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

[harmonica]

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.

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

he could be reaching for the pistol...you can't see anything
you didn't read my post--read it again---he could be threatening her ..

What was this "dangerous" man doing there sitting next to a young boy anyway?

???!!!
your first/major problem--research/read the article/read previous posts!!!

you don't have to give a warning--that means nothing unless you can link otherwise

She fired no shot over his head.

????!!!???WTF is that?
as I've stated in other threads, you people are living in TV/Movie land!!!
...in some states you are not allowed to fire warning shots

t, but in the state of Oklahoma it’s highly recommended by your attorney not to fire any warning shots because it is using deadly force. Deadly force is not allowed to protect your property if the felony is not a forceable felony

--unless you are threatened and need to use self defense--as this jury voted this lady did

All that means is we’ve been taught by Hollywood...

Oklahoma: Stop, Or I’ll Shoot! - U.S. & Texas LawShield
--if the ''suspect'' is close--the warning shot is useless!!!

 

[harmonica]

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."

hahahah--you PROVE to be a racist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
why bring up race in this thread??!!!???
if anything, it proves the pro-shooters are NOT racist
the shooter is white--criminal is white

 

[harmonica]

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.

...as stated before--it is the CRIMINAL that initiates the problem...initiates the whole sequence of events--and they are not ''natural''/everyday events to everybody--they are ''unnatural''--dynamic.....so ''unnatural'' actions will occur
...the police 99.99999999999% of the time don't just think--hey --'''look at that guy--let's shoot him for fun''''
this lady didn't just pick out some random person and shoot them

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

Are you on LSD?

 

[toobfreak]

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

Thank God you're not a cop or a judge. EVERYONE has a right to act immoral and improper! It is done and defended from shore to shore across this country! Gay rights parades where they march half naked! Women's equality parades wearing pink vaginas! KKK rallies! Black Lives Matter! Nudists parades! I'm not saying I'm FOR any of that stuff but the entire point of the Constitution is to defend not just those things we agree with, but those things we DISAGREE WITH, otherwise, you might as well live in a communist nation, where you are shot for saying the slightest thing out of line. Freedom comes at a price and people better relearn that real fast. Only a SICK ASS like you would defend communism. What you DON'T have a right to is to act CRIMINALLY. This man committed no crime. When the man started resisting handcuffing, they should have brought someone there to do it for them. He should NOT have been free to leave the room, he should NOT have been free to open a window. This event breaks so many levels of common sense and decency, I don't know where to even begin, but that woman has no business owning a gun and it should be taken off of her immediately and she needs charged with manslaughter.

 

[Anathema]

Thank God you're not a cop or a judge. EVERYONE has a right to act immoral and improper! It is done and defended from shore to shore across this country! Gay rights parades where they march half naked! Women's equality parades wearing pink vaginas! KKK rallies! Black Lives Matter! Nudists parades! I'm not saying I'm FOR any of that stuff but the entire point of the Constitution is to defend not just those things we agree with, but those things we DISAGREE WITH, otherwise, you might as well live in a communist nation, where you are shot for saying the slightest thing out of line. Freedom comes at a price and people better relearn that real fast. Only a SICK ASS like you would defend communism. What you DON'T have a right to is to act CRIMINALLY. This man committed no crime. When the man started resisting handcuffing, they should have brought someone there to do it for them. He should NOT have been free to leave the room, he should NOT have been free to open a window. This event breaks so many levels of common sense and decency, I don't know where to even begin, but that woman has no business owning a gun and it should be taken off of her immediately and she needs charged with manslaughter.

I' an admitted Authoritarian (Right Wing not Ckmmunist). Where have I ever claimed to believe in Freedom or Liberty. I believe Immorality and Impropriety ARE criminality.

Try again.

 

[toobfreak]

--unless you are threatened and need to use self defense--as this jury voted this lady did!

You have some evidence other than that shown on the video? Because the video didn't show that. According to the video shown, the man had his back turned, never saw the gun, was given no warning to stop or he would be shot, and she just killed him with a fatal shot to the vital part of the body in cold blood because they let LEOs GET AWAY WITH MURDER.

If I have a break in in my home, I have to:

Try to escape.
Try to avoid the confrontation, flee the scene.
Tell them I have a gun.
Shoot as a last resort. PROVE I felt my life was in danger.
Give warning.
Then hire a lawyer to defend myself in court why I used a large caliber, why I didn't aim for a non-lethal body area, then be prepared to be sued by the assailant's family for wrongful death.

But if your a bail bondsperson, just BLOW THE FUCKER AWAY IN THE BACK and call the janitor to clean up the blood.

 

[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."

hahahah--you PROVE to be a racist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
why bring up race in this thread??!!!???
if anything, it proves the pro-shooters are NOT racist
the shooter is white--criminal is white

Whadda idiot. Mentioning the same kind of thinking being defended here as exactly that used by racists to murder blacks in the south makes ME a racist too? You are about 12 floors below STUPID.

