6 year old murdered after boys in blue decide to chase his father for minor warrants

[koshergrl]

Sure sure. It gives them the right to murder you.

It does if you try to ram them with a vehicle

some folks are just too naive to know that the dude used his car as a weapon. clueless left I call them. completely escaping reality.

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[koshergrl]

some folks are just too naive to know that the dude used his car as a weapon. clueless left I call them. completely escaping reality.

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

the man was immediately a fugitive. Need to straighten out your story a bit jean.

You keep talking out of your ass dude. The so-called warrant or document being issued or served is being kept secret for some reason.

It's a conspiracy!!!

 

[Camp]

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

and?

It makes the person making the claim a liar. Just say'in

well then you should have double checked your facts before posting then eh?

My "facts" are as they are reported in links posted in this thread and other news sources. Your facts are coming out of your lies. Give it some time, however, when the Marshalls realize they are going down for the murder their lawyer will whine self-defense for them.

so bubba, were the marshals in their cars when the man rammed their cars?

Why don't you read the links to the articles? They will answer all your stupid questions that make you think will create a reason why two cops should be allowed to kill
six-year-old kids. "The father rammed our patrol car, so we shot his kid a bunch of times."

 

[Ernie S.]

Someone tries to hit me with a car is going to get deadified. I may or may not see a child in the car, especially one with dark tinted windows.

Only, he isn't dead, but the much smaller person who (supposedly) wasn't a target is. The man was shot twice and the boy five times? Explain that for us, please...

I can't. I wasn't there. Did the father use his son as a shield? Were officers view into the car hindered by tinting?

The father ran from cops. He should not have endangered his child. The father rammed a police car threatening the lives of officers. They neutralized the threat. It's a shame the boy got killed, but place the blame where it belongs. His dirtbag father should be charged with felony murder.

 

[Camp]

It does if you try to ram them with a vehicle

some folks are just too naive to know that the dude used his car as a weapon. clueless left I call them. completely escaping reality.

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Tell us all which fact I have posted is not true or included in one of the news sources posted in this thread.

 

[koshergrl]

You do realize that marshalls aren't the same as

some folks are just too naive to know that the dude used his car as a weapon. clueless left I call them. completely escaping reality.

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Tell us all which fact I have posted is not true or included in one of the news sources posted in this thread.

You haven't posted any facts. And in fact your statement that the cops werent' in their car when it was rammed was a lie.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

It does if you try to ram them with a vehicle

some folks are just too naive to know that the dude used his car as a weapon. clueless left I call them. completely escaping reality.

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Ah Kosher, if you aren't standing outside and away from a car, and you shoot at the driver but kill a child sitting in the front seat instead because he was in the line of fire, how exactly was the car a danger to you?

 

[bodecea]

At least the officers went home safely. That's the important thing. As for a dead kindergartener? Well, he's just collateral damage in the War on [INSERT EVIL CAUSE HERE].

They weren't even cops! Lol...they were "marshals" I have dealt with idiots like this...usually serve little warrants like traffic court crap,dog got loose and you got a ticket and didn't pay it etc. They leave the big warrants for the real cops...just more trigger happy assholes.

They could have been CPS.

 

[jc456]

some folks are just too naive to know that the dude used his car as a weapon. clueless left I call them. completely escaping reality.

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Ah Kosher, if you aren't standing outside and away from a car, and you shoot at the driver but kill a child sitting in the front seat instead because he was in the line of fire, how exactly was the car a danger to you?

who said it was a danger after the man rammed them? who, name someone.

 

[jc456]

and?

It makes the person making the claim a liar. Just say'in

well then you should have double checked your facts before posting then eh?

My "facts" are as they are reported in links posted in this thread and other news sources. Your facts are coming out of your lies. Give it some time, however, when the Marshalls realize they are going down for the murder their lawyer will whine self-defense for them.

so bubba, were the marshals in their cars when the man rammed their cars?

Why don't you read the links to the articles? They will answer all your stupid questions that make you think will create a reason why two cops should be allowed to kill
six-year-old kids. "The father rammed our patrol car, so we shot his kid a bunch of times."

hey fk, got them facts yet? Answer my question? where'd yo go?

 

[Camp]

You do realize that marshalls aren't the same as

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Tell us all which fact I have posted is not true or included in one of the news sources posted in this thread.

You haven't posted any facts. And in fact your statement that the cops werent' in their car when it was rammed was a lie.

I never said the cops were not in their patrol car when it was rammed. I said they exited the patrol car and the threat of being rammed had ceased to exist. They were not in danger of being injured by the car because they were standing beside it, not in front or behind. The threat of being injured by ramming the patrol car was over.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Ah Kosher, if you aren't standing outside and away from a car, and you shoot at the driver but kill a child sitting in the front seat instead because he was in the line of fire, how exactly was the car a danger to you?

who said it was a danger after the man rammed them? who, name someone.

Either answer the question or don't bother. The actual facts of the case are still up for grabs so we are using logic, which leaves you out of the discussion.

 

[koshergrl]

some folks are just too naive to know that the dude used his car as a weapon. clueless left I call them. completely escaping reality.

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Ah Kosher, if you aren't standing outside and away from a car, and you shoot at the driver but kill a child sitting in the front seat instead because he was in the line of fire, how exactly was the car a danger to you?

