

On 12/8/2018 at 3:05 PM, ASH said:

whats going on with the  austrailian lady who called the cops , walked down to talk to cops in car  and got shot ?  

Fired Minneapolis police officer Mohamed Noor is scheduled to stand trial on murder and manslaughter charges next April for the shooting of Justine Ruszczyk Damond.

In a brief court appearance — Noor’s second since he was charged — Hennepin County District Judge Kathryn Quaintance set an April 1, 2019, trial date, while denying a number of defense motions to dismiss the case and to exclude certain evidence. There existed enough evidence, she ruled, to bring Noor to trial for the death of the 40-year-old Australian woman in July 2017.

http://www.startribune.com/ex-minneapolis-police-officer-mohamed-noor-will-stand-trial-in-april-for-justine-damond-shooting/494534001/

[steve4102]

On 12/8/2018 at 4:09 PM, janice6 said:

IIRC, that officer has been charged with either Manslaughter, or Murder.

It's important to the case to remember that, that officer was fast processed to get a ME representative on the force.  The city decided to forego stricter testing to ensure "diversity" because they feared Psych testing would reduce the Diverse base of candidates. 

The push for "Diversity" on the Police force was more important to the city government than ensuring the best candidate for the position.

Former Minneapolis police officer Mohamed Noor concerned psychiatrists and training officers about his fitness for duty long before he fatally shot Justine Ruszczyk Damond, new court records show.

Revelations about Noor's past were introduced by Hennepin County prosecutors on Wednesday in response to a motion by defense attorneys to dismiss the third-degree murder and manslaughter charges filed against him in Damond's death.

Noor was flagged by two psychiatrists during the pre-hiring evaluation in early 2015 after he exhibited an inability to handle the stress of regular police work and unwillingness to deal with people, according to the records.

The report went on to say that Noor was more likely than other police candidates to become impatient with others over minor infractions, have trouble getting along with others, to be more demanding and have a limited social support network. They showed he "reported disliking people and being around them." And yet, since Noor exhibited no signs of a major mental illness, chemical dependence or personality disorder, he was deemed "psychiatrically fit to work as a cadet police officer for the Minneapolis Police Department," the filing said. Given the inconsistencies in the report, a civilian human resources employee followed up with the psychiatrist two weeks later, seeking clarification. The psychiatrist, Dr. Thomas Gratzer, stood by his recommendation.

Michael Quinn, a former Minneapolis detective-turned-consultant, said that any of those findings should have raised red flags during the hiring process.

http://www.startribune.com/judge-rejects-motion-to-seal-medical-records-in-trial-for-officer-who-killed-justine-ruszczyk-damond/492518991/

[steve4102]

Judge to weigh dismissing charges against ex-Mpls. cop Noor in Ruszczyk killing

Sep 17, 2018

 

More than a year after Mohamed Noor shot and killed Justine Ruszczyk, also known by the surname Damond, in the alley behind her southwest Minneapolis home, the former police officer is scheduled to appear for a court hearing to consider motions his attorneys have made about the murder and manslaughter charges.

Noor, 32, is charged with shooting and killing Ruszczyk, 40, last summer. She'd called 911 to report what she thought was an assault. Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman charged Noor last spring with third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter.

The omnibus hearing in Hennepin County District Court next Thursday will revolve around motions filed by Noor's attorneys seeking to dismiss the charges and suppress psychological testing of Noor by the Minneapolis Police Department.

 

Defense attorney Melvin Welch, who is not connected to the Noor case, said the judge will be looking at whether there's enough admissible evidence to establish probable cause for the charges.

"There's no burden on the defense at this time," Welch said. "The burden is on the prosecution to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant's constitutional rights have not been violated — it's the state's burden of proof to show that this evidence was properly obtained."

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/09/17/noor-minneapolis-police-shooting-ruszczyk-damond-judge-weigh-charge-dismissal

[ASH]

figures ,  and will prolly get away with murder , i know  if that was my wife and he walks .   later on down the road the chance of another accident  would be in his fortune cookie 

Edited December 10, 2018 by ASH

[TBO]

12 hours ago, steve4102 said:

Judge to weigh dismissing charges against ex-Mpls. cop Noor in Ruszczyk killing

Sep 17, 2018

 

More than a year after Mohamed Noor shot and killed Justine Ruszczyk, also known by the surname Damond, in the alley behind her southwest Minneapolis home, the former police officer is scheduled to appear for a court hearing to consider motions his attorneys have made about the murder and manslaughter charges.

Noor, 32, is charged with shooting and killing Ruszczyk, 40, last summer. She'd called 911 to report what she thought was an assault. Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman charged Noor last spring with third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter.

The omnibus hearing in Hennepin County District Court next Thursday will revolve around motions filed by Noor's attorneys seeking to dismiss the charges and suppress psychological testing of Noor by the Minneapolis Police Department.

 

Defense attorney Melvin Welch, who is not connected to the Noor case, said the judge will be looking at whether there's enough admissible evidence to establish probable cause for the charges.

"There's no burden on the defense at this time," Welch said. "The burden is on the prosecution to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant's constitutional rights have not been violated — it's the state's burden of proof to show that this evidence was properly obtained."

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/09/17/noor-minneapolis-police-shooting-ruszczyk-damond-judge-weigh-charge-dismissal

Standard Defense Attorney check list, nothing will come of his motions. Plead straight up or go to jury trial. 

[Mike]

Back to the story in the OP.

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/national/ala-ag-takes-over-mall-shooting-cases-citing-conflict-of-interest

 

After reading a different article that said there was a "shooting suspect arrested" in the original mall shootings. I have to admit I was wrong in my Dec 7th post, I thought this person had killed somebody at the mall and that this person was in the wind and the cops would be to busy covering up for their coworker that they wouldn't have time to catch this guy. Turns out other agencies got involved to grab him.

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/national/alabama-mall-shooting-suspect-arrested