(July 22, 2016 at 1:44 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: (I post this with a certainty approaching unity that someone else ((probably Min)) has already done so.)
The police department in question has said that the therapist was shot by mistake - the cop was aiming at his patient.
Really? Fucking really ? The 'explanation' given is that the BEST possible outcome would have been the shooting of a severely autistic man who was sitting down and holding a toy truck. Not a toy gun, a toy TRUCK.
You know what? I'll take my NZ cops with their batons and pepper spray.
Boru
Well, they pretty much had to claim negligence or incompetence. I suppose they thought incompetence would play better to the audience - and save them money come settlement time.
I don't buy it for a second in any case. Cops in the US are trained to shoot until a target is neutralized. If he was shooting at the patient, why did he stop shooting after failing to hit him even once? If he thought the tactical situation demanded that he shoot the patient - why did he stop shooting when the tactical situation remained unchanged.
I smell bullshit.
