SkyDekker 1,465 #51 November 28, 2006 QuoteNo one, not even your employer, can overrule your legal protection. ie. Honest held belief of imminent danger and reacting to that danger. That's a given. Normally I would consider some one using a vehicle as a weapon to be using deadly force and hence, the shooting would be justified. However, if the department has a policy stating the opposite, that would make the shooting unjustified. Should that also result in a manslaughter or murder charge? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scoop 0 #52 November 28, 2006 It wouldn't be unjustified, just not as per policy. I would like to be part of the defense and ask the police forces officer safety instructors what other techniques they recommend for stopping a vehicle... bodily force maybe, powers of the mind, shouting loudly, playing dead? All pretty inneffective against avehcile driven at you. This would hopefully prove they used the right response option (note - not saying they did, just questioning the policy) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #53 November 28, 2006 Quote I would like to be part of the defense and ask the police forces officer safety instructors what other techniques they recommend for stopping a vehicle... PIT manouver? We've all seen it on COPS. The whole thing should have never happened. It sounds to me like some innocent people got shot 51 times because the lap dances were too 'hands on' in the champagne room. Every vice position in every city in the country should be terminated. It's a waste of time and money. -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wuffo2 0 #54 November 29, 2006 QuoteEveryone makes mistakes in all sorts of situations in life. When weapons are involved, along with fear and very little time to react, the consequences can be severe. I don't understand what this black/white argument is. Are people trying to say it was a racist attack? I find it hard to believe you'd get away with being a racist cop in New York for very long. You'd be out the force extremely fast. From what we have read (and how accurate is the media) there has been some sort of altercation or exchange of words inside or outside the venue, furthur to that for whatever reason a vehicle nearly hits a police officer. With your laws I'm of the understanding he'd be within his rights to shoot the driver to protect his own life or anyone elses in those circumstances. Whether they are armed or not is irrelevant, they were in a vehicle which is deemed a lethal weapon isn't it? The belief of whether they were armed is important. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but when your experiencing a 'brown trouser moment' you dont have that benefit. I find it amusing that many people seem to find it ok that a civilian can practically execute someone for being on their property but if a police officer fears for his life hes not allowed to shoot. What the fuck? Double standards! Same over here, if we get the shit kicked out of us, very rare for any serious conviction. But if we are found guilty of excessive force we'd lose our jobs, receive a stiff penalty and be publically humiliated by the media as some sort of public relations exercise. Too bad they were a bunch of assholes. If they were behaving themselves they wouldnt have even come to police attention. Turns out the cops (inside and who knows outside) had been doing a little drinking themselves. Could this be a contributing factor. You know damn guns and alcohol= Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #55 November 29, 2006 PIT manouver? We've all seen it on COPS. Quote I would give anything to see someone do a pit manuver without a vehicle And as for a previous question, I don't believe violating department policy could be murder, everyone has the right to react to a threat accordingly, it's up to the laws to determine what constitutes murder and what doesn't. I'm sure there is something in the policy leaving the decision of whether or not the policy is applicable to the situation up to the officer. As previously stated though i think we should wait for something conclusive to come out, because right now all we are hearing is different versions of "eyewitness" accountsHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites justinb138 0 #56 November 29, 2006 Seeing as how this was an undercover thing at the club, does anyone know if these were uniformed officers involved in the shooting? Honestly, if someone approached my vehicle with a gun pointed at me and I had no reason to believe they were a police officer, I'd very seriously consider using my vehicle to defend myself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,465 #57 November 29, 2006 QuoteHonestly, if someone approached my vehicle with a gun pointed at me and I had no reason to believe they were a police officer, I'd very seriously consider using my vehicle to defend myself. or, let's say they did claim to be police officers, but you recognize one or two of them from inside the strip joint and saw them drinking and maybe getting a lap dance or two..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #58 November 29, 2006 Surely not going in for a couple of freebies? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites warpedskydiver 0 #59 November 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteas for black on white or white on black.... i'm losing my patience over hearing that.. It is what it is.... and this is the result... just like the little old black 92 year old lady sitting in her home.. scared to death that someone would break in... well they did but it was the police.. in the dark.. in H HOME.. and that is happening far too often.. of the police..." Making Mistakes" The 92 yr old lady should have killed everyone of the men who burst through her door then called 911 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #60 November 29, 2006 QuoteThe 92 yr old lady should have killed everyone of the men who burst through her door then called 911 She was unsuccessful, but I have to smile at the fact that at least she tried. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Scoop 0 #61 November 30, 2006 ...and I smile at the fact shes dead Good for you granny. Good decision huh!? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Samurai136 0 #62 December 1, 2006 http://www.slate.com/id/2154631/?GT1=8805 Slate has a good opinion article.***The perils of "contagious shooting." By William Saletan Posted Thursday, Nov. 30, 2006, at 2:35 AM ET Fifty bullets fired at three unarmed men last Saturday. Forty-three fired at an armed man last year. Forty-one fired at Amadou Diallo. All by New York police; all cases fatal. Why so many bullets? "Contagious shooting," proposed the New York Times in a front-page story on Monday. "An officer fires, so his colleagues do, too." It's natural to grope for a rational or mechanical explanation in cases like these. But it's not clear which kind of explanation this contagion is. If it's rational, it should be judged like any rational process, and cops should be culpable for it. If it's mechanical, it should be controlled like any mechanical process, starting with the guns supplied to police. We can't keep doing what we've been doing: giving cops high-round semiautomatic weapons because we trust them not to blast away like robots, then excusing them like robots when they blast away. Supposedly, contagious shooting was coined four decades ago to explain copycat police fire during riots. Once you start describing a behavioral phenomenon as a predictable sequence of events—"post-traumatic stress disorder," for example—people start reading it as an excuse. Seven years ago, during the Diallo case, a lawyer for one of the accused officers pointed out that "contagious shooting" was in the New York Police Department patrol guide. "I suspect that this phenomenon may play an active role in this case for my client," he told reporters. What makes contagious shooting a handy legal defense is its mechanical portrayal of behavior. You're not choosing to kill; you're catching a disease. In the Diallo era, the NYPD patrol guide explained that the first shot "sets off a chain reaction of shooting by other personnel." Officers "join in as a kind of contagion," said the Times. They "instinctively follow suit," said the Daily News, as one shot "sparks a volley from other officers." On Monday, the Times said contagious shooting "spreads like germs, like laughter." One former NYPD official called it the "fog of the moment." Another said "your reflexes take over." A third told CNN, "It's sort of like a Pavlovian response. It's automatic. It's not intentional." This mess of metaphors is telling. Nothing can behave like germs, sparks, laughter, fog, instinct, and conditioning all at once. That's the first clue that "contagious" is being used not to clarify matters, but to confuse them. Another clue is that the same people who invoke it often point out that the number of shootings by police is low and has been falling. An urge that's so commonly resisted can't be irresistible. Here's a third clue: Prior to Monday, "contagious shooting" had appeared in 25 articles in Nexis. Half of them were about cops or soldiers; the other half were about basketball. Three years ago, for example, contagious shooting "rubbed off" among Duke players; last year, it "spread" among the Philadelphia 76ers. Anyone who follows sports knows that writers reach for such silly metaphors when they have no idea why something happened. Maybe cops can get off with this defense. But it carries a price. If lethal police reactions really are contagious, then the sensible response is to control them like a disease. As Al Sharpton—who says 10,000 things a year and is right at least twice—pointed out Monday, contagious shooting as an explanation for this week's tragedy is "even more frightening" than malice, since it implies that such incidents will recur. The most famous invocation of contagion in law enforcement, delivered eight decades ago by Justice Louis Brandeis, became a centerpiece of the 1966 Miranda case. "Crime is contagious," Brandeis wrote. "If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy." How can you control a contagion of police overreaction? By controlling the crucial mechanism: guns. The key number in the Diallo case wasn't 41; it was 16. Two of the four officers accounted for 32 of the 41 bullets, because each of them emptied his weapon. NYPD rules "require that the officers carry nine millimeter semi-automatic pistols with 16 shots in the magazine and the first trigger pull being a conventional trigger pull and all subsequent trigger pulls being a hair trigger pull," one defense lawyer told the jury. That's why the officers fired so many shots so fast: Their guns, loaded with 64 rounds, "were all capable of being emptied in less than four seconds." Same thing this week. Thirty-one of the 50 bullets reportedly came from one officer's 16-round semiautomatic. One reload, two clips, total mayhem. This is why Mayor David Dinkins and his police commissioners, including Ray Kelly, originally opposed giving cops semiautomatic weapons. In 1993, when they gave in, they put a 10-round limit on the clips. A year later, Mayor Rudy Giuliani and his commissioner lifted the cap. They argued that cops shouldn't be outgunned and would handle the weapons responsibly. It's the same argument the National Rifle Association makes for the freedom to use firearms: Guns don't kill people; people kill people.