Now we got white women cops killing unarmed negros.....ww?????

[PredFan]

Not the point.

The point is that the shot is muted because the mic for the dash cam is inside the police car. If the shot is that muted, then you would not hear the voices of the cops even if they were yelling at him.

The shot sounds "muted" to you only because you have a hearing problem. The same mic that picked up the gunshot, picked up her saying "shot fired."

Shitforbrains still thinks a radio is a webcam microphone.

You have a reading disorder... he said nothing about a "radio" in that post.

"Shots fired!" Came over the radio.

Ed disputed that. So obviously he's not talking about the radio.

Ok, maybe I'm confused but the cop who said "Shots fired!" Said it over the walkie talkie radio. If anyone is talking about that, they are talking about the radio.

 

[PredFan]

Wtf is an idiot from Ohio doing chiming in on events in Oklahoma?

Shitforbrains thinks only Tulsa residents can talk about this shooting.

1. I didn't say that he couldn't talk about it. I am talking about it now.

2. What is stupid is that he was concluding wrongdoing on the cops part when he has no more knowledge about the subject than we do.

3. It appears that YOU have the shit for brains. You should shut up while you are behind.

He has 24 years on the job and runs his own dept. I'm fairly certain that he has a sound understanding of proper protocols and policy. He obviously saw something he thought was out of bounds.

Irrelevant. All he knows is what is on the videos. That isn't enough.

He can watch the entire encounter and see as an expert in policing, how it went down.
No different than a former player calling a ball game.

His knowledge is limited to what he can make out if the video plus his experience. However, he cannot tell key important data any more than we can. Key important data like what the victim was and wasn't told to do, or whether or not the window was down or whether or not the victim reached fror the door handle. He is talking out of his ass period. It may ultimately be a wrongful death, but he cannot know that now.

 

[PredFan]

I disagree. It's almost completely inconclusive at best. I have seen nothing that makes me think it was definitely a justified shooting but I have seen some things that indicate that it might not be.

In the hundreds of thousands of interactions between the cops and the public, there are bound to be some that are mistakes by the cops. If you ask a cop, I'll bet he or she will tell you that It happens. I will, as I always do, trust the investigators.

The only claim the negroes can make is that she should have waited to see if he was gonna drag out a weapon...he had already demonstrated he was willing to disobey lawful orders....but in front of a jury would that claim hold up?....I think not....at least for the majority of them.....not much here really to investigate.........some want to make a big deal out of the windows being open or closed....in final analysis makes not much difference...he had gone to his car...it can be presumed ..... for some reason? What could that reason be? No matter what his reasoning...it is reasonable to believe the lady cop at that point felt her life was in danger...if the jury thinks that was a reasonable assumption on her part and I think there is no doubt most juries would be of that inclination...they have no case. Not even to mention the other cop that fired off his taser...he must have also thought the scenario had got to a point where action was required...so you have two cops in agreement that the guy presented a threat....more evidence for the jury not to convict.

This is a good example of what can happen to a cop that lets a suspect go back to his vehicle....this has been posted on here already...but obviously some have not watched it...show this to a jury and it is a slam dunk...the lady cop was justified.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjP34LuwqHPAhWB5iYKHeSMA_UQtwIILTAB&url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1150706/WARNING-GRAPHIC-Police-officer-shot-dead-Vietnam-veteran.html&usg=AFQjCNGmALSdj7K070W5CVgC8W9RqBF9Gw&sig2=4gbXzT9ndexoquZB8os_ng

Whether or not the window is open is a very important concideration. If it is closed, she will have a difficult time claiming she felt threatened. If it's open then I can agree with you but I see no evidence that it is open and air evidence that it is closed. Though not enough to say for sure.

How much time do you think it takes to open a door? Why do you think he was going back to his car anyhow....either way...a competent lawyer in front of a reasonable jury will have little trouble vindicating her behavior....that is if she is charged...which I do not think she will be...it may go before a grand jury to appease the blacks but that will be the end of it.