 

[toobfreak]

I' an admitted Authoritarian (Right Wing not Ckmmunist). Where have I ever claimed to believe in Freedom or Liberty. I believe Immorality and Impropriety ARE criminality.

Try again.

So YOU freely admit YOU define what is immoral and improper by your own arbitrary standards then sentence others to death by YOUR personal decree? And suspicion of crime is as good as convicted and those convicted are immediately sentenced to death? You are not Right Wing, you are a piece of dirt. You are fascist scum. You give conservatives a bad name. You should go move to central America or Bolivia and go work for someone like Che Guevara, you might get along. You are a pig and a coward. You are no better than those you disagree with and you will die by your own hands someday when you meet another person JUST LIKE YOU who disagrees with and kills you in execution for YOUR criminality. For if you don't believe in any freedom or liberty for others then you claim NONE FOR YOURSELF EITHER, pig. Good luck with that.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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?

It is apparent from this post that you:
a) did not watch the video
b) did not read the thread
c) have no fucking clue as to what you are talking about.

Try again after you resolve those issues.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

--unless you are threatened and need to use self defense--as this jury voted this lady did!

You have some evidence other than that shown on the video? Because the video didn't show that. According to the video shown, the man had his back turned, never saw the gun, was given no warning to stop or he would be shot, and she just killed him with a fatal shot to the vital part of the body in cold blood because they let LEOs GET AWAY WITH MURDER.

If I have a break in in my home, I have to:

Try to escape.
Try to avoid the confrontation, flee the scene.
Tell them I have a gun.
Shoot as a last resort. PROVE I felt my life was in danger.
Give warning.
Then hire a lawyer to defend myself in court why I used a large caliber, why I didn't aim for a non-lethal body area, then be prepared to be sued by the assailant's family for wrongful death.

But if your a bail bondsperson, just BLOW THE FUCKER AWAY IN THE BACK and call the janitor to clean up the blood.

How do you know he was shot in the back?

 

[Missourian]

Here's are my biggest concerns.

She introduces the firearm not when she is under attack...but as the victim is attempting to escape.

The gun wasn't on her belt where the victim had easy access to it...she couldn't say "he was grabbing for it"...it was stowed in a desk drawer. If a guy you didn't have the resources to control is fleeing out the window, you can't claim you are in fear for your life.

As soon as the gun is deployed, it is discharged...and the coroner testified the bullet entered the lower back and exitted the upper chest. IMO, she shot him while he was fleeing. Police cannot do that...self defenders can't. Bail bonds enforcers sure as hell cannot either.

This isn't a law enforcement officer...this is a bail bondswoman. She has a financial motive to prevent this guys escape.

Even the son understands this shooting isn't justified.

And the police made the same determination...that the video and witness statements were not consistant with a justified shooting.

 

[harmonica]

--unless you are threatened and need to use self defense--as this jury voted this lady did!

You have some evidence other than that shown on the video? Because the video didn't show that. According to the video shown, the man had his back turned, never saw the gun, was given no warning to stop or he would be shot, and she just killed him with a fatal shot to the vital part of the body in cold blood because they let LEOs GET AWAY WITH MURDER.

If I have a break in in my home, I have to:

Try to escape.
Try to avoid the confrontation, flee the scene.
Tell them I have a gun.
Shoot as a last resort. PROVE I felt my life was in danger.
Give warning.
Then hire a lawyer to defend myself in court why I used a large caliber, why I didn't aim for a non-lethal body area, then be prepared to be sued by the assailant's family for wrongful death.

But if your a bail bondsperson, just BLOW THE FUCKER AWAY IN THE BACK and call the janitor to clean up the blood.

the man is NOT in the video as she gets the pistol and shoots!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NOT in the video....what are you smoking
he's out of the video at 2:16

 

[harmonica]

I' an admitted Authoritarian (Right Wing not Ckmmunist). Where have I ever claimed to believe in Freedom or Liberty. I believe Immorality and Impropriety ARE criminality.

Try again.

So YOU freely admit YOU define what is immoral and improper by your own arbitrary standards then sentence others to death by YOUR personal decree? And suspicion of crime is as good as convicted and those convicted are immediately sentenced to death? You are not Right Wing, you are a piece of dirt. You are fascist scum. You give conservatives a bad name. You should go move to central America or Bolivia and go work for someone like Che Guevara, you might get along. You are a pig and a coward. You are no better than those you disagree with and you will die by your own hands someday when you meet another person JUST LIKE YOU who disagrees with and kills you in execution for YOUR criminality. For if you don't believe in any freedom or liberty for others then you claim NONE FOR YOURSELF EITHER, pig. Good luck with that.

“What’s not on the video is your reasonable doubt.”

reasonable doubt

 

[harmonica]

Here's are my biggest concerns.

She introduces the firearm not when she is under attack...but as the victim is attempting to escape.

The gun wasn't on her belt where the victim had easy access to it...she couldn't say "he was grabbing for it"...it was stowed in a desk drawer. If a guy you didn't have the resources to control is fleeing out the window, you can't claim you are in fear for your life.

