Naming the Capitol Cop Who Killed Unarmed Jan. 6 Rioter Ashli Babbitt

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I saw no justification for her being shot and it makes no sense. This one woman was the lone threat? That said most complaining have argued for years to just do what law enforcement tells you to do and no one gets hurt.

They still do but all the same, why does it not apply here?

she was security detail while she was in the AF & knew the 2nd she trespassed she was committing a crime. she also knew that when she was front & center of a mob trying to force their way into the house chambers where the inside security were the only barrier between a bloodthirsty crowd & the members of congress they were defending & protecting. she rolled the dice & lost. it was her own fault.

All the same the officer that shot was not at risk. I do not support killing someone in that scenario.

they were busting thru the door.

"They". If she was a danger so were the hundreds of others.

Collectively, as a mob, they were a threat according to our laws.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

There's a difference between justice and revenge. You guys really want to kill this mystery hero.

I guess it takes a big, brave, heroic man, to shoot an unarmed woman in the back.

When did that happen?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I saw no justification for her being shot and it makes no sense. This one woman was the lone threat? That said most complaining have argued for years to just do what law enforcement tells you to do and no one gets hurt.

They still do but all the same, why does it not apply here?

she was security detail while she was in the AF & knew the 2nd she trespassed she was committing a crime. she also knew that when she was front & center of a mob trying to force their way into the house chambers where the inside security were the only barrier between a bloodthirsty crowd & the members of congress they were defending & protecting. she rolled the dice & lost. it was her own fault.

All the same the officer that shot was not at risk. I do not support killing someone in that scenario.

they were busting thru the door.

True, but did you hear that cop yell out "First person through gets shot!" No. He said nothing before firing. The filmer was standing close to where he was standing and had the audio on the whole time. I heard nothing from that cop...nada....what I did hear was another person from behind the doors say, "I see a gun!". That would have been enough for me to not attempt to continue to get through the doors. She chose to continue but I have no proof she heard what was audible on tape when the person (sounded like another in her group) saying I see a gun. My point? Even in the heat of the moment, hearts racing, adrenaline pumping, focusing on protecting the sealed area, that cop should have at least shouted out "I plan to shoot!" or similar heads up but he chose to stay mute. Maybe if this does go to court, as it sounds, he'll provide testimony about why he just chose to shoot without verbal warning when he had the time to do so.

We have no idea what kind of warning he gave. He was out of sight of the camera at first.

I watched it over and over at that part. As you've said, he's out of sight at first but then his right hand holding a gun can be seen at the bottom left of the screen for, what appeared to be, at least 30 seconds before shooting. Thirty seconds would have been more than enough time to give a verbal warning. Fifteen seconds would have been enough time to include a verbal warning. In fact, he could have been holding it in place a lot longer than the tape revealed, but as you said I can only attest to what the tape contained.

So, am I claiming to have all of the details that went on with that cop and the victim? No. I will be interested in finding out what the court testimony contains and concludes. Maybe the cop did give a warning, but I don't think so since everything was pretty clear on that tape and his nearby voice would have most likely registered.

I absolutely believe the family deserves answers and I hate the excuse "we can't release the info until after the investigation because we have seen it can be released and the investigation can still continue but.........

If this had been a black man in Chicago, many complaining would not be.

Not releasing information while there is an open investigation is pretty much standard throughout the country, whether it's in response to a Public Record request, FOIA request (Freedom of Information Act which is federal) or a subpoena duces tecum.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

From the OP's source, this needs explaining so I can better comprehend why any police force is above the legal requirements for all others: "Unlike other police forces, USCP does not have to disclose records on police misconduct."

"More than 700 complaints were lodged against Capitol Police officers between 2017 and 2019, but brass won’t say what the alleged violations were or how the department resolved them. They also won’t disclose how many complaints are in any individual officer’s file."

