Another killer cop walks!

I watched the same video the prosecutor did.
The cops on the ground must have given their accounts of what occured in written statements to the prosecutor. Had they unanimously sided with Shelby a trial wouldn't have taken place. Given the video
and eyewitness accounts at the scene...the only way Shelby could escape justice was
by a corrupt jury. The two blacks must have been paid pawns or just plain gullible patsies
selected as tokens to make it look good.
Riddle me this: why would anyone care about a dead thug, regardless of race?

Trayvon, Big Mike or this thug?
Because the cops think all black men are thugs. Many think just like you. That mode of thought endangers every black male in this country.
Again, why should I care about a dead thug, black, Latino or white?
Thinking people care about the mindset of the cop in the few minutes just before they kill someone who isn't armed. The word thug is usually applied by bigots like you to any black person murdered by cops. But that's part of the strategy to dehumanize the victim and make the murder more palatable to a hostile anti-black audience..from which prospective jurors will be selected.
Wrong. A thug dehumanizes himself regardless of skin color which is why you never see whites or Latinos whining about dead thugs. Only some blacks whine about dead black thugs.
You see a few blacks responding to the shooting of unarmed blacks because the media focuses on them. Black protests seem to be more newsworthy than those of other people.
 
Then they tried to pay with EBT and got mad and started jumping up and down, even the little ones too
 
The negro was asking for it


He was searching for his identification.

I'm recalling Brooklyn, New York, of the fifties, and I'm talking about the Brooklyn Waterfront where I was born and raised, which was one bad-ass neighborhood.

Back then the cops walked "beats." They carried nightsticks and .38 revolvers. They didn't have radios back then and there was one police car to every sector, which included an area consisting of several foot patrols ("beats").

Back then a cop was not allowed to draw his revolver unless he was threatened with deadly force -- and the threat had to be actual, not presumptive. In other words, to shoot someone because, "I thought he was reaching for a weapon," was not acceptable. Back then, if a cop shot someone there had to be a damn good and provable reason for it.

But as bad-ass as that neighborhood was (see the movie, On The Waterfront) the cops rarely ever shot anyone -- and when they did there always was a good reason.

Different world today.
 
That's great news! Perhaps if the person who got shot hadn't been high on drugs and had done what the police said and not made threatening movements, he'd be alive still.
why do you believe that we, as American Citizens, should be forced to submit to government demands and orders, no matter the reason?
 
That's great news! Perhaps if the person who got shot hadn't been high on drugs and had done what the police said and not made threatening movements, he'd be alive still.
why do you believe that we, as American Citizens, should be forced to submit to government demands and orders, no matter the reason?
Why do twist what was said to play games?
 
The n###% stopped his car in the middle of the road like a nutcase. Then he walked back to his car not listening to orders and he was reaching for something in his car. It could have been a gun with a perp acting erratic!

The officers were beyond in the right!


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
 
The n###% stopped his car in the middle of the road like a nutcase. Then he walked back to his car not listening to orders and he was reaching for something in his car. It could have been a gun with a perp acting erratic!

The officers were beyond in the right!
Back in New York City of the fifties and sixties the rule was a cop who used deadly force on someone whom he thought was reaching for a gun had better be right. Because if he was wrong and there was no gun he was subject to some very serious felony charges. In other words, back then a cop had to actually see a weapon to justify using deadly force.

Back then the cops walked beats and they carried "nightsticks" (even in the daytime) and those sticks were considered a reasonably effective defense against physical force and weapons other than guns. I once watched a cop lean forward, take a full roundhouse swing at a very big, very aggressive fellow and hit him square on the side of the knee. There was a loud cracking sound, the guy bellowed like a wounded animal and dropped like a sack of sand. Today the guy would have been shot because the cop "feared for his life."

Those nightsticks were about 2" thick, about 30" long, and very heavy wood. Back then the cops were fond of jabbing an uncooperative subject in the belly or groin with his stick and streetwise people knew better than to grab the stick. Because that could be construed as attempting to "disarm" the cop -- which was justification for using deadly force. Maybe it would be a good idea for today's cops to carry nightsticks, which could reduce the need to use the gun.
 
They prefer Tasers...much better torture devices. No bruises, no blood in the car, no chance of straining a muscle while pounding on someone or breaking an expensive Maglite. Best thing since the drive-through donut shop!
 
A jury has aquitted police officer, Betty Shelby, of first degree manslaghter in the cold blooded murder of Terence Crutcher.
Crutcher, a large Black man, was executed by Shelby after she and several other officers approached him as he stood in a roadway near his disabled vehicle with his hands raised. It is still unclear as to why deadly force was used on a stranded motorist not suspected of committing a crime.

Nevertheless, Crutcher is alleged to have refused to obey orders although he compiled with orders to put his hands on his head. His death sentence was carried out when he decided to walk away from the officers towards his car, a logical choice for someone wanting to retrieve identification.

One officer used a tazer but seconds later
Shelby acted to terminate Crutcher by firing her service weapon.

Subsequently, based on video evidence, a prosecutor decided that was enough evidence to indict Shelby for manslaughter. The charge ought to have been murder but prosecutorial deference to police misconduct generally always means a lesser charge if any at all.

Still, the prosecutor is to be commended for at least giving Crutcher's family their day in criminal court.

The jury consisted of 8 females and 4 men..three were African American.
Under the color of justice, the skill of a union paid defense team and the devalued life of another black man in
a hostile system made the outcome all too predictable. Somehow, what we saw for ourselves on the incriminating video
was revised in a courtroom
setting in favor of a killer produced by the same system.
Ok...i know...the majority here will be apologists for the killer cop. That's just the way you roll. All the irrelevant after the fact revelations will be bandied about to dehumanize the victim.
You sound like you were an eye witness. Why didn't you testify?
I am testifying.
Looks like your testimony isn't credible.
 

Forum List

Back
Top