I don't think this shooting was justified...

[TNHarley]

Didn't see what, j-mac? She deliberately murdered him.

It blows my mind how much you frequent forums and still dont know how they work..

 

[j-mac]

Didn't see what, j-mac? She deliberately murdered him.

It did appear that she shot him for trying to get away....I didn't see that he was trying to get her gun or anything....

 

[depotoo]

He became a criminal the minute he didn’t show for his hearing. I know that in some places, yes, if law enforcement picks them up, rather than turning themselves in or the bondsman or their agents bring them in, they will lose the money they put up. Other places will just reduce what they get back. It is because a bondsman guarantees they will show up for court. In the case of Ok, she only had 5 days from the missed hearing to get him turned in, or lose her $35 grand.

My understanding is if police get involved bail isn’t returned in some places. The bail bondsman or an bounty hunter has to bring them in.

I'm not sure what you quoted means she'd lose the money if she had the police pick him up from her office.

 

[BulletProof]

He became a criminal the minute he didn’t show for his hearing. I know that in some places, yes, if law enforcement picks them up, rather than turning themselves in or the bondsman or their agents bring them in, they will lose the money they put up. Other places will just reduce what they get back. It is because a bondsman guarantees they will show up for court. In the case of Ok, she only had 5 days from the missed hearing to get him turned in, or lose her $35 grand.

I don't know how this bounty stuff works, but if there is financial incentive to leave the police out when the police are the best option, the law needs to be changed. It possible, the police should always handle the arrest. And, it's absurd that she'd lose her money if she were instrumental in his return.

The way she handled it is guaranteed to cause big problems.

 

[depotoo]

1. They feel whomever does the work gets the pay. If it isn’t for the bailsbondman they would be safely in jail until their hearing. It creates more man hours and danger for officers to have to locate a runner.

   He became a criminal the minute he didn’t show for his hearing. I know that in some places, yes, if law enforcement picks them up, rather than turning themselves in or the bondsman or their agents bring them in, they will lose the money they put up. Other places will just reduce what they get back. It is because a bondsman guarantees they will show up for court. In the case of Ok, she only had 5 days from the missed hearing to get him turned in, or lose her $35 grand.

I don't know how this bounty stuff works, but if there is financial incentive to leave the police out when the police are the best option, the law needs to be changed. It possible, the police should always handle the arrest. And, it's absurd that she'd lose her money if she were instrumental in his return.

The way she handled it is guaranteed to cause big problems.

 

[Jarlaxle]

My understanding is if police get involved bail isn’t returned in some places. The bail bondsman or an bounty hunter has to bring them in.


Title 22. Criminal Procedure
§22-1110. Jumping bail - Penalties.
Universal Citation: 22 OK Stat § 22-1110 (2014)
Whoever, having been admitted to bail or released on recognizance, bond, or undertaking for appearance before any magistrate or court of the State of Oklahoma, incurs a forfeiture of the bail or violates such undertaking or recognizance and willfully fails to surrender himself within five (5) days following the date of such forfeiture shall, if the bail was given or undertaking or recognizance extended in connection with a charge of felony or pending appeal or certiorari after conviction of any such offense, be guilty of a felony and shall be fined not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or imprisoned not more than one (1) year, or both. Nothing in this section shall be construed to interfere with or prevent the exercise by any court of its power to punish for contempt.

2014 Oklahoma Statutes
Title 22. Criminal Procedure
§22-1141.18. Forfeiture of bail.
Universal Citation: 22 OK Stat § 22-1141.18 (2014)
If the prisoner is admitted to bail, and fails to appear and surrender himself according to the conditions of his bond, the judge, or magistrate by proper order, shall declare the bond forfeited and order his immediate arrest without warrant if he be within this state. Recovery may be had on such bond in the name of the state as in the case of other bonds given by the accused in criminal proceedings within this state.

Laws 1949, p. 210, § 18.

Here is what he had been charged with

Suspect in restaurant burglaries arrested
And had a $35,000 bond, yet skipped
Victim identified in fatal shooting in downtown Stillwater

He broke into a couple of restaurants at night, and cameras nailed him. We're probably better off without him in the world, but that doesn't establish him as especially bad. The Bitch testified that she has never been so scared, but I hardly wonder how he felt with she locked the door in horror-movie fashion, when all they had been talking about are cars.

If her goal was to turn him in, she should have called the police.

She murdered him because of money.

No, she murdered him because she wanted to watch him die.

 

[ErikViking]

Clearly his own fault.

In America you should never meet up with people like that; unarmed.
He should of course brought his own gun and killed them first.

Why should she be punished for his inability to equip himself?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Urine idiot.

 

[BulletProof]

He should have demolished her the moment she locked the door. No one locks a door in the middle of a conversation without ill-intent. Instead, he panicked, giving her time to get her gun and kill him.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Clearly his own fault. In America you should never meet up with people like that; unarmed. He should of course brought his own gun and killed them first. Why should she be punished for his inability to equip himself?

Yup, he did not run fast enough. You eejit.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Hollywood Glamorizing Convicts Is the Real Crime

Letting criminals run loose in society is what you want? We need a "Stop or I'll Shoot" law. It is no different from shooting man-eating animals if they escape from the zoo.

The man wasn't [yet] a convict.

I'm not really against shooting fleeing criminals, when they're caught in the act of a crime and their identity if unknown. This man was not committing a crime and they knew exactly who he was.