[/] Contagious shooting blows that argument away. If cops fire reflexively, there's no moral difference between people and guns. They're both machines, and based on recent shootings, we should limit clips or firing speed to control their damage. No responsibility, no freedom. Alternatively, we could reassert that police are free agents, to be trusted with weapons and held responsible—not excused with mechanical metaphors—when they abuse them. You can't have it both ways.[url]"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian Ken Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CameraNewbie 0 #63 December 3, 2006 QuoteHow about we afford the officers the same presumption of innocence that everyone else in this country gets until an investigation is completed. Excellent point GQ! Alot of people that are not from NYC and do not come from a law enforcement background will never understand this. By chiming in on what the NYPD could have done or shouldn't have done, we're Monday Night Quarterbacking. We were not there to witness any of these events that took place. We're only basing our opinions on how the media portrays the situation. Doesn't this sound unfair when the media does the same thing for skydiving fatalities and what not? They're not giving you the full story. First of all, the media failed to mention that 1 of the black male passengers of the 3 that were in the car had a history of felony arrests that included drug possession charges. I've worked with a lot of ex-convicts in the mailroom and as couriers. I've heard it from the horses' mouth about how they're very adamant about not ever going back to jail and that they'll kill a cop if they have to in order to stay out of jail and retain their freedom. I've heard a majority of the ex-cons mention this to me and most of them feel the same exact way. Some of them are law abiding and some of them are still into drugs, partying and occassional fighting to defend their stand. Anyway, so knowing that there was an ex-con among the passengers is one of the things the media failed to mention initially. Then, inside the club they failed to mention that the one of the 2 passengers, well call him passenger #1 had an argument with another drug dealer (who was not one of the 3 men that were shot at). The argument ended with one of the passenger #1 gesturing with his hands to the drug dealer that he was going to shoot him. Then, passenger#1 told passenger #2 that he was going to shoot the muthaf#$! and to go get his gun. The undercover police that were working inside the club overheard this and followed the men outside to their car. Undercover cop#1 approached the men in the vehicle and identified himself as a police officer. The 2 passengers jumped into the car and told the driver to drive off. That's when the whole ramming of the black car and the clipping of the police officer happened. The officers noticed that the passenger in the front seat had his hands inside his belt and brandished a firearm and that's when the firing occurred. The cop identified himself and told the people in the car to stop. When they failed to stop and tried to run down the van, the passenger of the vehicle in the front seat had his hands inside his belt and brandished a firearm. Like Billvon said, QuoteIf, someday, I am in my car, trying to leave the area of a bar fight, and someone in street clothes runs into the street and points a gun at me - I am going to run them over. I'd rather be wrong and alive than careful and dead. The driver did not listen to the officer when he told him to stop his car. The passenger in the front seat had brandished his gun. So the cop reacted on what he was trained to do, his life was in eminant danger because that passenger had a gun in his hand. The driver had a depraved indifference to human life by trying to run people over. You wouldn't wait to shoot until you got shot at, would you? Why the 51 shots you asked. If you shot someone once and they kept raising their gun and pointing at you, are you going to stop after you shot him once or are you going to keep shooting until he drops that gun? It's easy for you to Monday Night Quarterback this whole situation because you weren't there. You weren't in a situation where it was life and death and you had to protect your life and your partner's lives. Most of you would probably just freeze and let yourself get run over or let yourself get shot at and piss and shit your pants. It's easy for you to Monday Night Quarterback this whole situation and judge cops because you're not a cop. Most of you weren't even in combat in the military. You're all talk on what shouldn't have been done and what not! You guys that talk are going to be the first ones going up to a cop crying and complaining that someone robbed you or someone pointed a gun at you. And it's not white on black or black on white. Get your freakin' facts straight. The officer that was nearest to the car that shot 11 times was black. The other officers that shot were black and one of them were hispanic. There were two white cops there too. One of them was inside a car. Just because someone is getting married the following day doesn't make him a saint. Friends will help out other friends and they will have steel balls and beer muscles when they're drunk. And if a friend doesn't want to go back to jail to get butt fucked all day or suck dicks all day, he'll do whatever it takes to stay out of jail and his friends will help him. Why no gun at the scene? All it takes is a few seconds and it will disappear. It's NY for pete's sake! It has happened numerous times in NYC. I've seen a situation where 2 cops were bringing down a store robbery suspect and they only turned away for less than a minute to put the cuffs on him and within that time the store robber's goody bag which was worth $2,000 of stolen goods disappeared. Right in front of a crowd of 30 people. No one saw a thing. This is NY if anyone sees a gun on the floor they're not going to do what you non-city folk will do. They'll pick it up and hide it in their pocket? Why? It's a free fuckin' gun, that's why? It can be sold for money or it can be used in an assassination and it can't be traced. In this situation, police identified a man that was near the vehicle when this happened but disappeared shortly after. Read more than one newspaper. Watch more than one news excerpt. Next time get your facts first before you become Judge, Jury and Executioner. You guys would make lousy jurors in NYC. Really lousy ones!What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,026 #64 December 3, 2006 I was under the impression that the investigation was ongoing but you seem to think it's cut and dried. Tell us about NYPD and Amadou Diallo.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CameraNewbie 0 #65 December 3, 2006 Nothing is cut and dry my friend. I merely read more than one newspaper article and I watched more than one news excerpt than probably all of you combined. Which is what most of you should have done before running your mouth off about it. You guys are like whuffos that read what the media says about Skydiving fatalities and don't get all the facts first. Amadou Diallo is not what this topic is about. Read the subject "NYPD bullet kills Groom on Wedding Day". I fail to see where it mentions Amadou Diallo.What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GrabGrass 0 #66 December 3, 2006 Let me preface by saying I agree nothing is cut and dried, and I'm all for sorting this out before making judgement. As to "us" being poor jurors, I've testified in over 100 court cases involving shootings and one thing I have come to believe is that where there is smoke there is fire. We were not there to witness any of these events that took place. That's true, so let's take the evidence and ascertain the facts from that. Was there a gun found? No. Did anyone SEE a gun thrown away? No one that has come forward. No one saw a thing. This is NY if anyone sees a gun on the floor they're not going to do what you non-city folk will do. They'll pick it up and hide it in their pocket? Why? It's a free fuckin' gun, that's why? It can be sold for money or it can be used in an assassination and it can't be traced. In this situation, police identified a man that was near the vehicle when this happened but disappeared shortly after. That all make a great story, PROVE it in court. "IF" there was a gun, and it "WAS" brandished resulting in 51 rounds being fired, I DAMN sure would have secured the scene and located that weapon as my first priority. Failing to do so is poor police work, unless of course there wasn't a gun in which case the "Gun Fairy" running away with it is a handy