RE: Arrogant, Entitled, Cry-Baby, and Coward - 10/3/2016 4:45:33 PM
|
|
|
CreativeDominant
Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:
But...you weren't referring to the Wash. Post article, were you Vince? Not was my reply? How about...instead of deflecting to ANOTHER article...you answer the question asked about the article you first cited?
The Times article is dated 9/25 while the Post article is dated 9/24. It is easy to presume they both got their information from the same feed, like the AP or Reuters. That's how journalism works. Your point is trivial.
quote:
the police didn't give a shot about the blunt UNTIL they saw him brandishing a weapon.
"Brandishing" is your characterization. That is not what the report tells us.
quote:
Despite repeated commands to stop and to drop the weapon...commands also noted by civilian witnesses...Scott refused to do so.
Kieth Scott was barely three or four steps away from his vehicle and backing away non-aggressively when he was shot. There is no gun visible in his hand. It is also instructive to see that there is no gun on the pavement near Scott at 2:40 in the WP film.
Which begs the question: if the coppers were there to serve a warrant or arrest another dude why did they divert from their assigned task, leave, and go back to accost a man who was sitting peacefully in his van? How did they perceive he was a risk to anyone in an open carry state? Just the technicality that he had a gun, if he did, in conjunction with a blunt. How does the blunt make the gun more dangerous or how does the gun make the blunt dangerous? That's pretty petty bullshit.
quote:
The gun has been shown to belong to Scott (it wasn't planted).
Riiight. . . . it is so difficult to plant the dead man's DNA and prints on a gun
Unnecessary police activity with a tragic result is becoming pretty common news.
And that last statement is why they don't have civilian advisors...with absolutely no experience and an easily-identifiable bias...make decisions about police work.
Let's post the Washington Post story and notes those things you didn't:
"There have been numerous unconfirmed reports published in the media concerning this case. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department has prepared the foll,owing case update to provide factual information about the officer-involved shooting.
Two plain clothes officers were sitting inside of their unmarked police vehicle preparing to serve an arrest warrant in the parking lot of The Village at College Downs, when a white SUV pulled in and parked beside of them.
The officers observed the driver, later identified as Mr. Keith Lamont Scott, rolling what they believed to be a marijuana “blunt.” Officers did NOT consider Mr. Scott’s drug activity to be a priority at the time and they resumed the warrant operation. A short time later, Officer Vinson observed Mr. Scott hold a gun up.
(O.k....so they had zero interest in the blunt)
Because of that, the officers had probable cause to arrest him for the drug violation and to further investigate Mr. Scott being in possession of the gun.
Due to the combination of illegal drugs and the gun Mr. Scott had in his possession, officers decided to take enforcement action for public safety concerns.Officers departed the immediate area to outfit themselves with marked duty vests and equipment that would clearly identify them as police officers.
(O.k....so now , they have a man with ILLEGAL drugs and a gun in his hand and they become concerned. I would hope so)
Upon returning, the officers again witnessed Mr. Scott in possession of a gun. The officers immediately identified themselves as police officers and gave clear, loud and repeated verbal commands to drop the gun. Mr. Scott refused to follow the officers repeated verbal commands.
(O.k....so now, we have officers who have made sure they can be identified as police. They have given clear orders...several times... to drop the gun. Mr. Scott does not do so)
A uniformed officer in a marked patrol vehicle arrived to assist the officers. The uniformed officer utilized his baton to attempt to breach the front passenger window in an effort to arrest Mr. Scott.
Mr. Scott then exited the vehicle with the gun and backed away from the vehicle while CONTINUING to ignore officers’ repeated loud verbal commands to drop the gun.
(O.k...so NOW, we have an officer getting into the vehicle to arrest Mr. Scott and Mr. Scott continues to refuse to do as he is told. He exits the vehicle WITH the gun)
Officer Vinson perceived Mr. Scott’s actions and movements as an imminent physical threat to himself and the other officers. Officer Vinson fired his issued service weapon, striking Mr. Scott. Officers immediately rendered first aid and requested Medic to respond to the scene.
(O.k....so we have the BLACK cop shoot the BLACK man. Racism? Cop vs "them"?)
Homicide Unit Detectives interviewed multiple independent civilian witnesses at the scene and at police headquarters. Those witnesses confirmed that officers gave numerous loud verbal commands for Mr. Scott to drop the weapon and also confirmed that at NO time did Mr. Scott comply with their commands.
(O.k....so is this where the officers should have called in a negotiator? A psychologist? Dr. Phil, maybe? And how much do you suppose those witnesses were paid by the cops?)
A lab analysis conducted of the gun crime scene investigators recovered at the scene revealed the presence of Mr. Scott’s DNA and his fingerprints on the gun. It was also determined that the gun Mr. Scott possessed was loaded at the time of the encounter with the officers. The investigation also revealed that Mr. Scott was wearing an ankle holster at the time of the event.
(O.k....so was the ankle holster ALSO planted by the cops?)
Attached are photos of the gun, ankle holster and marijuana “blunt” in Mr. Scott’s possession at the time of the incident. Additionally, links to the portion of the digital mobile video recorder (dash-cam) and body worn camera footage that capture the time of the shooting are included below.
The body worn camera illustrates the footage from the moment it was turned on until officers began rendering first aid to Mr. Scott
The dash-cam footage is from the time in which the officer operating the car with the dash-cam video arrives on the scene until officers began rendering first aid to Mr. Scott."
Yeah...that report reads badly for the officers, just as you noted.
|
|
|
|
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread