16 year old boy shot to death by cop in courthouse

[RWNJ]

I watched the video. No clue as to what happened except fighting and shooting. How does anyone not there reach a conclusion based on that?

The link is in the OP.

I didn't see a video. I'll look again.

 

[bodecea]

Well, he can't be a thug in this case.

You're fuken racist.

How do you get "racist" from my post?

 

[RWNJ]

Sure, a life can be "worthy" even if one does not achieve great things, but a teenager facing gun charges and assaulting officers is very unlikely to have one (I inserted my own pronoun to complete your compound object).

The world is better off and safer without the likes of Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin and now this guy.

It's a damned good thing you aren't anywhere near a position of authority where teenagers are concerned.

I met a 12 year old psychopath once. Chief of Police sadly assured me this kid would kill someday and there's nothing you can do to stop it. That kid did give me the heebie-jeebs, I'll admit. Sweet as an angel to your face, but no sense of moral right and wrong whatsoever. Now that's the kind you have to worry about--not a mouthy hormonal adolescent.

How can you know all about this kid when you never met him and weren't there?

How can everyone else?

If you can see my post I clearly stated the opposite. How do you know all about this kid? Or are you just spouting more nonsense?

Repeating yourself doesn't actually further your argument. Why don't you ask the SEVERAL posters here who feel they know the kid so well that they've judged he deserves to be dead?

He was shot for a reason. We'll just have to wait and see if it's a good reason. I'm guessing that it will be ruled a justified shooting. I may be wrong, but so could all the people siding with this little punk. It's amazing how many are so eager to side with the criminal, when they don't even know what the f*ck happened.

 

[harmonica]

he's been in trouble before ''menacing with a firearm''
looks like a present and future criminal jackass is dead
good riddance

so the deputy SMACKED the mom and shoved her to the ground?? -NO
the kid should've said ''please don't harass my mom'' or something--no-- the kid had to start trouble [ IF the deputy did anything wrong! ]
he's in court for one idiotic thing--you think he wouldn't do another??

is it possible the deputy was wrong? sure--but chances of that are low

 

[miketx]

I watched the video. No clue as to what happened except fighting and shooting. How does anyone not there reach a conclusion based on that?

The link is in the OP.

I didn't see a video. I'll look again.

It's really not much of a video but it's in this link. All it is was he said she said.

An Ohio deputy shot and killed a 16-year-old boy in juvenile court

 

[aaronleland]

I like how the guy from the police union made his judgement that it was justified, while admitting that the only information he has came from the media like everybody else's. At least lie and omit that last part so you don't look like an irresponsible jackass.

 

[miketx]

I like how the guy from the police union made his judgement that it was justified, while admitting that the only information he has came from the media like everybody else's. At least lie and omit that last part so you don't look like an irresponsible jackass.

Yeah, from the link, you can't tell what happened.

 

[OldLady]

It's a damned good thing you aren't anywhere near a position of authority where teenagers are concerned.

I met a 12 year old psychopath once. Chief of Police sadly assured me this kid would kill someday and there's nothing you can do to stop it. That kid did give me the heebie-jeebs, I'll admit. Sweet as an angel to your face, but no sense of moral right and wrong whatsoever. Now that's the kind you have to worry about--not a mouthy hormonal adolescent.

How can you know all about this kid when you never met him and weren't there?

How can everyone else?

If you can see my post I clearly stated the opposite. How do you know all about this kid? Or are you just spouting more nonsense?

Repeating yourself doesn't actually further your argument. Why don't you ask the SEVERAL posters here who feel they know the kid so well that they've judged he deserves to be dead?

He was shot for a reason. We'll just have to wait and see if it's a good reason. I'm guessing that it will be ruled a justified shooting. I may be wrong, but so could all the people siding with this little punk. It's amazing how many are so eager to side with the criminal, when they don't even know what the f*ck happened.

It's not TOO hard to side with a skinny unarmed 16 year old who is KILLED defending his mother however stupidly from a power trippin sheriff's deputy. HOWEVER, if as a poster here said, the kid was reaching for another officer's weapon, yeah, shoot him.

 

[aaronleland]

I like how the guy from the police union made his judgement that it was justified, while admitting that the only information he has came from the media like everybody else's. At least lie and omit that last part so you don't look like an irresponsible jackass.

Yeah, from the link, you can't tell what happened.

He pretty much said, "It was justified, self defense, but admittedly I have no idea what I'm saying." He would have been better off not making a statement at all. Instead it comes across as him defending a fellow officer for no reason other than it's a fellow officer.

 

[Vastator]

This will be one to watch for sure. I find it rather convenient that the authorities have decided to withhold the name of the public servant, involved in a shooting in the courthouse of "the people"; but had no problem releasing the name of the minor.
.
I smell something... Not quite sure what it is yet. But it doesn't smell good...

