(January 6, 2012 at 2:23 am)jediphobic Wrote: Perhaps the officer didn't have all the information. You saw how short his chance of observing the subject. Perhaps he only observed the weapon, not the wood. We can't say for sure, as the camera doesn't see what he did. (one of the myths covered in that video)
Based on the article, the officer told the other officers that arrived at the scene that he did see that the subject was whittling a piece of wood.
Quote:Certainly he was unaware of the subject being deaf. That was certain to influence his perception at that moment. This armed subject was not responding to him.
No doubt about that. I will say that if it turns out that he shot the subject in the back, it'll be a pretty hard sell for a justified shooting.
Quote:Ok, done with that for a second. In this case, I'll agree that there is some evidence that the cop was negligent. Whether he actually was guilty of homicide, is a task better left up to an investigation, than to the media, or to us. I'm not saying that police should be unaccountable, only that we live in a specialized society, and we generally depend on experts to make expert decisions.
Yes, we do - which is why the rules for cops aren't the same as for civilians. I'll be watching for news of the investigation as details come out (the incident occurred in my home state of Washington).
Unfortunately, all too often these cases get closed after an internal investigation, which of course does nothing to quell public opinion regarding excessive force. Based on what I've seen so far, I want to see this go to a grand jury - not because I think he's guilty, but to bring a greater sense of legitimacy to the investigation.
