BREAKING: Judicial Watch Files $30 Million Wrongful Death Lawsuit against U.S. Government on Behalf of Ashli Babbitt’s Husband and Estate

[martybegan]

Who was going to arrest her while still keeping the barricaded doorway guarded from the other rioters who would be streaming through the breach she tried to create?

One unarmed woman?

I think they could have handled it.

 

[Marener]

That references excessive force, not the use of deadly force. Try again.

And you’re saying deadly force was excessive, moron.

 

[martybegan]

And you’re saying deadly force was excessive, moron.

But the suit you referenced was about excessive force that didn't involve the use of deadly force.

once a cop decides to use deadly force, all sorts of new rules and regulations come into play.

 

[Marener]

But the suit you referenced was about excessive force that didn't involve the use of deadly force.

once a cop decides to use deadly force, all sorts of new rules and regulations come into play.

It’s the controlling precedent. One must consider the reasonableness of his actions at the time he made them with the totality of circumstances known to the officer.

As I said, no rational person thinks that he was unreasonable to feel threatened in the circumstances.

 

[martybegan]

It’s the controlling precedent. One must consider the reasonableness of his actions at the time he made them with the totality of circumstances known to the officer.

As I said, no rational person thinks that he was unreasonable to feel threatened in the circumstances.

threatened by the unarmed woman hanging halfway in a window?

You are not allowed to shoot one person as a warning to other people as a police officer.

 

[Marener]

threatened by the unarmed woman hanging halfway in a window?

You are not allowed to shoot one person as a warning to other people as a police officer.

When you’re being attacked by a violent mob, it’s reasonable to fear when that mob starts climbing through the barricaded door.

 

[martybegan]

When you’re being attacked by a violent mob, it’s reasonable to fear when that mob starts climbing through the barricaded door.

So cops can just open fire the next BLM/Anti-fa riot? good to know.

Idiot.

 

[BlindBoo]

One unarmed woman?

I think they could have handled it.

With a riotous mob at her back ready to invade the House Chamber, How many rioters should they have let into the hallway before shooting to stop them from entering the chamber where members were still sheltering?

The suit will be laughed out of court because she was part of an illegal riotous mob.

 

[Marener]

So cops can just open fire the next BLM/Anti-fa riot? good to know.

Idiot.

Depends on the circumstances. There are plenty of circumstances when it would be justified and plenty of circumstances when it wouldn’t.

If thousands of violent rioters cornered police in a building they had violently broken into, then probably.

 

[MAGA Macho Man]

Depends on the circumstances. There are plenty of circumstances when it would be justified and plenty of circumstances when it wouldn’t.

If thousands of violent rioters cornered police in a building they had violently broken into, then probably.

In an interview, Rep Clay Higgins, a former deputy sheriff, said when Ashli was climbing through the window, that all Michael Byrd had to do is grab her and put zip ties on her and sat her down and called someone to come get her and take her away. That's it. Said he broke all the rules firing his pistol at her knowing she had 5 cops standing behind her.

 

[martybegan]

With a riotous mob at her back ready to invade the House Chamber, How many rioters should they have let into the hallway before shooting to stop them from entering the chamber where members were still sheltering?

The suit will be laughed out of court because she was part of an illegal riotous mob.

A mob with a bunch of far more armed cops milling around with it.

Show me where in the federal use of deadly force rules "encouragement les autres" is allowed.

 

[martybegan]

Depends on the circumstances. There are plenty of circumstances when it would be justified and plenty of circumstances when it wouldn’t.

If thousands of violent rioters cornered police in a building they had violently broken into, then probably.

No, it does not. Stop making shit up because you can't admit this was a bad shoot.

The same rioters that had far more heavily armed cops milling around amongst them?

 

[WEATHER53]

View attachment 883884

Ashli Babbitt's Mother Makes Death Threat Against Nancy Pelosi​

Well one does say bad things about someone who helped coordinate one’s daughters murder

 

[Marener]

In an interview, Rep Clay Higgins, a former deputy sheriff, said when Ashli was climbing through the window, that all Michael Byrd had to do is grab her and put zip ties on her and sat her down and called someone to come get her and take her away. That's it. Said he broke all the rules firing his pistol at her knowing she had 5 cops standing behind her.

Clay Higgins is a pandering piece of shit who will tell you whatever gets you to vote for him.

The officers were heavily outnumbered and attempting to arrest Babbitt would put them at the mercy of other rioters coming through the window they smashed in.

 

[WEATHER53]

It’s the controlling precedent. One must consider the reasonableness of his actions at the time he made them with the totality of circumstances known to the officer.

As I said, no rational person thinks that he was unreasonable to feel threatened in the circumstances.

6 other fully armed police standing closer to her than he was And he had to creep up to get closer say NO!
She never advanced on him but rather he to her. Cowardly AA hire.

 

[Marener]

No, it does not. Stop making shit up because you can't admit this was a bad shoot.

The same rioters that had far more heavily armed cops milling around amongst them?

Yes, it does. All they have to show is that the officer reasonably feared for their safety or the safety of others.

The officer who shot Babbitt had no knowledge of any other officers behind them.

Remember, the standard has to be from the perspective of the officer at the time of the shooting.

 

[martybegan]

Yes, it does. All they have to show is that the officer reasonably feared for their safety or the safety of others.

The officer who shot Babbitt had no knowledge of any other officers behind them.

Remember, the standard has to be from the perspective of the officer at the time of the shooting.

not for the use of deadly force.

If he didn't know what was behind her, even more bad on him for shooting.

 

[Marener]

6 other fully armed police standing closer to her than he was And he had to creep up to get closer say NO!
She never advanced in him but rather he to her. Cowardly AA hire.

That’s false. He was the closest office to the door.

 

[Marener]

not for the use of deadly force.

If he didn't know what was behind her, even more bad on him for shooting.

Yes, for all force including use of deadly force.

He knew a mob of violent thugs was behind her. He couldn’t see the police. You’re going to criticize him for not being able to see through people?

 

[WEATHER53]

Yes, it does. All they have to show is that the officer reasonably feared for their safety or the safety of others.

The officer who shot Babbitt had no knowledge of any other officers behind them.

Remember, the standard has to be from the perspective of the officer at the time of the shooting.

It’s a higher level than mere “safety” stop lying. You have to be facing an imminent threat of lethal harm. You don’t get to trade a punch in the arm for shot dead in the face . That’s murder.