Dems Are Doormats

With your fashionable attitude, it's no wonder that we've allowed 20 million illegal aliens to invade our country.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Hollywood Glamorizing Convicts Is the Real Crime Letting criminals run loose in society is what you want? We need a "Stop or I'll Shoot" law. It is no different from shooting man-eating animals if they escape from the zoo.

Sigh. The guy was not a "man eating animal", you eejit.

Liberals Have a Secret Desire to Be Raped by Some Sweaty Thug

Those with contempt for our security are enemies of the human race.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Here is what he had been charged with

Suspect in restaurant burglaries arrested
And had a $35,000 bond, yet skipped
Victim identified in fatal shooting in downtown Stillwater

They've decided to run with the lie

has learned through multiple sources that he was 38-year-old Brandon James Williams, who reportedly struggled with his bail bondsman for control of a gun before his death.

If he has family, the bondswoman and her son better leave town pronto.

Deliver Us From Deliverance

It figures that the dirtnapped inbred cretin comes from a family of lawless thugs.

 

[harmonica]

she said he was trying to get the pistol--right there justifies shooting

I didn't see him reach for the pistol. And, he was shot in the back.

...just like the defense attorney said that's the reasonable doubt...you can't see what he is doing..he could be doing anything
...he could've easily reached for the gun and then turned.....the woman did not have time to stop and think if it happened quickly
..in a lot of these unarmed shootings, the ''suspect'' is definitely a threat....
could she have shot him just to keep him from escaping?? sure
could he have been a threat at any time in that video? yes
I give the benefit of the doubt to the non-criminal

 

[harmonica]

..as pointed out by another member, she did retrieve the weapon and fired almost instantly
..this appears to look as if she did just shoot unjustifiably--??
....but then again, it can also show she was in fear/thought she needed to shoot, or the suspect did something threatening
..I agree you just can't ''believe''/think you are in fear...there has to to be a real threat

 

[JakeStarkey]

She murdered him, and there will be a reckoning. It's OK.

 

[toobfreak]

If you haven't read my other posts, assure yourself that I'm all about giving LEOs and self defenders the benefit of the doubt...but this shooting looks to me like it was not justified. She introduces the gun from a desk drawer and he is just trying to escape the room. The coroner testified he was shot in the back at a trajectory consistent with him leaning out the window.

She is a bail bondswoman and he skipped bond.

She was found not guilty.

News link to follow.

Oklahoma DA’s office releases video of bail officer fatally shooting client

That was murder. She was under no direct threat. Her life was not in danger. She could have shot him in the ass or leg. She did not even try to warn him. There is clearly a double standard here when it involves the LEO, and they are being allowed to literally get away with murder because they know there will be no consequences.

 

[toobfreak]

I believe that criminals have no rights; legal or otherwise. The instant you refuse to cooperate and obey a law enforcement authority (which bail bondsmen are), you deserve to be shot. Fatally.

Then you should go soak your fucking head. Everyone has rights, especially the CHARGED. You are not a "criminal" until convicted, and thank god you will never be on the other side of that gun enforcing laws if you think that just being an LEO gives you total and absolute authority to take a person'e life for any reason or whim at all at any time. It is that kind of totalitarian power to "obey the state at all costs and risks to yourself" where a state can do anything against a helpless populace with no rights or representation that our Founders broke away from England to form the USA for in the first place for, Fool!

In YOUR sick, fucked up world, all you need to do is charge a person with a crime, then you are free to prosecute, convict, sentence and execute! It was people LIKE YOU who took blacks in the south because they didn't like them, tied them to bumpers for being black, then dragged them to their death because they "resisted."

 

[toobfreak]

if he's ''close'' and not complying/reaching/''going for''/the gun/etc in the slightest manner--I would shoot also..it would be justified
you can't let him grab the pistol
you can't let a jackass grab your pistol
could be like the Mike Brown deal--he's coming after the cop--you can't let them get close

Sorry, no. There was no gun until she took it out of the desk to shoot him. She gave no warning. She fired no shot over his head. She could have backed up to the other side of the desk away from him. She shot him in cold blood without hesitation because she could not control the situation and she simply didn't want him to get away. If she's allowed to get away with this murder then it will just mean more senseless killings. There should have been a deputy there to control the situation or he should have been brought in in cuffs, if his restraint and containment were paramount issues. What was this "dangerous" man doing there sitting next to a young boy anyway?

Has our law enforcement in the USA now slid down to that of a Third World Country?

 

[Anathema]

Then you should go soak your fucking head. Everyone has rights, especially the CHARGED. You are not a "criminal" until convicted,...

I disagree. Nobody has a Right to act in an immoral or improper manner. Ever.

...and thank god you will never be on the other side of that gun enforcing laws if you think that just being an LEO gives you total and absolute authority to take a person'e life for any reason or whim at all at any time.

The eason I didn't go into law enforcement is because the system is utterly broken and Legality now supercedes Justice as a goal in Our Society.

It is that kind of totalitarian power to "obey the state at all costs and risks to yourself" where a state can do anything against a helpless populace with no rights or representation that our Founders broke away from England to form the USA for in the first place for, Fool!

Our Founders were naive. They believed People could be trusted to act properly without restraints.

In YOUR sick, fucked up world, all you need to do is charge a person with a crime, then you are free to prosecute, convict, sentence and execute!

No. They get a chance to prove their innocence, unless the legal authority witnessed the infraction personally.