Without sounding evasive. The tales told after the events have little bearing on the fact presented because we have a video account of what happened. If you were yelled at to stop going for your pockets, would you continue to do so?
Society Yanez NOT GUILTY in Philando Castile shooting
- Thread starter drjones
- Start date
he did testify that he saw the gun yes.
unrelated to your post - i love how people just keep inventing things that happened as if there isnt a video we can now watch and see exactly what happened.
he didnt scream at him multiple times, he didnt tell him to stop reaching for his pockets... the cops voice is pretty calm and normal speaking volume when he says "dont reach for it then, dont pull it out" both of them reply fairly calmly that he isnt going to pull it out, then one second later the cops voice is only very slightly elevated when he repeats "dont pull it out" and then less than a second later he opens fire.
it is sort of ironic that the cop only started screaming after the threat was eliminated. well, the imaginary threat.
but he told him not to move! no, he didnt.
but he screamed at him to stop! no, he didnt.
if the cop did what he was trained to do this never happens, philando castile was being cooperative and polite, if he was told to stop and put his hands on the wheel immediately i have no doubt he would have done just that.
That frustration is a sign of remorse. Believe it or not (you won't) police officers don't drive around looking for people to shoot.
and you're probably right. I don't think I've ever suggested the officer handled the situation well. Still doesn't mean a crime was committed.
I'd say whether or not he saw the gun is pretty significant.
@drjones, says he testified in the affirmative, which would probably explain that quick jerk of his body away from the vehicle.But did he really see the gun? Or was that his excuse after he realized he fucked up?
3 other witnesses testified that it was in his pocket. The EMT testified that he had to "dig really deep" in Castile's pocket to recover it.I'd say whether or not he saw the gun is pretty significant.
But did he really see the gun? Or was that his excuse after he realized he fucked up?
Yanez didn't give his statement until the next day, no doubt he was counseled as to what he needed to say given the evidence and statements from witnesses that the police had collected. For example, he testified that he thought Castile was going for his gun because he smelled 'burnt marijuana'. A small amount (6g) of MJ was found in the vehicle, but the officer at the passenger window said he did not smell anything.
Yanez used the 'smell of burnt MJ' to characterize Castile as a dangerous person because (according to Yanez) if Castile was willing to smoke pot in front of his kid in the back seat, he must hold human life in such wanton disregard that he'd be willing to shoot a cop. So to protect the child, he discharged his weapon 7 times in the direction of the child, but he was being careful because (according to Yanez) he 'tried to angle the gun down' when shooting.
No, I'm not making that up.
That officer isn't anywhere near the car compared to yanez.
My concern that somebody is dangerous would increase if they are willing to smoke pot and drive a kid around.
He discharged his weapon to protect himself not to protect the child. You're adding so much editorializing to this that makes it really difficult to follow along.
That officer found the weed when he searched the car. So if the 'smell of burnt marijuana" was in the car, I'm guess he would have noted it in his report. Maybe not.
Regardless, if the smell of burnt marijuana gives you an itchy trigger finger, you have no business possessing a firearm.
Let alone possessing a monopoly on violence and the prejudicial favor of the legal system.
“I thought, I was gonna die and I thought if he’s, if he has the, the guts and the audacity to smoke marijuana in front of the five-year-old girl and risk her lungs and risk her life by giving her secondhand smoke and the front seat passenger doing the same thing then what, what care does he give about me."
If that's not editorialization-free enough, here's a link to the transcript and the audio.
Read the transcript of officer Jeronimo Yanez's BCA interview after the Philando Castile shooting
But if you watched that video and saw something other than an officer who unreasonably panicked and killed an innocent citizen, then no amount of data is going to sway you from that position.
Agreed. Manslaughter at least for the cop. But try to get a cop convicted in this country, it just ain't going to happen.
How the cop reacted had not anything to do with any type of training, no de-escalation techniques, and he instructed the civilian to get out his papers. He did not cancel that order.
Any conceal carrier should be very worried at this as the civilian did his duty to explain to the officer he carries. It is so hard to belive that the victim would calmly warn the cop that he would reach for his gun, only to shoot him, in the precense of his wife and child. It doesn't add up. It's the rsult of a cop who shouldn't have been a cop in the first place.