"While the USCP has an inspector general, he does not make reports public, unlike other agency watchdogs. His report on Jan. 6 remains secret." Where is the outcry that US Capitol Police are above all others without need to report anything, and even the USCP's AG doesn't make reports lol So please somebody, tell me what I'm missing here since this reeks of layers of corruption that's gone on since when...inception of the USCP? Yikes...I guess I'll give that example next time when I hear somebody claim that nobody is above the law....USCP are considered to be above the law. Crazy stuff here.

Secretive covert actions are needed when it involves military actions and planning. This event is an entirely different scenario, but we're told that USCP's need for secrecy is due to protecting the life of the shooter...yet reading the article explains that they've never had to report anything. Added note: using the descriptor "shooter" with this event might stir up a few left-leaning partisan types, but this policeman shot a gun and killed a person, and a person who shoots a gun and kills someone is in fact a shooter. Many good cops lose a lot of sleep over it, even when they had no other option or to die. I'm wondering about this guy. He might be losing sleep about his name being released, and beyond that....it's anyone's guess.

Had they thought this through more, USCP should have arranged a press conference within a week of the tragic shooting. Had they come out from their protected capitol affairs, void of misconduct reports for public knowledge, into the daylight, they'd have faired better. Gaining public acceptance for secretive actions is going to be like forcing a kid to eat brussels sprouts (wow, just learned that it's really not brussel sprouts but brussels sprouts-who says brussels sprouts?! haha)
especially now that they've waited so long. I guess the USCP never intended to release his name, and reportedly it will be the defense attorney who releases it publicly.

The defense lawyer knows who it is and awaiting to complete all legal procedures prior to releasing it. Good for him to not blow the case by ensuring all stones are left uncovered! Other defense attorneys should take note.

Do you know who the defense attorney is?

 

[Lesh]

More than that...the Capitol Police simply never release that kind of information.

Note that the Capitol Police shooters involved in killing the black woman who made a wrong turn in front of the Capitol several years ago were never identified.

Why do Trump Humpers demand that the guy who shot this piece of shit be identified?

Because it appears he was a black cop and they want to attack him and his family

 

[pknopp]

I saw no justification for her being shot and it makes no sense. This one woman was the lone threat? That said most complaining have argued for years to just do what law enforcement tells you to do and no one gets hurt.

They still do but all the same, why does it not apply here?

she was security detail while she was in the AF & knew the 2nd she trespassed she was committing a crime. she also knew that when she was front & center of a mob trying to force their way into the house chambers where the inside security were the only barrier between a bloodthirsty crowd & the members of congress they were defending & protecting. she rolled the dice & lost. it was her own fault.

All the same the officer that shot was not at risk. I do not support killing someone in that scenario.

He was protecting our Congressional representatives. That's just as legitimate as shooting in self-defense, maybe even more so in this scenario because that was his job, to protect them, with deadly force if necessary.

Personally, if a person can see me addressing them and telling them to cease whatever behavior they're engaged in with my firearm in my hand, and for whatever reason they think they don't have to pay attention to what I'm saying to them, that behavior in and of itself is worrisome and can cause them to get shot.

You are arguing he failed at his job as he let hundreds of others in.

 

[pknopp]

I saw no justification for her being shot and it makes no sense. This one woman was the lone threat? That said most complaining have argued for years to just do what law enforcement tells you to do and no one gets hurt.

They still do but all the same, why does it not apply here?

she was security detail while she was in the AF & knew the 2nd she trespassed she was committing a crime. she also knew that when she was front & center of a mob trying to force their way into the house chambers where the inside security were the only barrier between a bloodthirsty crowd & the members of congress they were defending & protecting. she rolled the dice & lost. it was her own fault.

All the same the officer that shot was not at risk. I do not support killing someone in that scenario.

they were busting thru the door.