excuse. I've worked with a lot of ex-convicts in the mailroom and as couriers. I've heard it from the horses' mouth about how they're very adamant about not ever going back to jail and that they'll kill a cop if they have to in order to stay out of jail and retain their freedom. I've heard a majority of the ex-cons mention this to me and most of them feel the same exact way. So what? Did YOU personally or anyone else for that matter hear any of these suspect / victims make that statement? If so bring them forward, if not, might as well read "Green Eggs and Ham" in court, it would carry the same weight. The argument ended with one of the passenger #1 gesturing with his hands to the drug dealer that he was going to shoot him. Then, passenger#1 told passenger #2 that he was going to shoot the muthaf#$! and to go get his gun. So at this point we have at best, Terrorist Threat of Bodily Injury...IN A BAR! Certainly probably cause for further investigation, but these UC's were unarmed at the time, why didn't they allow the armed back up team to intervene then and there if they thought the threat credible? Hum...maybe they didn't think it was. The undercover police that were working inside the club overheard this and followed the men outside to their car. Undercover cop#1 approached the men in the vehicle and identified himself as a police officer. And did so verbally ONLY. The weapons and shields were with the back up team. So either they didn't think the suspects were really armed, or they are incredibly wreckless and / or poorly trained. The passenger in the front seat had brandished his gun. So you say, where is that gun again? No gun, no threat. So the cop reacted on what he was trained to do, his life was in eminent danger because that passenger had a gun in his hand. Or, it could be argued that he disregarded his training entirely and that's how he got in that situation in the first place. The driver had a depraved indifference to human life by trying to run people over. Or was he acting in fear for his life having just had a confrontation with a known drug dealer in which he may have felt threatened, then was approached by someone unknown to him 'claiming' to be a police officer shouting orders? You wouldn't wait to shoot until you got shot at, would you? No, but I would verify the threat existed in the first place before firing, and DAMN well would have noticed the threat continuing (as in incoming fire) before I started on the second magazine! Funny there are no MT casings or GSR with the suspects / victims, guess the "Gun Fairy" picked up the empties and washed their hands too. Read more than one newspaper. Watch more than one news excerpt. Next time get your facts first before you become Judge, Jury and Executioner. You guys would make lousy jurors in NYC. Really lousy ones! And as far as a prosecuting Attorney, you make one heck of a mail clerk! ~ "Pack Fast, Pull Low... and Date Your Riggers WIFE!" ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Samurai136 0 #67 December 3, 2006 QuoteNothing is cut and dry my friend. I merely read more than one newspaper article and I watched more than one news excerpt than probably all of you combined. Which is what most of you should have done before running your mouth off about it. You guys are like whuffos that read what the media says about Skydiving fatalities and don't get all the facts first. Amadou Diallo is not what this topic is about. Read the subject "NYPD bullet kills Groom on Wedding Day". I fail to see where it mentions Amadou Diallo. Please direct us to the article that says the police found a firearm. I can point you to a New York Times article that suggests the police are intimidating witnesses in the hunt for a mysterious 4th man whom the police claim was the one with the gun. New York Times, Dec 3, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/nyregion/03shooting.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 QuoteSince then, detectives have looked for a fourth man so they can determine how close he was to the shooting and whether he had a gun. Because the three other men turned out to be unarmed, what the fourth man saw — or what he was holding — could drastically alter the outcome of criminal and internal investigations into whether the police acted properly when they fired 50 bullets at Mr. Bell’s car. That is, if the fourth man really does exist. Hmmm.... 50 rounds unloaded into 3 unarmed men, boxed in between two undercover police vehicles, and the "armed 4th man" is apparently never shot and disappears into the night. Something is rotten in Denmark."Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian Ken Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CameraNewbie 0 #68 December 3, 2006 Quote"IF" there was a gun, and it "WAS" brandished resulting in 51 rounds being fired, I DAMN sure would have secured the scene and located that weapon as my first priority. Failing to do so is poor police work. Dude, you're not a cop. How or why could you say if you would have secured the scene? 51 shots were fired. People bleeding all over the place. Officers injured from the ramming another officer injured from being clipped from another car. With all this going on, you can honestly say that the first thing you would have done would be to secure the firearm and failure to do so is poor police work. Boy, either you are Mr. SuperCool under pressure or you have no emotions whatsoever. Who do you think had to call for an ambulance for the dying and the injured? Who do you think went around making sure the officers in the black van were injured or not. Who do you think went around making sure the officer struck by the vehicle was injured or not? Since they weren't Mr. Supercool under pressure like you are or Superhuman, do you honestly think that would be the first thing that went in their mind? "I gotta secure the gun. I gotta find the weapon." You weren't there. You're not a cop and you cannot say what you would do if you're not presented with that much stress in a short time span. QuoteSo at this point we have at best, Terrorist Threat of Bodily Injury...IN A BAR!Crazy Certainly probably cause for further investigation, but these UC's were unarmed at the time, why didn't they allow the armed back up team to intervene then and there if they thought the threat credible? Hum...maybe they didn't think it was. You just said it yourself pal. It was just threat of bodily injury. They were being further observed. When someone mentions that they're going to get a gun and 3 guys are congregrating outside a car with the doors open and are observed or heard to be making gestures about shooting someone that's good reason to believe that the firearm is in the car and they're about to take actions on their threats. QuoteSo you say, where is that gun again? No gun, no threat. Me no say. Newspaper say. QuoteOr, it could be argued that he disregarded his training entirely and that's how he got in that situation in the first place. How are you already judging him without even knowing all the facts or what transpired at that moment? I thought you were experienced in gun cases. QuoteOr was he acting in fear for his life having just had a confrontation with a known drug dealer in which he may have felt threatened, then was approached by someone unknown to him 'claiming' to be a police officer shouting orders? So you're telling me that makes it okay to run over other people and ram cars? So you're telling me if this is the only evidence you were presented with, you would clear anyone from running over cops dead and ramming their cars? You and I were not there. So my argument would be: Why couldn't the driver make a U turn to avoid the van that blocked them? Why couldn't they drive on the sidewalk to avoid everyone? Why couldn't they just drive backwards and keep going until they were clear and free? QuoteNo, but I would verify the threat existed in the first place before firing, and DAMN well would have noticed the threat continuing (as in incoming fire) before I started on the second magazine! Funny there are no MT casings or GSR with the suspects / victims, guess the "Gun Fairy" picked up the empties and washed their hands too. So seeing a brandished gun is not a threat? So you're telling me that with all the gun fire going on, you can honestly distinguish if gun fire was coming at you from inside the vehicle? Wow, you are really Mr. Supercool under pressure. QuoteAnd as far as a prosecuting Attorney, you make one heck of a mail clerk! That's okay. I'm proud of what I do my friend. At least I can sleep at night not making assumptions on what "I would do or what I should have done." if I were a cop. You make a great prosecuting atty! You're so objective! And you're so Mr. Supercool under pressure!What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CameraNewbie 0 #69 December 3, 2006 QuotePlease direct us to the article that says the police found a firearm. I can point you to a New York Times article that suggests the police are intimidating witnesses in the hunt for a mysterious 4th man whom the police claim was the one with the gun. I've never said that a firearm was found. QuoteHmmm.... 50 rounds unloaded into 3 unarmed men, boxed in between two undercover police vehicles, and the "armed 4th man" is apparently never shot and disappears into the night. Something is rotten in Denmark. The case is still under investigation my friend. Why are you already judging them? Hear the facts first, not what the media portrays.What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freethefly 6 #70 December 3, 2006 QuoteThe passenger in the front seat had brandished his gun. There was no gun so, this is a false statement that you are making. QuoteSo the cop reacted on what he was trained to do, his life was in eminant danger because that passenger had a gun in his hand They are trained to react to a real threat, not an imagined threat. And, again, there was no gun. QuoteThe driver had a depraved indifference to human life by trying to run people over. From what I understand is that the cop got in front of a moving car afterwhich he stepped to the side. The car was then boxed in by two vehicle and the police opened fire. QuoteIf you shot someone once and they kept raising their gun and pointing at you, are you going to stop after you shot him once or are you going to keep shooting until he drops that gun? So this guy is shot all to hell yet he keeps raising this imaginary gun and then he... what? Threw it out the window or did he use imaginary powers and make it just disappear into thin air??????? QuoteI've worked with a lot of ex-convicts in the mailroom Yup, your qualification are as such that they should call you as an expert witness. Quotethe passenger of the vehicle in the front seat had his hands inside his belt and brandished a firearm. Now, I am just speculating that he may have been going for a cell phone.