I have to respectfully disagree. You assume a lot that you can't know to be true.

 

[Weatherman2020]

A thorough investigation is needed on this one no matter what the cost to taxpayers. Did this guy have a felony record?

The answer is yes, he had a felony record with multiple arrests.

 

[Jarlaxle]

When the cop yells you to drop and start sucking, which knee hits the ground first?

I take the bullet in the head option instead....

See, I have no problem with people disobeying - SO LONG AS THEY'RE WILLING TO.ACCEPT THE CONSEQUENCES.

How old were you the first time you managed to deep-throat that nightstick?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Well, the racists are getting pretty thick, so I'll be moving on. But the guy should have been more cooperative, and the cops should not have shot him. It was a lose-lose, all the way around.

It's entirely his own fault for not cooperating. Guns wouldn't have even been drawn.

Says Miss Perfect. Cops don't have a right to kill citizens for being uncooperative.

Cops and everyone in fact are entitled by law to use lethal force if they have a reasonable fear their life is in danger.....that is on the books in all the states....it is called the law of self defense....libtards never seem able to grasp a good understanding of the law of self defense.

Dey always want to make a big issue out of some moron being un-armed....being un-armed at one moment does not mean the suspect will be unarmed the next moment....many, many cases of someone appearing to be unarmed suddenly able to get their hands on a weapon....not even to mention many so called unarmed perps have beaten people to death with their bare hands...how many times do you think a big negro on pcp would have to hit a woman to kill her? Yet she bravely stayed right on his heels issuing lawful orders until the moron got to his car and reached inside....who knows what for? There is no jury in the world that will not undestand the lady cop was in fear of her life at this point if not earlier....you can tell how scared she is on the radio.

The meaning of "reasonable" is the operative word.

Of course....that is the case in any self defense argument. A competent jury even wid some blacks on it should have no problem understanding that a big black man high on pcp and disobeying lawful police orders goes back to his car......for what reason? Obviously in the eyes of the officer....very possibly to get a weapon....was she supposed to give him the benefit of the doubt? With her life on the line...I do not think so...not to forget the other officer fired his taser which more than likely reinforced her belief that it was time to take action..how many times are you supposed to ax a suspect to get down...maybe twice...after that anything he does should be viewed with much alertness and suspicion.

"Big black man"
"On PCP"
"Very possibly to get a weapon"

There is nothing reasonable about you scenario.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

A thorough investigation is needed on this one no matter what the cost to taxpayers. Did this guy have a felony record?

The answer is yes, he had a felony record with multiple arrests.

Link

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Shitforbrains thinks only Tulsa residents can talk about this shooting.

1. I didn't say that he couldn't talk about it. I am talking about it now.

2. What is stupid is that he was concluding wrongdoing on the cops part when he has no more knowledge about the subject than we do.

3. It appears that YOU have the shit for brains. You should shut up while you are behind.

He has 24 years on the job and runs his own dept. I'm fairly certain that he has a sound understanding of proper protocols and policy. He obviously saw something he thought was out of bounds.

Irrelevant. All he knows is what is on the videos. That isn't enough.

He can watch the entire encounter and see as an expert in policing, how it went down.
No different than a former player calling a ball game.

His knowledge is limited to what he can make out if the video plus his experience. However, he cannot tell key important data any more than we can. Key important data like what the victim was and wasn't told to do, or whether or not the window was down or whether or not the victim reached fror the door handle. He is talking out of his ass period. It may ultimately be a wrongful death, but he cannot know that now.

OK fine. I'm not going to argue with you even though this is a guy who makes policy and trains cops.

 

[Weatherman2020]

A thorough investigation is needed on this one no matter what the cost to taxpayers. Did this guy have a felony record?

The answer is yes, he had a felony record with multiple arrests.

Link

He was "turning his life around"
Problem was he did a 360 instead of a 180.