True, but did you hear that cop yell out "First person through gets shot!" No. He said nothing before firing. The filmer was standing close to where he was standing and had the audio on the whole time. I heard nothing from that cop...nada....what I did hear was another person from behind the doors say, "I see a gun!". That would have been enough for me to not attempt to continue to get through the doors. She chose to continue but I have no proof she heard what was audible on tape when the person (sounded like another in her group) saying I see a gun. My point? Even in the heat of the moment, hearts racing, adrenaline pumping, focusing on protecting the sealed area, that cop should have at least shouted out "I plan to shoot!" or similar heads up but he chose to stay mute. Maybe if this does go to court, as it sounds, he'll provide testimony about why he just chose to shoot without verbal warning when he had the time to do so.

We have no idea what kind of warning he gave. He was out of sight of the camera at first.

I watched it over and over at that part. As you've said, he's out of sight at first but then his right hand holding a gun can be seen at the bottom left of the screen for, what appeared to be, at least 30 seconds before shooting. Thirty seconds would have been more than enough time to give a verbal warning. Fifteen seconds would have been enough time to include a verbal warning. In fact, he could have been holding it in place a lot longer than the tape revealed, but as you said I can only attest to what the tape contained.

So, am I claiming to have all of the details that went on with that cop and the victim? No. I will be interested in finding out what the court testimony contains and concludes. Maybe the cop did give a warning, but I don't think so since everything was pretty clear on that tape and his nearby voice would have most likely registered.

I absolutely believe the family deserves answers and I hate the excuse "we can't release the info until after the investigation because we have seen it can be released and the investigation can still continue but.........

If this had been a black man in Chicago, many complaining would not be.

Not releasing information while there is an open investigation is pretty much standard throughout the country, whether it's in response to a Public Record request, FOIA request (Freedom of Information Act which is federal) or a subpoena duces tecum.

Not anymore it isn't.

 

[Turtlesoup]

The death of this woman must not be forgotten......justice for her killer must be demanded.

She got justice, she put herself where she knew she didn't belong as was killed trying to break down a door with a cop on the other side. Did that cop know she was unarmed or what her intentions were? Tragic but just.

She wasn't breaking down anything fool. FBI/antifa/blm had already broken the window out. She didn't know the Racist Killer Kapital Kop was there. He hid to shoot her, and didn't issue any warnings before doing so.

According to your logic, I should get a machine gun and mow down every f'ing BLM and anti fa that see out "protesting" which actually rioting and looting...no exceptions because I wouldn't know which ones were armed.

 

[Lesh]

The death of this woman must not be forgotten......justice for her killer must be demanded.

She got justice, she put herself where she knew she didn't belong as was killed trying to break down a door with a cop on the other side. Did that cop know she was unarmed or what her intentions were? Tragic but just.

She wasn't breaking down anything fool. FBI/antifa/blm had already broken the window out. She didn't know the Racist Killer Kapital Kop was there. He hid to shoot her, and didn't issue any warnings before doing so.

According to your logic, I should get a machine gun and mow down every f'ing BLM and anti fa that see out "protesting" which actually rioting and looting...no exceptions because I wouldn't know which ones were armed.

Her MAGA buddies had just broken in the window and she was climbing through (leading a mob against the last barricade protecting virtually our entire electorate)...including the VP and the VP elect...knowing she was looking down the barrel of a loaded gun and with a backpack on.'
For all the world looking like a suicide bomber

 

[Crepitus]

The death of this woman must not be forgotten......justice for her killer must be demanded.

Naming the Capitol Cop Who Killed Unarmed Jan. 6 Rioter Ashli Babbitt

At top, pistol drawn in the House chamber, a plainclothes black officer who fits the description of Michael L. Byrd. His name was apparently divulged at a hearing as the cop who shot Ashli Babbi

www.realclearinvestigations.com

I'm shocked only one insurrectionist was shot. The rest got off easy.

He only had to shoot one person, after Ashley no one else wanted or tried to go through that window.

They should have opened fire when the doors went down.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

The death of this woman must not be forgotten......justice for her killer must be demanded.

Naming the Capitol Cop Who Killed Unarmed Jan. 6 Rioter Ashli Babbitt

At top, pistol drawn in the House chamber, a plainclothes black officer who fits the description of Michael L. Byrd. His name was apparently divulged at a hearing as the cop who shot Ashli Babbi

www.realclearinvestigations.com

I'm shocked only one insurrectionist was shot. The rest got off easy.

