| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Reedjr
United States228 Posts
On February 17 2013 08:06 Chilling5pr33 wrote: I agree it seemes to me that he got asked just the right questions to let it still look as it could have been justified. Then why didn't the other witness (Campos) get asked "just the right questions?" | ||
|
FallDownMarigold
United States3710 Posts
On February 17 2013 08:06 Chilling5pr33 wrote: I agree it seemes to me that he got asked just the right questions to let it still look as it could have been justified. I thought its theoretical legal to carry a loaded gun? So its legal but you always can get shot anytime by any police man? That makes no sence for me No, it is not legal to carry a loaded gun in CA without a permit. http://www.shouselaw.com/12031.html "California Penal Code 12031 PC punishes carrying a loaded firearm in a vehicle or public place." When something appears to make absolutely no sense whatsoever, it's usually a good indication that you should seek more information in order to verify whether the thing in question is truly nonsensical or if it's that you need to be more informed. | ||
|
Chilling5pr33
Germany518 Posts
On February 17 2013 08:09 Reedjr wrote: Then why didn't the other witness (Campos) get asked "just the right questions?" Let me see some good questions: What did the officer said to the killed person? Did the suspect ever turned towards the police man? Did the Suspect ever reached for his gun? I guess there are even better ones. | ||
|
Aerisky
United States12129 Posts
These situations are just depressing  | ||
|
FallDownMarigold
United States3710 Posts
On February 17 2013 08:15 Aerisky wrote: Ugh the testimonies vary a lot...this is why eyewitness stories aren't that great to go on etc. They don't vary that much, but they do so enough that the liability of the officer might be drawn into question. YET so much that they surpass the potential effects of constructive memory and just misremembrance. It's possible that the officer was in fight/flight mode, thought his life was threatened, and really thought the guy was about to pull a gun on the victim after the victim had run a distance, but it's also possible that the officer shot him without good cause. I would, however, be inclined to think the latter if only because I think the testimonies seem to suggest it and because one would tend to extend sympathy toward the victim and outrage toward the shooter. These situations are just depressing Very nice post! | ||
|
Warlock40
601 Posts
On February 17 2013 07:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote: Witness statements are evidence. It doesn't mean that statements are assumed factually correct. I know the witness statements are not assumed to be factually correct. I'm asking why Deputy Jove's statement is. From the report: Deputy Jove provided a voluntary statement which was considered as part of this analysis. First of all, what does "voluntary statement" mean? I was under the impression that whenever anyone gets killed or even seriously hurt, there is a lot of paperwork involved. Does this mean that Jove did not even need to provide a statement to the people reviewing the case? But the main point is about Jove's statement being considered fact. I understand that the testimony of sworn officers of the law has greater weight than the testimony of the average joe, but to just consider it fact doesn't seem very impartial. Also, could an admin change the title to accurately reflect the department involved (Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department)? | ||
|
NoGasfOu
United States1117 Posts
| ||
|
Djagulingu
Germany3605 Posts
| ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
| ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
i really doubt ANY media station will pick out the two truck shootings and past events such as this one, question LAPD, create awareness. thats what sucks | ||
|
Millitron
United States2611 Posts
On February 17 2013 08:24 Warlock40 wrote: I know the witness statements are not assumed to be factually correct. I'm asking why Deputy Jove's statement is. From the report: First of all, what does "voluntary statement" mean? I was under the impression that whenever anyone gets killed or even seriously hurt, there is a lot of paperwork involved. Does this mean that Jove did not even need to provide a statement to the people reviewing the case? But the main point is about Jove's statement being considered fact. I understand that the testimony of sworn officers of the law has greater weight than the testimony of the average joe, but to just consider it fact doesn't seem very impartial. Also, could an admin change the title to accurately reflect the department involved (Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department)? Voluntary statement is when he waived his fifth amendment rights and spoke without a lawyer. You do not have to answer any questions without your lawyer present if you do not want to. You can, but you don't have to. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On February 17 2013 07:38 dcemuser wrote: The funniest thing is that everyone in this thread thinks that the world is brainwashed into thinking this is a good thing, yet almost nobody has rushed to this officer's defense. How does it even make sense to claim people are brainwashed when the vast majority is agreeing with you? Who's brainwashed? If anything, it is you. The media's selective reporting of the 0.01% of cop incidents that go badly or involve cops that should be fired or imprisoned makes the entire country look down upon its own police force, when in reality, most of the cops are honest people. Yes, I understand the reasons (capitalism). People don't like stories about cops risking their own life or dying to save people; stories about cops breaking the law are probably the best selling concept besides celebrity affairs. The truth is that there are hundreds of thousands of cops in this country, and only one of them has to fuck up or be fucked up and the entire country will shit all over cops everywhere. It's stupid and people who buy into it are even stupider. It sounds like you're living in a privileged bubble where you don't talk to many "average" individuals. The vast majority of this country practically reveres police officers/military veterans. It's definitely worthy of respect, but our cultural fascination with respecting these professions, combined with our irrational obsession with "security" (leading to an obnoxiously massive military and far, far too much leniency for law enforcement/military personnel) has led us to turn a blind eye to the crimes of officers/military personnel. | ||