[?] QuoteIt's easy for you to Monday Night Quarterback this whole situation because you weren't there And you were there? Oh, and the phrase is Monday morning quarterbacking. QuoteI've seen a situation where 2 cops were bringing down a store robbery suspect and they only turned away for less than a minute to put the cuffs on him and within that time the store robber's goody bag which was worth $2,000 of stolen goods disappeared What makes you believe that the cops didn't snag the cash and stash themselves a throwdown? QuoteThis is NY if anyone sees a gun on the floor they're not going to do what you non-city folk will do. LMAO I spent more than half my life riding the streets of St. Louis and East St. Louis in a motorcycle club. I have also lived and worked in N.Y.C down in the subway and worked the LIRR out of Jamaica. Fucking NYC is a powderpuff compared to St. Louis. Think I am bullshitting? Check the crime statistics for cities. St. Louis is #1, Woo Woo NUMBER FUCKING ONE, YEAH!!!! Oh, by the way, never been shot in powderpuff city. St. Louis? Took a round in North City."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freethefly 6 #71 December 3, 2006 QuoteSo you're telling me that with all the gun fire going on, you can honestly distinguish if gun fire was coming at you from inside the vehicle? It was dark with minimal light. They would had seen muzzle flash. When I got shot, the guy was about 10' max from me, I saw the flash. Never heard the gun fire though. The bullet put a burrow along the side of my head. Another inch to the right and it would had gone through my eye and out the back."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CameraNewbie 0 #72 December 3, 2006 QuoteThere was no gun so, this is a false statement that you are making. Hoy vey! I said I read this in the newspaper! QuoteThey are trained to react to a real threat, not an imagined threat. And, again, there was no gun. There you go now, alright shutting the case closed. The case is still under investigation mon frere. They're still looking for another man and the gun. Stop pretending like you were there. You're already judging them and you don't even have all the facts yet. QuoteFrom what I understand is that the cop got in front of a moving car afterwhich he stepped to the side. Quotes from one of the passengers stated that they were scared and thought the men were drug dealers trying to kill them. So they were defending themselves. QuoteSo this guy is shot all to hell yet he keeps raising this imaginary gun and then he... what? Threw it out the window or did he use imaginary powers and make it just disappear into thin air??????? You weren't there, I wasn't there, we can't say what happened to the gun, imaginary or not. Read my reply to crab grass about that. QuoteYup, your qualification are as such that they should call you as an expert witness. No dude, a majority of the hardcore felons I spoke with claimed that they would kill not to go back to prison. There was a repeat felon in that car. Why couldn't there be an inkling of a possibility that he didn't want to go back to jail and that he would do anything not to go back? Is it impossible to even think that? QuoteNow, I am just speculating that he may have been going for a cell phone.[?] Now, you're only speculating that from the comfort behind your monitor and comfortable chair at home. How about if you were there? QuoteAnd you were there? Oh, and the phrase is Monday morning quarterbacking. Like I said, I wasn't there but I did read more than one article about it and watched more than one news excerpt. QuoteWhat makes you believe that the cops didn't snag the cash and stash themselves a throwdown? Yikes. Clearly someone here has an issue with cops. There were two cops there. I watched them bring down the criminal and then the bag disappeared. This isn't the movies guy, it wasn't staged. Sheesh. QuoteLMAO I spent more than half my life riding the streets of St. Louis and East St. Louis in a motorcycle club. I have also lived and worked in N.Y.C down in the subway and worked the LIRR out of Jamaica. Fucking NYC is a powderpuff compared to St. Louis. Think I am bullshitting? Check the crime statistics for cities. St. Louis is #1, Woo Woo NUMBER FUCKING ONE, YEAH!!!! Oh, by the way, never been shot in powderpuff city. St. Louis? Took a round in North City. My goodness, you've only been to NYC which is predominantly a business district and to Jamaica. Have you ever been to Browsville, Brooklyn? East New York? Upper west side of NYC? The South Bronx? St. Louis has a population of what? Let's say 300,000? Over 2 million people walk throughout NYC (manhattan) alone daily! That's not including the tourists either. Do you know how many people get shot, stabbed and murdered in the south bronx, brownsville, east new york and the upper west side on a daily basis? That shit doesn't even make the fuckin' paper anymore. If you're not a white murder victim, shooting victim or stabbing victim, we won't even read about you. Don't even compare St. Louis to NY. You worked here like what a year or two and you're already a crime analysis expert. Wow.What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CameraNewbie 0 #73 December 3, 2006 QuoteIt was dark with minimal light. They would had seen muzzle flash. When I got shot, the guy was about 10' max from me, I saw the flash. Never heard the gun fire though. The bullet put a burrow along the side of my head. Another inch to the right and it would had gone through my eye and out the back. Who the fuck shot you? An enemy? Stranger? Dude, that's a fuckin' miracle man. You survived! Thank goodness you're okay now. Man, you're a fuckin' survivor! Shit. Someone up there must really love you. Now you done and lowered your chances of survival by Skydiving. Smart move! That's my whole point. You saw a muzzle flash. The cop might have too. The cops aren't talking right now so for now, we know jack diddly. Trust me bro. I hate fuckin' cops. They pulled me over for stupid reasons and they never gave me break on stupid tickets, even when I had an emergency. I even had one pull me out from my car window because he had fuckin' road rage. I was totally not on their side when I first heard about this. Then, when I started out reading more articles about them, I no longer doubted them. Most of these cops had more than 10 years on the force. All of them had a lot of meritorious commendations. I was shocked. None of them had a history of past violence or abuse of authority. Their neighbors commented on how great people they all were. It kind of made me step back and see it from a different point of view. This is exactly what everyone should do. Take a step back and wait to see what new developments take place regarding the investigation. And better yet, see what the outcome of court case is both civil and criminal courts. If the investigation comes up with any foul play, believe you me I'll be the first one to be protesting with Al Sharpton.What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GrabGrass 0 #74 December 3, 2006 Dude, you're not a cop. How or why could you say if you would have secured the scene? No, I'm not anymore but I was for 12 years in Detroit, MI. And securing the scene is SOP following ANY shooting. ESPICALLY if people are bleeding. YOU SECURE THE WEAPON FIRST! It is still a threat to you and the other officers until it is in POLICE custody. PERIOD! What if the "Gun Fairy" resumes shooting at law enforcement or civilians? You keep telling us a gun was found, WHERE is this information? Quote your source! When someone mentions that they're going to get a gun and 3 guys are congregating outside a car with the doors open and are observed or heard to be making gestures about shooting someone that's good reason to believe that the firearm is in the car and they're about to take actions on their threats. I don't know how to make this any clearer to you, IF that all is true and the UC approached them without his weapon and shield, then he made a mistake! You keep parroting the officers that are playing CYA. Brandishing WHAT GUN?! Tell us what this obscure newspaper is you alone seem to have access to? Where are you getting these "facts"? So you're telling me if this is the only evidence you were presented with, you would clear anyone from running over cops dead and ramming their cars? IF the officer were on the stand in court, the questioning would revolve around why he approached the car in the first place. If he said to investigate a possible gun threat, he would be asked if he actually saw a gun and if so is it common procedure to attempt to detain and question and armed suspect while he himself us unarmed and unable to identify himself as a police officer. Especially with armed back up so close. He would be asked if he did everything according to procedure, and if he had it to do again would he have done anything different. And THAT is the question that no matter HOW he answers either put himself or the police agency itself at liability. It went BAD, did inadequate training factor in it, or were the UC's "John Wayne-ing" the situation escalate it to an unmanageable point. No, I'm not a NYC police officer but I bet that they are not instructed to approach any individual(s) thought to be armed , without a weapon drawn and