Family, neighbors: Tulsa man was changing his life, generous

- Weatherman, educating the left since 1978

 

[Weatherman2020]

It's entirely his own fault for not cooperating. Guns wouldn't have even been drawn.

Says Miss Perfect. Cops don't have a right to kill citizens for being uncooperative.

Cops and everyone in fact are entitled by law to use lethal force if they have a reasonable fear their life is in danger.....that is on the books in all the states....it is called the law of self defense....libtards never seem able to grasp a good understanding of the law of self defense.

Dey always want to make a big issue out of some moron being un-armed....being un-armed at one moment does not mean the suspect will be unarmed the next moment....many, many cases of someone appearing to be unarmed suddenly able to get their hands on a weapon....not even to mention many so called unarmed perps have beaten people to death with their bare hands...how many times do you think a big negro on pcp would have to hit a woman to kill her? Yet she bravely stayed right on his heels issuing lawful orders until the moron got to his car and reached inside....who knows what for? There is no jury in the world that will not undestand the lady cop was in fear of her life at this point if not earlier....you can tell how scared she is on the radio.

The meaning of "reasonable" is the operative word.

Of course....that is the case in any self defense argument. A competent jury even wid some blacks on it should have no problem understanding that a big black man high on pcp and disobeying lawful police orders goes back to his car......for what reason? Obviously in the eyes of the officer....very possibly to get a weapon....was she supposed to give him the benefit of the doubt? With her life on the line...I do not think so...not to forget the other officer fired his taser which more than likely reinforced her belief that it was time to take action..how many times are you supposed to ax a suspect to get down...maybe twice...after that anything he does should be viewed with much alertness and suspicion.

"Big black man"
"On PCP"
"Very possibly to get a weapon"

There is nothing reasonable about you scenario.

Actually he was going to his car for the bomb he said was in there.
Good shooting. PCP kills in more than one way.

 

[fbj]

Yet again, the negro was resisting and refusing to follow directions, as the helicopter pilot remarked in the video. The cop hater crowd yet again fails to produce a genuine victim of police brutality.

One thing is certain, those streets are safer now. Good riddance.

You a stupid mutherfucker

 

[PredFan]

A thorough investigation is needed on this one no matter what the cost to taxpayers. Did this guy have a felony record?

The answer is yes, he had a felony record with multiple arrests.

Link?

 

[PredFan]

A thorough investigation is needed on this one no matter what the cost to taxpayers. Did this guy have a felony record?

The answer is yes, he had a felony record with multiple arrests.

Link

He was "turning his life around"
Problem was he did a 360 instead of a 180.

Family, neighbors: Tulsa man was changing his life, generous

- Weatherman, educating the left since 1978

I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.

 

[Sundance508]

I disagree. It's almost completely inconclusive at best. I have seen nothing that makes me think it was definitely a justified shooting but I have seen some things that indicate that it might not be.

In the hundreds of thousands of interactions between the cops and the public, there are bound to be some that are mistakes by the cops. If you ask a cop, I'll bet he or she will tell you that It happens. I will, as I always do, trust the investigators.

The only claim the negroes can make is that she should have waited to see if he was gonna drag out a weapon...he had already demonstrated he was willing to disobey lawful orders....but in front of a jury would that claim hold up?....I think not....at least for the majority of them.....not much here really to investigate.........some want to make a big deal out of the windows being open or closed....in final analysis makes not much difference...he had gone to his car...it can be presumed ..... for some reason? What could that reason be? No matter what his reasoning...it is reasonable to believe the lady cop at that point felt her life was in danger...if the jury thinks that was a reasonable assumption on her part and I think there is no doubt most juries would be of that inclination...they have no case. Not even to mention the other cop that fired off his taser...he must have also thought the scenario had got to a point where action was required...so you have two cops in agreement that the guy presented a threat....more evidence for the jury not to convict.