|
Dontkillme
Korea (South)806 Posts
| ||
|
PanzerKing
United States483 Posts
On February 17 2013 08:50 Dontkillme wrote: It seems like the guy was running away. If the suspect had a gun why did he run away? Why would he not run away? Possessing an unlicensed, loaded firearm in public is a serious felony in most, if not all jurisdictions. Kids on the street are smart these days. In my jurisdiction, they know that possessing a loaded firearm is a felony, and unloaded firearm is a misdemeanor. So what do they do? They try to toss the mag and eject the cartridge in the chamber before they're caught, so they can plead to a misdemeanor, get mandatory youthful offender, and walk away with no criminal record and probation at worst. And that willingness to fiddle with the gun while you're running away from the cop just increases the chance that the officer will feel threatened and discharge his weapon. At any kind of distance and in an unlit part of the street, he can't tell whether you're about to turn around and kill him or whether you're trying to toss the ammo. All he can see is your hands pulling out a gun and fiddling with it. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On February 17 2013 07:59 m4inbrain wrote: It's actually the biggest point in the whole case. That guy was fleeing, not attacking. There's a slight difference, like 180°. He did not dive into cover. He ran full steam ahead, turning his back on the cop - completely exposed. That's not a threat. I agree, as a cop, i would not chase him, because he might pull a gun on me. But killing him in that case is not justified, just because there could be danger if i chase him. In other countries, as a cop, you need to protect your life. If my life is in danger when i chase someone, i just don't chase him alone. There's no need to kill a maybe innocent or "small criminal" just because he "might do something if i do something stupid, like chasing someone who i think could have a gun". In every other country than the US, that guy would go to jail. And that would be justified. Well according to the cop he shot when the suspect turned. Jove yelled to Cuevas, “Let me see your hands! Let me see your handsl” Cuevas quickly turned his upper body toward Jove. Fearing that Cuevas was about to shoot him, Jove fired one round from his service Weapon. We can see ex post from the video that Cuevas did not fully turn to shoot. But ex ante the cop doesn't know that and waiting even a fraction of a second too long could have been a fatal mistake. | ||
|
PanzerKing
United States483 Posts
On February 17 2013 09:03 JonnyBNoHo wrote: Well according to the cop he shot when the suspect turned. We can see ex post from the video that Cuevas did not fully turn to shoot. But ex ante the cop doesn't know that and waiting even a fraction of a second too long could have been a fatal mistake. Let's also not forget that the video is, quality-wise, on par with an Atari 2600 game. Nobody can tell with any degree of accuracy how much of his body was turned towards the cop or how quickly he was turning it. I mean, a person can turn their upper body around in a fraction of a second. At that resolution, it's impossible to say definitively what was happening. | ||
|
Reedjr
United States228 Posts
On February 17 2013 08:35 Stratos_speAr wrote: It sounds like you're living in a privileged bubble where you don't talk to many "average" individuals. The vast majority of this country practically reveres police officers/military veterans. It's definitely worthy of respect, but our cultural fascination with respecting these professions, combined with our irrational obsession with "security" (leading to an obnoxiously massive military and far, far too much leniency for law enforcement/military personnel) has led us to turn a blind eye to the crimes of officers/military personnel. Firstly, the context of the people dcemuser is referring to is clearly the posters in this thread. While, as you say, "average individuals" may have a reverence for police officers, the majority here seems to be decidedly of the "fuck tha police" variety. Secondly, why bring up the military at all? It is completely separate from the police. What does the size of the military or the actions of personnel overseas have anything to do with this thread? | ||
|
Areon
United States273 Posts
| ||
|
HunterX11
United States1048 Posts
On February 17 2013 09:15 Areon wrote: Sigh. Posting stupid bullshit articles like these aren't going to lessen the hate and bitching any more. But for what it's worth, LAPD has royally screwed up, and they deserve all the negative attention they can get for this crap. The thread title is wrong and this isn't even the LAPD at all  | ||
|
Robinsa
Japan1333 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Rex vs INexorable
GgMaChine vs HeRoMaRinE
Reynor vs herO
AI Arena Tournament
BSL: Ladder Tournament
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Patches Events
BSL Open Qualifier
BSL Open Qualifier
WardiTV Weekly
PiGosaur Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