 

[RWNJ]

I watched the video. No clue as to what happened except fighting and shooting. How does anyone not there reach a conclusion based on that?

The link is in the OP.

I didn't see a video. I'll look again.

It's really not much of a video but it's in this link. All it is was he said she said.

An Ohio deputy shot and killed a 16-year-old boy in juvenile court

I'm wondering where the courtroom video is at. They have cameras. Where's the video? My guess is that we'll never see it.

 

[aaronleland]

This will be one to watch for sure. I find it rather convenient that the authorities have decided to withhold the name of the public servant, involved in a shooting in the courthouse of "the people"; but had no problem releasing the name of the minor.
.
I smell something... Not quite sure what it is yet. But it doesn't smell good...

They said that they were withholding his name because he was getting death threats. How is he getting so many death threats if nobody knows his name?

 

[Meathead]

This will be one to watch for sure. I find it rather convenient that the authorities have decided to withhold the name of the public servant, involved in a shooting in the courthouse of "the people"; but had no problem releasing the name of the minor.
.
I smell something... Not quite sure what it is yet. But it doesn't smell good...

Anti-deodorents have been available for many years.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I like how the guy from the police union made his judgement that it was justified, while admitting that the only information he has came from the media like everybody else's. At least lie and omit that last part so you don't look like an irresponsible jackass.

Yeah, from the link, you can't tell what happened.

He pretty much said, "It was justified, self defense, but admittedly I have no idea what I'm saying." He would have been better off not making a statement at all. Instead it comes across as him defending a fellow officer for no reason other than it's a fellow officer.

You mean like when Obama defended that professor with out any facts?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

I'm wondering where the courtroom video is at. They have cameras. Where's the video? My guess is that we'll never see it.

Show me a courtroom without cameras........

And I'll show you Leftists who aren't mental cases.

(Well, that 2nd part still might be difficult regardless)

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Well, he can't be a thug in this case.

You're fuken racist.

How do you get "racist" from my post?

And you're a pathetic liar.

 

[RWNJ]

How can you know all about this kid when you never met him and weren't there?

How can everyone else?

If you can see my post I clearly stated the opposite. How do you know all about this kid? Or are you just spouting more nonsense?

Repeating yourself doesn't actually further your argument. Why don't you ask the SEVERAL posters here who feel they know the kid so well that they've judged he deserves to be dead?

He was shot for a reason. We'll just have to wait and see if it's a good reason. I'm guessing that it will be ruled a justified shooting. I may be wrong, but so could all the people siding with this little punk. It's amazing how many are so eager to side with the criminal, when they don't even know what the f*ck happened.

It's not TOO hard to side with a skinny unarmed 16 year old who is KILLED defending his mother however stupidly from a power trippin sheriff's deputy. HOWEVER, if as a poster here said, the kid was reaching for another officer's weapon, yeah, shoot him.

Here's what I think happened. Reports say that the officer was knocked down and the kid probably went after his gun. In the struggle, the gun discharged. I'm thinking the officer did not intentionally discharge his weapon. Guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[aaronleland]

I like how the guy from the police union made his judgement that it was justified, while admitting that the only information he has came from the media like everybody else's. At least lie and omit that last part so you don't look like an irresponsible jackass.

Yeah, from the link, you can't tell what happened.

He pretty much said, "It was justified, self defense, but admittedly I have no idea what I'm saying." He would have been better off not making a statement at all. Instead it comes across as him defending a fellow officer for no reason other than it's a fellow officer.

You mean like when Obama defended that professor with out any facts?

Are you in the right thread?

 

[bodecea]

I like how the guy from the police union made his judgement that it was justified, while admitting that the only information he has came from the media like everybody else's. At least lie and omit that last part so you don't look like an irresponsible jackass.

Yeah, from the link, you can't tell what happened.

He pretty much said, "It was justified, self defense, but admittedly I have no idea what I'm saying." He would have been better off not making a statement at all. Instead it comes across as him defending a fellow officer for no reason other than it's a fellow officer.

You mean like when Obama defended that professor with out any facts?

You mean the professor trying to get into his own house? What a (((((thug))))).

 

[Vastator]

I'm wondering where the courtroom video is at. They have cameras. Where's the video? My guess is that we'll never see it.

Show me a courtroom without cameras........

And I'll show you Leftists who aren't mental cases.

(Well, that 2nd part still might be difficult regardless)

Actually, at least during trials... Many courts don't allow cameras; video or otherwise, in the court room. That's why you often see artists depictions of "the scene" shown on the news. That might be doubly so for cases involving minors.