As soon as the gun is deployed, it is discharged...and the coroner testified the bullet entered the lower back and exitted the upper chest. IMO, she shot him while he was fleeing. Police cannot do that...self defenders can't. Bail bonds enforcers sure as hell cannot either.

This isn't a law enforcement officer...this is a bail bondswoman. She has a financial motive to prevent this guys escape.

Even the son understands this shooting isn't justified.

And the police made the same determination...that the video and witness statements were not consistant with a justified shooting.

..I agree to all the points made ....
..but I'm going to give the shooter some points and some reasonable doubt because of the history of the the ''suspect''
....my final point:
he got what he deserved

 

[Anathema]

You have some evidence other than that shown on the video? Because the video didn't show that. According to the video shown, the man had his back turned, never saw the gun, was given no warning to stop or he would be shot, and she just killed him with a fatal shot to the vital part of the body in cold blood because they let LEOs GET AWAY WITH MURDER.

If I have a break in in my home, I have to:

Try to escape.
Try to avoid the confrontation, flee the scene.
Tell them I have a gun.
Shoot as a last resort. PROVE I felt my life was in danger.
Give warning.
Then hire a lawyer to defend myself in court why I used a large caliber, why I didn't aim for a non-lethal body area, then be prepared to be sued by the assailant's family for wrongful death.

But if your a bail bondsperson, just BLOW THE FUCKER AWAY IN THE BACK and call the janitor to clean up the blood.

No evidence needed to cap a criminal attempting to escape.

You need to move, if your stste doesn't hsve Castle Doctrine.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Anathema, you are morally wrong. End of story.

 

[Montrovant]

--unless you are threatened and need to use self defense--as this jury voted this lady did!

You have some evidence other than that shown on the video? Because the video didn't show that. According to the video shown, the man had his back turned, never saw the gun, was given no warning to stop or he would be shot, and she just killed him with a fatal shot to the vital part of the body in cold blood because they let LEOs GET AWAY WITH MURDER.

If I have a break in in my home, I have to:

Try to escape.
Try to avoid the confrontation, flee the scene.
Tell them I have a gun.
Shoot as a last resort. PROVE I felt my life was in danger.
Give warning.
Then hire a lawyer to defend myself in court why I used a large caliber, why I didn't aim for a non-lethal body area, then be prepared to be sued by the assailant's family for wrongful death.

But if your a bail bondsperson, just BLOW THE FUCKER AWAY IN THE BACK and call the janitor to clean up the blood.

How do you know he was shot in the back?

It's in the article from the OP: "The state medical examiner reportedly said the bullet entered Williams’ lower back and exited his upper chest, which is consistent with being shot while bending out a window."

 

[JakeStarkey]

Here's are my biggest concerns.

She introduces the firearm not when she is under attack...but as the victim is attempting to escape.

The gun wasn't on her belt where the victim had easy access to it...she couldn't say "he was grabbing for it"...it was stowed in a desk drawer. If a guy you didn't have the resources to control is fleeing out the window, you can't claim you are in fear for your life.

As soon as the gun is deployed, it is discharged...and the coroner testified the bullet entered the lower back and exitted the upper chest. IMO, she shot him while he was fleeing. Police cannot do that...self defenders can't. Bail bonds enforcers sure as hell cannot either.

This isn't a law enforcement officer...this is a bail bondswoman. She has a financial motive to prevent this guys escape.

Even the son understands this shooting isn't justified.

And the police made the same determination...that the video and witness statements were not consistant with a justified shooting.

..I agree to all the points made ....
..but I'm going to give the shooter some points and some reasonable doubt because of the history of the the ''suspect''
....my final point:
he got what he deserved

Nope. He was leaving, he did not try to get the gun, and she murdered him. They live in OK. She has some problems ahead of her.

 

[harmonica]

Here's are my biggest concerns.

She introduces the firearm not when she is under attack...but as the victim is attempting to escape.

The gun wasn't on her belt where the victim had easy access to it...she couldn't say "he was grabbing for it"...it was stowed in a desk drawer. If a guy you didn't have the resources to control is fleeing out the window, you can't claim you are in fear for your life.

As soon as the gun is deployed, it is discharged...and the coroner testified the bullet entered the lower back and exitted the upper chest. IMO, she shot him while he was fleeing. Police cannot do that...self defenders can't. Bail bonds enforcers sure as hell cannot either.

This isn't a law enforcement officer...this is a bail bondswoman. She has a financial motive to prevent this guys escape.

Even the son understands this shooting isn't justified.

And the police made the same determination...that the video and witness statements were not consistant with a justified shooting.

..I agree to all the points made ....
..but I'm going to give the shooter some points and some reasonable doubt because of the history of the the ''suspect''
....my final point:
he got what he deserved

Nope. He was leaving, he did not try to get the gun, and she murdered him. They live OK. She has some problems.

yes