a badge displayed. You said it yourself, panic / confused situation. Why no U turn, it can be argued they were scared, they are NOT TRAINED for these scenarios, the police are supposed to be. Yes, I have testified in gun cases adnauseam and this one stinks. Polishing my crystal ball, I'll venture a guess as to how this will end up. No chance this ever sees the inside of a court room. The suspects / victims will be paid 7 figures in a closed settlement without the NYPD receiving any responsibility or blame. IAB will investigate and make recommendations, a new set of "training standards" will be put in place so the Mayor and Police administration can point to all they are doing to insure this never happens again. I'm proud of what I do my friend. At least I can sleep at night not making assumptions on what "I would do or what I should have done." if I were a cop. Good for you, then stick to it. And I'm glad you can sleep at night assuming that your police force is infallible and never make mistakes. The officers involved probably aren't sleeping to well because they know that no matter what actually happened, it's WHAT YOU CAN PROVE that counts, and from the media reports that the rest of the world excluding yourself has been following seems to say, there is a whole lot about their story that the available evidence contradicts. You make a great prosecuting atty! You're so objective! No thanks, no money in it! And if I had to work this case I would No Bill it because it's a guaranteed loser. I would much rather defend the suspects / victims because that's a slam dunk and I'd get an easy percentage of the awarded sum. ~ "Pack Fast, Pull Low... and Date Your Riggers WIFE!" ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GrabGrass 0 #75 December 3, 2006 Quote Read my reply to crab grass about that. Quote Who the heck is crab grass? It's GRAB Grass, It's a skydiving reference from back when you had to be "Super Cool Under Pressure" to stay alive... (no wonder the mail is always late!) ~ "Pack Fast, Pull Low... and Date Your Riggers WIFE!" ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 3 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
justinb138 0 #56 November 29, 2006 Seeing as how this was an undercover thing at the club, does anyone know if these were uniformed officers involved in the shooting? Honestly, if someone approached my vehicle with a gun pointed at me and I had no reason to believe they were a police officer, I'd very seriously consider using my vehicle to defend myself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #57 November 29, 2006 QuoteHonestly, if someone approached my vehicle with a gun pointed at me and I had no reason to believe they were a police officer, I'd very seriously consider using my vehicle to defend myself. or, let's say they did claim to be police officers, but you recognize one or two of them from inside the strip joint and saw them drinking and maybe getting a lap dance or two..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #58 November 29, 2006 Surely not going in for a couple of freebies? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #59 November 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteas for black on white or white on black.... i'm losing my patience over hearing that.. It is what it is.... and this is the result... just like the little old black 92 year old lady sitting in her home.. scared to death that someone would break in... well they did but it was the police.. in the dark.. in H HOME.. and that is happening far too often.. of the police..." Making Mistakes" The 92 yr old lady should have killed everyone of the men who burst through her door then called 911 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #60 November 29, 2006 QuoteThe 92 yr old lady should have killed everyone of the men who burst through her door then called 911 She was unsuccessful, but I have to smile at the fact that at least she tried. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scoop 0 #61 November 30, 2006 ...and I smile at the fact shes dead Good for you granny. Good decision huh!? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Samurai136 0 #62 December 1, 2006 http://www.slate.com/id/2154631/?GT1=8805 Slate has a good opinion article.***The perils of "contagious shooting." By William Saletan Posted Thursday, Nov. 30, 2006, at 2:35 AM ET Fifty bullets fired at three unarmed men last Saturday. Forty-three fired at an armed man last year. Forty-one fired at Amadou Diallo. All by New York police; all cases fatal. Why so many bullets? "Contagious shooting," proposed the New York Times in a front-page story on Monday. "An officer fires, so his colleagues do, too." It's natural to grope for a rational or mechanical explanation in cases like these. But it's not clear which kind of explanation this contagion is. If it's rational, it should be judged like any rational process, and cops should be culpable for it. If it's mechanical, it should be controlled like any mechanical process, starting with the guns supplied to police. We can't keep doing what we've been doing: giving cops high-round semiautomatic weapons because we trust them not to blast away like robots, then excusing them like robots when they blast away. Supposedly, contagious shooting was coined four decades ago to explain copycat police fire during riots. Once you start describing a behavioral phenomenon as a predictable sequence of events—"post-traumatic stress disorder," for example—people start reading it as an excuse. Seven years ago, during the Diallo case, a lawyer for one of the accused officers pointed out that "contagious shooting" was in the New York Police Department patrol guide. "I suspect that this phenomenon may play an active role in this case for my client," he told reporters. What makes contagious shooting a handy legal defense is its mechanical portrayal of behavior. You're not choosing to kill; you're catching a disease. In the Diallo era, the NYPD patrol guide explained that the first shot "sets off a chain reaction of shooting by other personnel." Officers "join in as a kind of contagion," said the Times. They "instinctively follow suit," said the Daily News, as one shot "sparks a volley from other officers." On Monday, the Times said contagious shooting "spreads like germs, like laughter." One former NYPD official called it the "fog of the moment." Another said "your reflexes take over." A third told CNN, "It's sort of like a Pavlovian response. It's automatic. It's not intentional." This mess of metaphors is telling. Nothing can behave like germs, sparks, laughter, fog, instinct, and conditioning all at once. That's the first clue that "contagious" is being used not to clarify matters, but to confuse them. Another clue is that the same people who invoke it often point out that the number of shootings by police is low and has been falling. An urge that's so commonly resisted can't be irresistible. Here's a third clue: Prior to Monday, "contagious shooting" had appeared in 25 articles in Nexis. Half of them were about cops or soldiers; the other half were about basketball. Three years ago, for example, contagious shooting "rubbed off" among Duke players; last year, it "spread" among the Philadelphia 76ers. Anyone who follows sports knows that writers reach for such silly metaphors when they have no idea why something happened. Maybe cops can get off with this defense. But it carries a price. If lethal police reactions really are contagious, then the sensible response is to control them like a disease. As Al Sharpton—who says 10,000 things a year and is right at least twice—pointed out Monday, contagious shooting as an explanation for this week's tragedy is "even more frightening" than malice, since it implies that such incidents will recur. The most famous invocation of contagion in law enforcement, delivered eight decades ago by Justice Louis Brandeis, became a centerpiece of the 1966 Miranda case. "Crime is contagious," Brandeis wrote. "If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy." How can you control a contagion of police overreaction? By controlling the crucial mechanism: guns. The key number in the Diallo case wasn't 41; it was 16. Two of the four officers accounted for 32 of the 41 bullets, because each of them emptied his weapon. NYPD rules "require that the officers carry nine millimeter semi-automatic pistols with 16 shots in the magazine and the first trigger pull being a conventional trigger pull and all subsequent trigger pulls being a hair trigger pull," one defense lawyer told the jury. That's why the officers fired so many shots so fast: Their guns, loaded with 64 rounds, "were all capable of being emptied in less than four seconds." Same thing this week. Thirty-one of the 50 bullets reportedly came from one officer's 16-round semiautomatic. One reload, two clips, total mayhem. This is why Mayor David Dinkins and his police commissioners, including Ray Kelly, originally opposed giving cops semiautomatic weapons. In 1993, when they gave in, they put a 10-round limit on the clips. A year later, Mayor Rudy Giuliani and his commissioner lifted the cap. They argued that cops shouldn't be outgunned and would handle the weapons responsibly. It's the same argument the National Rifle Association makes for the freedom to use firearms: Guns don't kill people; people kill people.[/] Contagious shooting blows that argument away. If cops fire reflexively, there's no moral difference between people and guns. They're both machines, and based on recent shootings, we should limit clips or firing speed to control their damage. No responsibility, no freedom. Alternatively, we could reassert that police are free agents, to be trusted with weapons and held responsible—not excused with mechanical metaphors—when they abuse them. You can't have it both ways.