He only had to shoot one person, after Ashley no one else wanted or tried to go through that window.

They all still came in.

No one else went through the window Ashli was attempting to breach.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I saw no justification for her being shot and it makes no sense. This one woman was the lone threat? That said most complaining have argued for years to just do what law enforcement tells you to do and no one gets hurt.

They still do but all the same, why does it not apply here?

she was security detail while she was in the AF & knew the 2nd she trespassed she was committing a crime. she also knew that when she was front & center of a mob trying to force their way into the house chambers where the inside security were the only barrier between a bloodthirsty crowd & the members of congress they were defending & protecting. she rolled the dice & lost. it was her own fault.

All the same the officer that shot was not at risk. I do not support killing someone in that scenario.

they were busting thru the door.

True, but did you hear that cop yell out "First person through gets shot!" No. He said nothing before firing. The filmer was standing close to where he was standing and had the audio on the whole time. I heard nothing from that cop...nada....what I did hear was another person from behind the doors say, "I see a gun!". That would have been enough for me to not attempt to continue to get through the doors. She chose to continue but I have no proof she heard what was audible on tape when the person (sounded like another in her group) saying I see a gun. My point? Even in the heat of the moment, hearts racing, adrenaline pumping, focusing on protecting the sealed area, that cop should have at least shouted out "I plan to shoot!" or similar heads up but he chose to stay mute. Maybe if this does go to court, as it sounds, he'll provide testimony about why he just chose to shoot without verbal warning when he had the time to do so.

We have no idea what kind of warning he gave. He was out of sight of the camera at first.

I watched it over and over at that part. As you've said, he's out of sight at first but then his right hand holding a gun can be seen at the bottom left of the screen for, what appeared to be, at least 30 seconds before shooting. Thirty seconds would have been more than enough time to give a verbal warning. Fifteen seconds would have been enough time to include a verbal warning. In fact, he could have been holding it in place a lot longer than the tape revealed, but as you said I can only attest to what the tape contained.

So, am I claiming to have all of the details that went on with that cop and the victim? No. I will be interested in finding out what the court testimony contains and concludes. Maybe the cop did give a warning, but I don't think so since everything was pretty clear on that tape and his nearby voice would have most likely registered.

I absolutely believe the family deserves answers and I hate the excuse "we can't release the info until after the investigation because we have seen it can be released and the investigation can still continue but.........

If this had been a black man in Chicago, many complaining would not be.

Not releasing information while there is an open investigation is pretty much standard throughout the country, whether it's in response to a Public Record request, FOIA request (Freedom of Information Act which is federal) or a subpoena duces tecum.

Not anymore it isn't.

What do you mean, not anymore, nothing has changed in that regard.

 

[justinacolmena]

The death of this woman must not be forgotten......justice for her killer must be demanded.

Name the guy? He's got a bunch of buddies still on the police force, and they are retaliating with lethal force for any accusations.

 

[ClaireH]

Personally, if a person can see me addressing them and telling them to cease whatever behavior they're engaged in with my firearm in my hand, and for whatever reason they think they don't have to pay attention to what I'm saying to them, that behavior in and of itself is worrisome and can cause them to get shot.

I agree 100% NVM about thinking a cop might think that "if a person can see me addressing them and telling them to cease whatever behavior they're engaged in with my firearm in my hand, and for whatever reason they think they don't have to pay attention to what I'm saying to them, that behavior in and of itself is worrisome MINUS THIs NEXT PART: and can cause them to get shot". That last part seems subjective not absolute.

In this case, it's still debatable about the part you mentioned, if it even happened at all: "see me addressing them and telling them to cease whatever the behavior they're engaged", at this point in time it didn't happen at least not evidentially at this point. I question that the cop said any thing at all during these crucial seconds - like a quick verbal warning. It's not been presented on tape yet anyway, to my knowledge, but I haven't been searching admittedly.