In my opinion, yes the cop should serve time for this. Cops deserve to go home at night, but so do civilians, it has to be all be reasonable and less reckless as it has been. A good cop would've react different than this, I am sure of it.
And this right here. Indication of panic. Double tap may be policy, but 7 times in the presence of innocent bystanders/passengers (including an infant)?
You might want to read my other posts in this thread.
Here's a TMMAC exclusive for ye lads. He tried to verbalize that he wasn't a threat three times.
As I said, we've seen the video. An armed man not following police commands was shot by officer. To prove guilt for manslaughter they need to prove that his actions unintentionally caused someone's death outside of his occupational duties. I don't see how the facts as presented in the video do that.I'd say whether or not he saw the gun is pretty significant.
But did he really see the gun? Or was that his excuse after he realized he fucked up?
People here repeatedly, and correctly, have said "he panicked" and that's correct. But it doesn't mean a crime has taken place.
He was asked to get his ID. Reaching for the pocket would have been expected. The whole thing went down in 11 seconds. And within that 11 seconds, Castile tried to reassure the cop three times that he wasn't a threat.
Cop escalated, not Castile.
*But that doesn't mean he could be convicted of the crime he committed.
He was following police commands, and reiterated to the officer that he was following commands. He was reaching for his wallet, as directed by the officer, not for his legally-carried firearm.
I'm on this forum to teach, not learn. The TAs will review your posts and you'll see your grade.
M
member 3289
Guest
That is simply not true. There have been many cases of cops being convicted.
The ones of the cops getting off just make the headlines in a bigger way and so seem to be more prevalent. I have no idea of the charge/conviction numbers, but I am familiar with cases in which cops were convicted.
If he hadn't notified the officer of his firearm would it have been okay to reach for his pocket?
Apparently Minnesota is not a required notification state. That is you do not have to voluntarily tell an officer you have it concealed carry weapon unless you are asked.
With that bit of knowledge I'm even less impressed by this cop. Here is somebody notifying you of a weapon when they are not legally required to.
HahahahahaaI'm on this forum to teach, not learn. The TAs will review your posts and you'll see your grade.
M
member 3289
Guest
Whenever I have been pulled over in the past (which is maybe twice in the past 5 years, and I didn't get a ticket either time) and have not been quick enough to pull out my wallet from my pocket before the officer arrives at my window, I always ask him or her if it's OK to get my license (after he asks for my license and registration) from my pocket.
I also keep both hands on the steering wheel once I've given the officer my documents.
Don't remember where I learned to do those things but they're just habits. Granted I very rarely get pulled over.
I know a Swiss guy who told me he reached into his left pocket to get his license and the cop did a "woah woah woah", backing up a step or two with his left hand up and his right hand on or near his holster.
The Swiss guy was white. Not sure if that means anything.
Convictions are rare for officers in police shootings
Why It May Be Hard to Convict an Officer in Cases of Police-Involved Deaths
I thought it was pretty common knowledge. I am surprised to see an opinion differing from the consensus especially in 2017. Not only are more cops charged with manslaughter than ever, the conviction rate would let you to belive otherwise. Jurors are often reluctant to equate an officer of the law, to be a murderer.
In the Ferguson case there was a much better argument to be made, when it comes to a police officer having to protect himself. This particular man sat in his car, with his family, seatbelt on, in no context what so ever, a threat.
M
member 3289
Guest
35% conviction rate doesn't sound too bad.
I do the same.
All windows down.
Interior lights on if at night.
Car off, keys on dash.
Hands on wheel.
Let him know I need to get my license from my pocket/glovebox/etc then await the affirmative.
But that's the best way IMO. I'm not afraid of cops. But I try to put them at ease when I'm pulled over.
But I also am thinking about the huge gap from that to shooting someone.
I think you're rationalizing. I think that's a horrible number.
M
member 3289
Guest
I don't know what the number is for citizens. I tried to look it up but all I get are libtard articles bashing cops.