[url]"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian Ken Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameraNewbie 0 #63 December 3, 2006 QuoteHow about we afford the officers the same presumption of innocence that everyone else in this country gets until an investigation is completed. Excellent point GQ! Alot of people that are not from NYC and do not come from a law enforcement background will never understand this. By chiming in on what the NYPD could have done or shouldn't have done, we're Monday Night Quarterbacking. We were not there to witness any of these events that took place. We're only basing our opinions on how the media portrays the situation. Doesn't this sound unfair when the media does the same thing for skydiving fatalities and what not? They're not giving you the full story. First of all, the media failed to mention that 1 of the black male passengers of the 3 that were in the car had a history of felony arrests that included drug possession charges. I've worked with a lot of ex-convicts in the mailroom and as couriers. I've heard it from the horses' mouth about how they're very adamant about not ever going back to jail and that they'll kill a cop if they have to in order to stay out of jail and retain their freedom. I've heard a majority of the ex-cons mention this to me and most of them feel the same exact way. Some of them are law abiding and some of them are still into drugs, partying and occassional fighting to defend their stand. Anyway, so knowing that there was an ex-con among the passengers is one of the things the media failed to mention initially. Then, inside the club they failed to mention that the one of the 2 passengers, well call him passenger #1 had an argument with another drug dealer (who was not one of the 3 men that were shot at). The argument ended with one of the passenger #1 gesturing with his hands to the drug dealer that he was going to shoot him. Then, passenger#1 told passenger #2 that he was going to shoot the muthaf#$! and to go get his gun. The undercover police that were working inside the club overheard this and followed the men outside to their car. Undercover cop#1 approached the men in the vehicle and identified himself as a police officer. The 2 passengers jumped into the car and told the driver to drive off. That's when the whole ramming of the black car and the clipping of the police officer happened. The officers noticed that the passenger in the front seat had his hands inside his belt and brandished a firearm and that's when the firing occurred. The cop identified himself and told the people in the car to stop. When they failed to stop and tried to run down the van, the passenger of the vehicle in the front seat had his hands inside his belt and brandished a firearm. Like Billvon said, QuoteIf, someday, I am in my car, trying to leave the area of a bar fight, and someone in street clothes runs into the street and points a gun at me - I am going to run them over. I'd rather be wrong and alive than careful and dead. The driver did not listen to the officer when he told him to stop his car. The passenger in the front seat had brandished his gun. So the cop reacted on what he was trained to do, his life was in eminant danger because that passenger had a gun in his hand. The driver had a depraved indifference to human life by trying to run people over. You wouldn't wait to shoot until you got shot at, would you? Why the 51 shots you asked. If you shot someone once and they kept raising their gun and pointing at you, are you going to stop after you shot him once or are you going to keep shooting until he drops that gun? It's easy for you to Monday Night Quarterback this whole situation because you weren't there. You weren't in a situation where it was life and death and you had to protect your life and your partner's lives. Most of you would probably just freeze and let yourself get run over or let yourself get shot at and piss and shit your pants. It's easy for you to Monday Night Quarterback this whole situation and judge cops because you're not a cop. Most of you weren't even in combat in the military. You're all talk on what shouldn't have been done and what not! You guys that talk are going to be the first ones going up to a cop crying and complaining that someone robbed you or someone pointed a gun at you. And it's not white on black or black on white. Get your freakin' facts straight. The officer that was nearest to the car that shot 11 times was black. The other officers that shot were black and one of them were hispanic. There were two white cops there too. One of them was inside a car. Just because someone is getting married the following day doesn't make him a saint. Friends will help out other friends and they will have steel balls and beer muscles when they're drunk. And if a friend doesn't want to go back to jail to get butt fucked all day or suck dicks all day, he'll do whatever it takes to stay out of jail and his friends will help him. Why no gun at the scene? All it takes is a few seconds and it will disappear. It's NY for pete's sake! It has happened numerous times in NYC. I've seen a situation where 2 cops were bringing down a store robbery suspect and they only turned away for less than a minute to put the cuffs on him and within that time the store robber's goody bag which was worth $2,000 of stolen goods disappeared. Right in front of a crowd of 30 people. No one saw a thing. This is NY if anyone sees a gun on the floor they're not going to do what you non-city folk will do. They'll pick it up and hide it in their pocket? Why? It's a free fuckin' gun, that's why? It can be sold for money or it can be used in an assassination and it can't be traced. In this situation, police identified a man that was near the vehicle when this happened but disappeared shortly after. Read more than one newspaper. Watch more than one news excerpt. Next time get your facts first before you become Judge, Jury and Executioner. You guys would make lousy jurors in NYC. Really lousy ones!What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #64 December 3, 2006 I was under the impression that the investigation was ongoing but you seem to think it's cut and dried. Tell us about NYPD and Amadou Diallo.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameraNewbie 0 #65 December 3, 2006 Nothing is cut and dry my friend. I merely read more than one newspaper article and I watched more than one news excerpt than probably all of you combined. Which is what most of you should have done before running your mouth off about it. You guys are like whuffos that read what the media says about Skydiving fatalities and don't get all the facts first. Amadou Diallo is not what this topic is about. Read the subject "NYPD bullet kills Groom on Wedding Day". I fail to see where it mentions Amadou Diallo.What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrabGrass 0 #66 December 3, 2006 Let me preface by saying I agree nothing is cut and dried, and I'm all for sorting this out before making judgement. As to "us" being poor jurors, I've testified in over 100 court cases involving shootings and one thing I have come to believe is that where there is smoke there is fire. We were not there to witness any of these events that took place. That's true, so let's take the evidence and ascertain the facts from that. Was there a gun found? No. Did anyone SEE a gun thrown away? No one that has come forward. No one saw a thing. This is NY if anyone sees a gun on the floor they're not going to do what you non-city folk will do. They'll pick it up and hide it in their pocket? Why? It's a free fuckin' gun, that's why? It can be sold for money or it can be used in an assassination and it can't be traced. In this situation, police identified a man that was near the vehicle when this happened but disappeared shortly after. That all make a great story, PROVE it in court. "IF" there was a gun, and it "WAS" brandished resulting in 51 rounds being fired, I DAMN sure would have secured the scene and located that weapon as my first priority. Failing to do so is poor police work, unless of course there wasn't a gun in which case the "Gun Fairy" running away with it is a handy excuse. I've worked with a lot of ex-convicts in the mailroom and as couriers. I've heard it from the horses' mouth about how they're very adamant about not ever going back to jail and that they'll kill a cop if they have to in order to stay out of jail and retain their freedom. I've heard a majority of the ex-cons mention this to me and most of them feel the same exact way. So what? Did YOU personally or anyone else for that matter hear any of these suspect / victims make that statement? If so bring them forward, if not, might as well read "Green Eggs and Ham" in court, it would carry the same weight. The argument ended with one of the passenger #1 gesturing with his hands to the drug dealer that he was going to shoot him. Then, passenger#1 told passenger #2 that he was going to shoot the muthaf#$! and to go get his gun. So at this point we have at best, Terrorist Threat of Bodily Injury...IN A BAR! Certainly probably cause for further investigation, but these UC's were unarmed at the time, why didn't they allow the armed back up team to intervene then and there if they thought the threat credible? Hum...maybe they didn't think it was. The undercover police that were working inside the club overheard this and followed the men outside to their car. Undercover cop#1 approached the men in the vehicle and identified himself as a police officer. And did so verbally ONLY. The weapons and shields were with the back up team. So either they didn't think the suspects were really armed, or they are incredibly wreckless and / or poorly trained. The passenger in the front seat had brandished his gun. So you say, where is that gun again? No gun, no threat. So the cop reacted on what he was trained to do, his life was in eminent danger because that passenger had a gun in his hand. Or, it could be argued that he disregarded his training entirely and that's how he got in that situation in the first place. The driver had a depraved indifference to human life by trying to run people over. Or was he acting in fear for his life having just had a confrontation with a known drug dealer in which he may have felt threatened, then was approached by someone unknown to him 'claiming' to be a police officer shouting orders? You wouldn't wait to shoot until you got shot at, would you? No, but I would verify the threat existed in the first place before firing, and DAMN well would have noticed the threat continuing (as in incoming fire) before I started on the second magazine! Funny there are no MT casings or GSR with the suspects / victims, guess the "Gun Fairy" picked up the empties and washed their hands too. Read more than one newspaper. Watch more than one news excerpt. Next time get your facts first before you become Judge, Jury and Executioner. You guys would make lousy jurors in NYC. Really lousy ones! And as far as a prosecuting Attorney, you make one heck of a mail clerk! ~ "Pack Fast, Pull Low... and Date Your Riggers WIFE!" ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Samurai136 0 #67 December 3, 2006 QuoteNothing is cut and dry my friend. I merely read more than one newspaper article and I watched more than one news excerpt than probably all of you combined. Which is what most of you should have done before running your mouth off about it. You guys are like whuffos that read what the media says about Skydiving fatalities and don't get all the facts first. Amadou Diallo is not what this topic is about. Read the subject "NYPD bullet kills Groom on Wedding Day". I fail to see where it mentions Amadou Diallo. Please direct us to the article that says the police found a firearm. I can point you to a New York Times article that suggests the police are intimidating witnesses in the hunt for a mysterious 4th man whom the police claim was the one with the gun. New York Times, Dec 3, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/nyregion/03shooting.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 QuoteSince then, detectives have looked for a fourth man so they can determine how close he was to the shooting and whether he had a gun. Because the three other men turned out to be unarmed, what the fourth man saw — or what he was holding — could drastically alter the outcome of criminal and internal investigations into whether the police acted properly when they fired 50 bullets at Mr. Bell’s car. That is, if the fourth man really does exist. Hmmm.... 50 rounds unloaded into 3 unarmed men, boxed in between two undercover police vehicles, and the "armed 4th man" is apparently never shot and disappears into the night. Something is rotten in Denmark."Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian Ken Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameraNewbie 0 #68 December 3, 2006 Quote"IF" there was a gun, and it "WAS" brandished resulting in 51 rounds being fired, I DAMN sure would have secured the scene and located that weapon as my first priority. Failing to do so is poor police work. Dude, you're not a cop. How or why could you say if you would have secured the scene? 51 shots were fired. People bleeding all over the place. Officers injured from the ramming another officer injured from being clipped from another car. With all this going on, you can honestly say that the first thing you would have done would be to secure the firearm and failure to do so is poor police work. Boy, either you are Mr. SuperCool under pressure or you have no emotions whatsoever. Who do you think had to call for an ambulance for the dying and the injured? Who do you think went around making sure the officers in the black van were injured or not. Who do you think went around making sure the officer struck by the vehicle was injured or not? Since they weren't Mr. Supercool under pressure like you are or Superhuman, do you honestly think that would be the first thing that went in their mind? "I gotta secure the gun. I gotta find the weapon." You weren't there. You're not a cop and you cannot say what you would do if you're not presented with that much stress in a short time span. QuoteSo at this point we have at best, Terrorist Threat of Bodily Injury...IN A BAR!Crazy Certainly probably cause for further investigation, but these UC's were unarmed at the time, why didn't they allow the armed back up team to intervene then and there if they thought the threat credible? Hum...maybe they didn't think it was. You just said it yourself pal. It was just threat of bodily injury. They were being further observed. When someone mentions that they're going to get a gun and 3 guys are congregrating outside a car with the doors open and are observed or heard to be making gestures about shooting someone that's good reason to believe that the firearm is in the car and they're about to take actions on their threats. QuoteSo you say, where is that gun again? No gun, no threat. Me no say. Newspaper say. QuoteOr, it could be argued that he disregarded his training entirely and that's how he got in that situation in the first place. How are you already judging him without even knowing all the facts or what transpired at that moment? I thought you were experienced in gun cases. QuoteOr was he acting in fear for his life having just had a confrontation with a known drug dealer in which he may have felt threatened, then was approached by someone unknown to him 'claiming' to be a police officer shouting orders? So you're telling me that makes it okay to run over other people and ram cars? So you're telling me if this is the only evidence you were presented with, you would clear anyone from running over cops dead and ramming their cars? You and I were not there. So my argument would be: Why couldn't the driver make a U turn to avoid the van that blocked them? Why couldn't they drive on the sidewalk to avoid everyone? Why couldn't they just drive backwards and keep going until they were clear and free? QuoteNo, but I would verify the threat existed in the first place before firing, and DAMN well would have noticed the threat continuing (as in incoming fire) before I started on the second magazine! Funny there are no MT casings or GSR with the suspects / victims, guess the "Gun Fairy" picked up the empties and washed their hands too. So seeing a brandished gun is not a threat? So you're telling me that with all the gun fire going on, you can honestly distinguish if gun fire was coming at you from inside the vehicle? Wow, you are really Mr. Supercool under pressure. QuoteAnd as far as a prosecuting Attorney, you make one heck of a mail clerk! That's okay. I'm proud of what I do my friend. At least I can sleep at night not making assumptions on what "I would do or what I should have done." if I were a cop. You make a great prosecuting atty! You're so objective! And you're so Mr. Supercool under pressure!What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameraNewbie 0 #69 December 3, 2006 QuotePlease direct us to the article that says the police found a firearm. I can point you to a New York Times article that suggests the police are intimidating witnesses in the hunt for a mysterious 4th man whom the police claim was the one with the gun. I've never said that a firearm was found. QuoteHmmm.... 50 rounds unloaded into 3 unarmed men, boxed in between two undercover police vehicles, and the "armed 4th man" is apparently never shot and disappears into the night. Something is rotten in Denmark. The case is still under investigation my friend. Why are you already judging them? Hear the facts first, not what the media portrays.What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #70 December 3, 2006 QuoteThe passenger in the front seat had brandished his gun. There was no gun so, this is a false statement that you are making. QuoteSo the cop reacted on what he was trained to do, his life was in eminant danger because that passenger had a gun in his hand They are trained to react to a real threat, not an imagined threat. And, again, there was no gun. QuoteThe driver had a depraved indifference to human life by trying to run people over. From what I understand is that the cop got in front of a moving car afterwhich he stepped to the side. The car was then boxed in by two vehicle and the police opened fire. QuoteIf you shot someone once and they kept raising their gun and pointing at you, are you going to stop after you shot him once or are you going to keep shooting until he drops that gun? So this guy is shot all to hell yet he keeps raising this imaginary gun and then he... what? Threw it out the window or did he use imaginary powers and make it just disappear into thin air??????? QuoteI've worked with a lot of ex-convicts in the mailroom Yup, your qualification are as such that they should call you as an expert witness. Quotethe passenger of the vehicle in the front seat had his hands inside his belt and brandished a firearm. Now, I am just speculating that he may have been going for a cell phone.[?] QuoteIt's easy for you to Monday Night Quarterback this whole situation because you weren't there And you were there? Oh, and the phrase is Monday morning quarterbacking. QuoteI've seen a situation where 2 cops were bringing down a store robbery suspect and they only turned away for less than a minute to put the cuffs on him and within that time the store robber's goody bag which was worth $2,000 of stolen goods disappeared What makes you believe that the cops didn't snag the cash and stash themselves a throwdown? QuoteThis is NY if anyone sees a gun on the floor they're not going to do what you non-city folk will do. LMAO I spent more than half my life riding the streets of St. Louis and East St. Louis in a motorcycle club. I have also lived and worked in N.Y.C down in the subway and worked the LIRR out of Jamaica. Fucking NYC is a powderpuff compared to St. Louis. Think I am bullshitting? Check the crime statistics for cities. St. Louis is #1, Woo Woo NUMBER FUCKING ONE, YEAH!!!! Oh, by the way, never been shot in powderpuff city. St. Louis? Took a round in North City."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #71 December 3, 2006 QuoteSo you're telling me that with all the gun fire going on, you can honestly distinguish if gun fire was coming at you from inside the vehicle? It was dark with minimal light. They would had seen muzzle flash. When I got shot, the guy was about 10' max from me, I saw the flash. Never heard the gun fire though. The bullet put a burrow along the side of my head. Another inch to the right and it would had gone through my eye and out the back."