 

[ClaireH]

From the OP's source, this needs explaining so I can better comprehend why any police force is above the legal requirements for all others: "Unlike other police forces, USCP does not have to disclose records on police misconduct."

"More than 700 complaints were lodged against Capitol Police officers between 2017 and 2019, but brass won’t say what the alleged violations were or how the department resolved them. They also won’t disclose how many complaints are in any individual officer’s file."

"While the USCP has an inspector general, he does not make reports public, unlike other agency watchdogs. His report on Jan. 6 remains secret." Where is the outcry that US Capitol Police are above all others without need to report anything, and even the USCP's AG doesn't make reports lol So please somebody, tell me what I'm missing here since this reeks of layers of corruption that's gone on since when...inception of the USCP? Yikes...I guess I'll give that example next time when I hear somebody claim that nobody is above the law....USCP are considered to be above the law. Crazy stuff here.

Secretive covert actions are needed when it involves military actions and planning. This event is an entirely different scenario, but we're told that USCP's need for secrecy is due to protecting the life of the shooter...yet reading the article explains that they've never had to report anything. Added note: using the descriptor "shooter" with this event might stir up a few left-leaning partisan types, but this policeman shot a gun and killed a person, and a person who shoots a gun and kills someone is in fact a shooter. Many good cops lose a lot of sleep over it, even when they had no other option or to die. I'm wondering about this guy. He might be losing sleep about his name being released, and beyond that....it's anyone's guess.

Had they thought this through more, USCP should have arranged a press conference within a week of the tragic shooting. Had they come out from their protected capitol affairs, void of misconduct reports for public knowledge, into the daylight, they'd have faired better. Gaining public acceptance for secretive actions is going to be like forcing a kid to eat brussels sprouts (wow, just learned that it's really not brussel sprouts but brussels sprouts-who says brussels sprouts?! haha)
especially now that they've waited so long. I guess the USCP never intended to release his name, and reportedly it will be the defense attorney who releases it publicly.

The defense lawyer knows who it is and awaiting to complete all legal procedures prior to releasing it. Good for him to not blow the case by ensuring all stones are left uncovered! Other defense attorneys should take note.

Do you know who the defense attorney is?

Your question makes me think he's someone well-known...without checking Chauvin's lawyer-or one of them anyway. but the name didn't stand out to me when I read it...who?

 

[justinacolmena]

Personally, if a person can see me addressing them and telling them to cease whatever behavior they're engaged in with my firearm in my hand, and for whatever reason they think they don't have to pay attention to what I'm saying to them, that behavior in and of itself is worrisome and can cause them to get shot.

"Give me the money. Yup. I saw you open the safe. Just step back out of harm's way..."

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Personally, if a person can see me addressing them and telling them to cease whatever behavior they're engaged in with my firearm in my hand, and for whatever reason they think they don't have to pay attention to what I'm saying to them, that behavior in and of itself is worrisome and can cause them to get shot.

"Give me the money. Yup. I saw you open the safe. Just step back out of harm's way..."

"Two to the chest and one between the eyes"

 

[justinacolmena]

"Two to the chest and one between the eyes"

There's a body count and too much unexplained wealth in the hands of those cops.

 

[San Souci]

The death of this woman must not be forgotten......justice for her killer must be demanded.

Naming the Capitol Cop Who Killed Unarmed Jan. 6 Rioter Ashli Babbitt

At top, pistol drawn in the House chamber, a plainclothes black officer who fits the description of Michael L. Byrd. His name was apparently divulged at a hearing as the cop who shot Ashli Babbi

www.realclearinvestigations.com

True. Her life mattered far more than that filthy junkie George Floyd.

 

[San Souci]

There's a difference between justice and revenge. You guys really want to kill this mystery hero.

donny is deliberately trying to put a target on his back.

Absolutely. He's going to get so many death threats he will have to go into witness protection.

You mean Witless Protection.