What a stupid question. Yes if you're in, or next to, a car that is getting rammed you are in danger, ding dong. According to you, cops should run when attacked, and if they run, the danger is no longer dangerous. Typical criminal, mentally ill leftthink.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You do realize that marshalls aren't the same as

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Tell us all which fact I have posted is not true or included in one of the news sources posted in this thread.

You haven't posted any facts. And in fact your statement that the cops werent' in their car when it was rammed was a lie.

I never said the cops were not in their patrol car when it was rammed. I said they exited the patrol car and the threat of being rammed had ceased to exist. They were not in danger of being injured by the car because they were standing beside it, not in front or behind. The threat of being injured by ramming the patrol car was over.

Being logical that has to be true. There's no way the could have killed the child the way they did otherwise. And it sure as hell seems like they must have been shooting through the front passenger window as well.

 

[koshergrl]

You do realize that marshalls aren't the same as

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Tell us all which fact I have posted is not true or included in one of the news sources posted in this thread.

You haven't posted any facts. And in fact your statement that the cops werent' in their car when it was rammed was a lie.

I never said the cops were not in their patrol car when it was rammed. I said they exited the patrol car and the threat of being rammed had ceased to exist. They were not in danger of being injured by the car because they were standing beside it, not in front or behind. The threat of being injured by ramming the patrol car was over.

I don't care, you're too much of an idiot to take seriously.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Ah Kosher, if you aren't standing outside and away from a car, and you shoot at the driver but kill a child sitting in the front seat instead because he was in the line of fire, how exactly was the car a danger to you?

What a stupid question. Yes if you're in, or next to, a car that is getting rammed you are in danger, ding dong. According to you, cops should run when attacked, and if they run, the danger is no longer dangerous. Typical criminal, mentally ill leftthink.

They should not have shot at the car, period.

 

[sealybobo]

They didn't murder the kid or the dad. They may have killed them but murder no.

Firing wildly into a vehicle with no idea of occupants is negligent homicide at the least 2nd degree murder at best.

If a criminal uses a car as a weapon how's the cop to know if a baby's in the back seat?

You might get the cops fired but not charged. Not even fired.

Oh my he MIGHT HAVE bumped your car which every thug in blue I have ever seen has their car with a HUGE bumper on it to protect it from those things. Ya get out shoot tires out and he goes NO WHERE! He had no gun so its not like he was gonna shoot back! Its also why you DON'T run up to a car and start firing. Use a little self control you want more free reign try using some self control. A gun to someone's temple USUALLY makes them think twice before doing something dumb...

Like driving away? Like running from the cops? Seems a cop with a gun makes some people stupid. I consider it thinning the herd. His kid would have grown up to be trash just like daddy.

We're they black or white? I'm imagining white.

Ah now the true intent is coming out. No surprise. I bet you are a republican as well.

If I were a Republican I would have assumed daddy was black.

Actually, maybe the reason I should have known the dad was white was because he was with his kid. Black guys are never with their children. LOL.

I'm as liberal as they come btw.

 

[jc456]

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Ah Kosher, if you aren't standing outside and away from a car, and you shoot at the driver but kill a child sitting in the front seat instead because he was in the line of fire, how exactly was the car a danger to you?

who said it was a danger after the man rammed them? who, name someone.

Either answer the question or don't bother. The actual facts of the case are still up for grabs so we are using logic, which leaves you out of the discussion.

so you have zip, so post up you have facts to me is garbage and thanks for playing fk

 

[jc456]

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Ah Kosher, if you aren't standing outside and away from a car, and you shoot at the driver but kill a child sitting in the front seat instead because he was in the line of fire, how exactly was the car a danger to you?

What a stupid question. Yes if you're in, or next to, a car that is getting rammed you are in danger, ding dong. According to you, cops should run when attacked, and if they run, the danger is no longer dangerous. Typical criminal, mentally ill leftthink.

They should not have shot at the car, period.

why?

 

[Camp]

You are the only one making the claim of the victims vehicle being used as a weapon. The investigation implies that the vehicle was backed into the patrol car. The Marshalls were outside of their vehicle standing beside the victim's truck at the time of the shooting. They were not being threatened with being run over. They murdered that 6-year-old kid.

Er..no.

"Few then put his vehicle in reverse and struck the police vehicle, the news site reports. The officers exited their vehicle and fired their duty pistols through the driver’s side window."

They were in the car when the dipshit rammed it. And they shot him through the driver's side window. Which means he was using the kid as a shield.

That means they were no longer in any danger when they murdered the kid. They were not in the path of the vehicle and were standing beside it. The shots were fired with the intent of stopping the vehicle, not as a means of self-defense.

What a load of crap you spout, lol. You don't know what you're talking about.

Ah Kosher, if you aren't standing outside and away from a car, and you shoot at the driver but kill a child sitting in the front seat instead because he was in the line of fire, how exactly was the car a danger to you?

What a stupid question. Yes if you're in, or next to, a car that is getting rammed you are in danger, ding dong. According to you, cops should run when attacked, and if they run, the danger is no longer dangerous. Typical criminal, mentally ill leftthink.

They were not next to the car being rammed. You should at leat read the articles before making all these stupid comments you are making.