This is a good example of what can happen to a cop that lets a suspect go back to his vehicle....this has been posted on here already...but obviously some have not watched it...show this to a jury and it is a slam dunk...the lady cop was justified.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjP34LuwqHPAhWB5iYKHeSMA_UQtwIILTAB&url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1150706/WARNING-GRAPHIC-Police-officer-shot-dead-Vietnam-veteran.html&usg=AFQjCNGmALSdj7K070W5CVgC8W9RqBF9Gw&sig2=4gbXzT9ndexoquZB8os_ng

Whether or not the window is open is a very important concideration. If it is closed, she will have a difficult time claiming she felt threatened. If it's open then I can agree with you but I see no evidence that it is open and air evidence that it is closed. Though not enough to say for sure.

How much time do you think it takes to open a door? Why do you think he was going back to his car anyhow....either way...a competent lawyer in front of a reasonable jury will have little trouble vindicating her behavior....that is if she is charged...which I do not think she will be...it may go before a grand jury to appease the blacks but that will be the end of it.

I have to respectfully disagree. You assume a lot that you can't know to be true.

No...I am just familiar with the law on self defense and how juries have operated in the past....a policeman is an officer of the court..juries rarely ever convict policeman when there is even the slightest evicence he acted properly.

Look at the Zimmerman case...he was not even a police officer...just a lowly night watchman volunteer...but the jury was able to determine despite the best efforts of the feds and the state of florida to convict him...that he was in fear of his life and thus entitled to use deadly force.

You seem not to recognize the significance of the suspect disobeying lawful police orders...and then to go back to his car which just compounded his disobeying lawful police orders....very,very suspicious....like I said...if it ever goes before a jury...just bring out that training film of a perp being allowed to get back in his car and to retrieve a gun and then kill the cop with that weapon he retrieved.

Not even to mention toxicology reports will no doubt prove he was under the influence of drugs...which makes him appear even more irrational and dangerous.

Obviously you have a poor understanding of how the law operates.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

A thorough investigation is needed on this one no matter what the cost to taxpayers. Did this guy have a felony record?

The answer is yes, he had a felony record with multiple arrests.

Link

He was "turning his life around"
Problem was he did a 360 instead of a 180.

Family, neighbors: Tulsa man was changing his life, generous

- Weatherman, educating the left since 1978

Certainly worth immediate execution.

 

[Anathema]

How old were you the first time you managed to deep-throat that nightstick?

I was probably 4 years old when I was taught that you obey a LEO no matter what, or expect the consequences.

My father told us.... 'If you disrespect a cop don't bother coming home."

 

[Jarlaxle]

It isn't news that Pops was as psychotic as you.

 

[PredFan]

I disagree. It's almost completely inconclusive at best. I have seen nothing that makes me think it was definitely a justified shooting but I have seen some things that indicate that it might not be.

In the hundreds of thousands of interactions between the cops and the public, there are bound to be some that are mistakes by the cops. If you ask a cop, I'll bet he or she will tell you that It happens. I will, as I always do, trust the investigators.

The only claim the negroes can make is that she should have waited to see if he was gonna drag out a weapon...he had already demonstrated he was willing to disobey lawful orders....but in front of a jury would that claim hold up?....I think not....at least for the majority of them.....not much here really to investigate.........some want to make a big deal out of the windows being open or closed....in final analysis makes not much difference...he had gone to his car...it can be presumed ..... for some reason? What could that reason be? No matter what his reasoning...it is reasonable to believe the lady cop at that point felt her life was in danger...if the jury thinks that was a reasonable assumption on her part and I think there is no doubt most juries would be of that inclination...they have no case. Not even to mention the other cop that fired off his taser...he must have also thought the scenario had got to a point where action was required...so you have two cops in agreement that the guy presented a threat....more evidence for the jury not to convict.