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameraNewbie 0 #72 December 3, 2006 QuoteThere was no gun so, this is a false statement that you are making. Hoy vey! I said I read this in the newspaper! QuoteThey are trained to react to a real threat, not an imagined threat. And, again, there was no gun. There you go now, alright shutting the case closed. The case is still under investigation mon frere. They're still looking for another man and the gun. Stop pretending like you were there. You're already judging them and you don't even have all the facts yet. QuoteFrom what I understand is that the cop got in front of a moving car afterwhich he stepped to the side. Quotes from one of the passengers stated that they were scared and thought the men were drug dealers trying to kill them. So they were defending themselves. QuoteSo this guy is shot all to hell yet he keeps raising this imaginary gun and then he... what? Threw it out the window or did he use imaginary powers and make it just disappear into thin air??????? You weren't there, I wasn't there, we can't say what happened to the gun, imaginary or not. Read my reply to crab grass about that. QuoteYup, your qualification are as such that they should call you as an expert witness. No dude, a majority of the hardcore felons I spoke with claimed that they would kill not to go back to prison. There was a repeat felon in that car. Why couldn't there be an inkling of a possibility that he didn't want to go back to jail and that he would do anything not to go back? Is it impossible to even think that? QuoteNow, I am just speculating that he may have been going for a cell phone.[?] Now, you're only speculating that from the comfort behind your monitor and comfortable chair at home. How about if you were there? QuoteAnd you were there? Oh, and the phrase is Monday morning quarterbacking. Like I said, I wasn't there but I did read more than one article about it and watched more than one news excerpt. QuoteWhat makes you believe that the cops didn't snag the cash and stash themselves a throwdown? Yikes. Clearly someone here has an issue with cops. There were two cops there. I watched them bring down the criminal and then the bag disappeared. This isn't the movies guy, it wasn't staged. Sheesh. QuoteLMAO I spent more than half my life riding the streets of St. Louis and East St. Louis in a motorcycle club. I have also lived and worked in N.Y.C down in the subway and worked the LIRR out of Jamaica. Fucking NYC is a powderpuff compared to St. Louis. Think I am bullshitting? Check the crime statistics for cities. St. Louis is #1, Woo Woo NUMBER FUCKING ONE, YEAH!!!! Oh, by the way, never been shot in powderpuff city. St. Louis? Took a round in North City. My goodness, you've only been to NYC which is predominantly a business district and to Jamaica. Have you ever been to Browsville, Brooklyn? East New York? Upper west side of NYC? The South Bronx? St. Louis has a population of what? Let's say 300,000? Over 2 million people walk throughout NYC (manhattan) alone daily! That's not including the tourists either. Do you know how many people get shot, stabbed and murdered in the south bronx, brownsville, east new york and the upper west side on a daily basis? That shit doesn't even make the fuckin' paper anymore. If you're not a white murder victim, shooting victim or stabbing victim, we won't even read about you. Don't even compare St. Louis to NY. You worked here like what a year or two and you're already a crime analysis expert. Wow.What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameraNewbie 0 #73 December 3, 2006 QuoteIt was dark with minimal light. They would had seen muzzle flash. When I got shot, the guy was about 10' max from me, I saw the flash. Never heard the gun fire though. The bullet put a burrow along the side of my head. Another inch to the right and it would had gone through my eye and out the back. Who the fuck shot you? An enemy? Stranger? Dude, that's a fuckin' miracle man. You survived! Thank goodness you're okay now. Man, you're a fuckin' survivor! Shit. Someone up there must really love you. Now you done and lowered your chances of survival by Skydiving. Smart move! That's my whole point. You saw a muzzle flash. The cop might have too. The cops aren't talking right now so for now, we know jack diddly. Trust me bro. I hate fuckin' cops. They pulled me over for stupid reasons and they never gave me break on stupid tickets, even when I had an emergency. I even had one pull me out from my car window because he had fuckin' road rage. I was totally not on their side when I first heard about this. Then, when I started out reading more articles about them, I no longer doubted them. Most of these cops had more than 10 years on the force. All of them had a lot of meritorious commendations. I was shocked. None of them had a history of past violence or abuse of authority. Their neighbors commented on how great people they all were. It kind of made me step back and see it from a different point of view. This is exactly what everyone should do. Take a step back and wait to see what new developments take place regarding the investigation. And better yet, see what the outcome of court case is both civil and criminal courts. If the investigation comes up with any foul play, believe you me I'll be the first one to be protesting with Al Sharpton.What do protesters want? Dead cops! When do they want it? Every 2 weeks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrabGrass 0 #74 December 3, 2006 Dude, you're not a cop. How or why could you say if you would have secured the scene? No, I'm not anymore but I was for 12 years in Detroit, MI. And securing the scene is SOP following ANY shooting. ESPICALLY if people are bleeding. YOU SECURE THE WEAPON FIRST! It is still a threat to you and the other officers until it is in POLICE custody. PERIOD! What if the "Gun Fairy" resumes shooting at law enforcement or civilians? You keep telling us a gun was found, WHERE is this information? Quote your source! When someone mentions that they're going to get a gun and 3 guys are congregating outside a car with the doors open and are observed or heard to be making gestures about shooting someone that's good reason to believe that the firearm is in the car and they're about to take actions on their threats. I don't know how to make this any clearer to you, IF that all is true and the UC approached them without his weapon and shield, then he made a mistake! You keep parroting the officers that are playing CYA. Brandishing WHAT GUN?! Tell us what this obscure newspaper is you alone seem to have access to? Where are you getting these "facts"? So you're telling me if this is the only evidence you were presented with, you would clear anyone from running over cops dead and ramming their cars? IF the officer were on the stand in court, the questioning would revolve around why he approached the car in the first place. If he said to investigate a possible gun threat, he would be asked if he actually saw a gun and if so is it common procedure to attempt to detain and question and armed suspect while he himself us unarmed and unable to identify himself as a police officer. Especially with armed back up so close. He would be asked if he did everything according to procedure, and if he had it to do again would he have done anything different. And THAT is the question that no matter HOW he answers either put himself or the police agency itself at liability. It went BAD, did inadequate training factor in it, or were the UC's "John Wayne-ing" the situation escalate it to an unmanageable point. No, I'm not a NYC police officer but I bet that they are not instructed to approach any individual(s) thought to be armed , without a weapon drawn and a badge displayed. You said it yourself, panic / confused situation. Why no U turn, it can be argued they were scared, they are NOT TRAINED for these scenarios, the police are supposed to be. Yes, I have testified in gun cases adnauseam and this one stinks. Polishing my crystal ball, I'll venture a guess as to how this will end up. No chance this ever sees the inside of a court room. The suspects / victims will be paid 7 figures in a closed settlement without the NYPD receiving any responsibility or blame. IAB will investigate and make recommendations, a new set of "training standards" will be put in place so the Mayor and Police administration can point to all they are doing to insure this never happens again. I'm proud of what I do my friend. At least I can sleep at night not making assumptions on what "I would do or what I should have done." if I were a cop. Good for you, then stick to it. And I'm glad you can sleep at night assuming that your police force is infallible and never make mistakes. The officers involved probably aren't sleeping to well because they know that no matter what actually happened, it's WHAT YOU CAN PROVE that counts, and from the media reports that the rest of the world excluding yourself has been following seems to say, there is a whole lot about their story that the available evidence contradicts. You make a great prosecuting atty! You're so objective! No thanks, no money in it! And if I had to work this case I would No Bill it because it's a guaranteed loser. I would much rather defend the suspects / victims because that's a slam dunk and I'd get an easy percentage of the awarded sum. ~ "Pack Fast, Pull Low... and Date Your Riggers WIFE!" ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrabGrass 0 #75 December 3, 2006 Quote Read my reply to crab grass about that. Quote Who the heck is crab grass? It's GRAB Grass, It's a skydiving reference from back when you had to be "Super Cool Under Pressure" to stay alive... (no wonder the mail is always late!) ~ "Pack Fast, Pull Low... and Date Your Riggers WIFE!" ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