This is a good example of what can happen to a cop that lets a suspect go back to his vehicle....this has been posted on here already...but obviously some have not watched it...show this to a jury and it is a slam dunk...the lady cop was justified.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjP34LuwqHPAhWB5iYKHeSMA_UQtwIILTAB&url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1150706/WARNING-GRAPHIC-Police-officer-shot-dead-Vietnam-veteran.html&usg=AFQjCNGmALSdj7K070W5CVgC8W9RqBF9Gw&sig2=4gbXzT9ndexoquZB8os_ng

Whether or not the window is open is a very important concideration. If it is closed, she will have a difficult time claiming she felt threatened. If it's open then I can agree with you but I see no evidence that it is open and air evidence that it is closed. Though not enough to say for sure.

How much time do you think it takes to open a door? Why do you think he was going back to his car anyhow....either way...a competent lawyer in front of a reasonable jury will have little trouble vindicating her behavior....that is if she is charged...which I do not think she will be...it may go before a grand jury to appease the blacks but that will be the end of it.

I have to respectfully disagree. You assume a lot that you can't know to be true.

No...I am just familiar with the law on self defense and how juries have operated in the past....a policeman is an officer of the court..juries rarely ever convict policeman when there is even the slightest evicence he acted properly.

Look at the Zimmerman case...he was not even a police officer...just a lowly night watchman volunteer...but the jury was able to determine despite the best efforts of the feds and the state of florida to convict him...that he was in fear of his life and thus entitled to use deadly force.

You seem not to recognize the significance of the suspect disobeying lawful police orders...and then to go back to his car which just compounded his disobeying lawful police orders....very,very suspicious....like I said...if it ever goes before a jury...just bring out that training film of a perp being allowed to get back in his car and to retrieve a gun and then kill the cop with that weapon he retrieved.

Not even to mention toxicology reports will no doubt prove he was under the influence of drugs...which makes him appear even more irrational and dangerous.

Obviously you have a poor understanding of how the law operates.

this isnt anywhere near the Zimmerman case.

even in that post, you assume a lot

 

[Weatherman2020]

My, my.
His prior run ins with the law:
1996 Shooting with intent to kill — Dismissed
2001 Petit larceny — Conviction
2004 Driving while suspended — Conviction
2005 Driving while suspended, resisting officer — Conviction
2006 Driving while suspended — Conviction
Driving with open container — Dismissed
2006 Trafficking in illegal drugs — Conviction. (He was also charged in that incident with assault on a police officer and resisting, but that was dismissed.)
2011 Public intoxication (while in prison for drug trafficking) — Conviction
2012 Public intoxication — Conviction
Obstructing an officer — Conviction
2013 DUI — Conviction
Resisting officer — Conviction
Open Container — Conviction
Failure to wear seatbelt — Conviction
Speeding — Conviction

His outstanding warrants at the time of the shooting:

His hands are not up and he said his car was going to blow up - as in I have a bomb in the car. He walked back to that car against orders not to do so.

 

[Faun]

My, my.
His prior run ins with the law:
1996 Shooting with intent to kill — Dismissed
2001 Petit larceny — Conviction
2004 Driving while suspended — Conviction
2005 Driving while suspended, resisting officer — Conviction
2006 Driving while suspended — Conviction
Driving with open container — Dismissed
2006 Trafficking in illegal drugs — Conviction. (He was also charged in that incident with assault on a police officer and resisting, but that was dismissed.)
2011 Public intoxication (while in prison for drug trafficking) — Conviction
2012 Public intoxication — Conviction
Obstructing an officer — Conviction
2013 DUI — Conviction
Resisting officer — Conviction
Open Container — Conviction
Failure to wear seatbelt — Conviction
Speeding — Conviction

His outstanding warrants at the time of the shooting:
View attachment 90595

His hands are not up and he said his car was going to blow up - as in I have a bomb in the car. He walked back to that car against orders not to do so.
View attachment 90596
View attachment 90597

He's already been shot in those pictures.