Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Off Topic > Off Topic - General


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 12-10-2017, 08:05 PM   #46
railbird
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Drop Husker View Post
A jury of our supposed peers witnessed this very video. And let that man go.
Sorry , but the video was withheld from the jury . The judge felt it would be too (predudicial ? ) to the case
__________________
and down the stretch they come....
railbird is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 08:43 AM   #47
Fager Fan
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper View Post
That was terrible.

This cop seemed to be looking for a reason to blow this kid away. I have no training, but everything about the way this was handled seemed wrong.

The thing that probably got the cop off was the kid reaching behind his back the first time. It provoked a serious reaction from the cop. A cop will not know why you are reaching behind you. Many people keep guns in their pants behind them. So he could have easily been reaching for a gun. That's why he was screaming at the kid to not reach behind again or he'd shoot him.

The kid did not realize the significance of why he should reach behind himself and seemed to be making a move in that direction again when the cop shot him. Tragic.
The man (kid?) making that move as he was crawling forward was the issue. Why the heck did he reach over?

I don't like a lot of what happened here, like why they were drawing this out. Once on the floor, the partner should've handcuffed them quickly. It's almost like they were just trying to draw it out until the guy did something to justify shooting.

But I'd still ask why the guy reached for the girl's bag (isn't that what he was doing?)? That was a crazy move to make and ultimately justified the shooting.

What were this girl and guy in trouble over? I haven't googled for more news on this.
Fager Fan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 08:58 AM   #48
Fager Fan
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,222
I've read through the thread and see he was shooting a pellet gun in a hotel room. And drunk.

This was very badly handled. These cops mayve been found not guilty, but both should be fired and never hired again as a cop or security guard. Their instructions were ridiculous and they should've quickly cuffed them. The video should've been allowed.
Fager Fan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 09:25 AM   #49
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtothegame View Post
So a cop on an interstate in inclimate weather is compared to a cop arriving on a scene where there has been said to be guns and a shooter???
And this is how "nerves of steel are determined'???

I can imagine you have never had hot lead flying over your head or at you.
Considering that cars were spinning out on the parkway at 55 miles per hour and coming down a very slippery hill and that highway state patrolman was walking along the edge of the highway and could have been hit by a 1500 pound projectile at any second I'd say he had nerves of steel. I saw them spinning out and there was no way I would have gotten out of my car. The snow was plowed into banks alongside the road. There was no where to run if a car started spinning out at him. It was Russian roulette and he got lucky.

I would think cops get some kind of training on how to handle situations like the one in the video. Surely that requires nerves of steel to handle that situation. The guy was acquitted so there must be more to the story than just the video.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 10:05 AM   #50
davew
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fager Fan View Post
The man (kid?) making that move as he was crawling forward was the issue. Why the heck did he reach over?

I don't like a lot of what happened here, like why they were drawing this out. Once on the floor, the partner should've handcuffed them quickly. It's almost like they were just trying to draw it out until the guy did something to justify shooting.

But I'd still ask why the guy reached for the girl's bag (isn't that what he was doing?)? That was a crazy move to make and ultimately justified the shooting.

What were this girl and guy in trouble over? I haven't googled for more news on this.
He reached back to pull up his dropping pants?

The other cop did not cuff because he was in front of open door to his room and they did not know if anyone else was in room.
davew is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 10:06 AM   #51
Inner Dirt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Beaverdam Virginia
Posts: 12,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by railbird View Post
Sorry , but the video was withheld from the jury . The judge felt it would be too (predudicial ? ) to the case
I don't think so from what I read, it was only originally withheld from the media and general public.
Inner Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 10:29 AM   #52
PaceAdvantage
PA Steward
 
PaceAdvantage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by railbird View Post
Sorry , but the video was withheld from the jury . The judge felt it would be too (predudicial ? ) to the case
A video of what actually transpired would be too prejudicial for the jury to see?

WHAT?

WOW...that's insane...that can't be true, can it?

These cops were on trial for the shooting and killing of this man, and the video of the shooting and killing of the man was not allowed to be shown in court?

Seriously?
PaceAdvantage is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 10:35 AM   #53
zico20
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: st louis
Posts: 2,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by davew View Post
He reached back to pull up his dropping pants?

The other cop did not cuff because he was in front of open door to his room and they did not know if anyone else was in room.


Are we watching the same video? The door to his room was behind the guy and it was closed. The cops had no problem going past the dead guy to get to his room. The cops could have easily cuffed him while others went to the room.

The cop was looking to kill him, he got his wish. We should be thankful their were not little kids with him, they would not have been able to follow those directions and the cop would have gunned them down to.
__________________
You will never achieve 100% if 99% is okay!
zico20 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 11:03 AM   #54
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
A jury acquitted the cop. A jury also acquitted O.J. Simpson.

Does that mean O.J. is innocent?

Most people believe O.J. killed his wife and her friend, but the jury felt there was reasonable doubt.

The same goes here. Just because the cop was acquitted by a jury does not make him truly innocent. Only God knows what the truth is -- what was in the shooter's mind.

The cop probably had a better attorney than the prosecuting attorney.

I assume there will be a civil case?

The cop was let go by the department. That sends a message that there was at least some wrong doing on the part of the cop.

The question I have is why didn't the cops call for more backup? If they feared another shooter was in the room wouldn't they want a SWAT team to help out?

Last edited by highnote; 12-11-2017 at 11:05 AM.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 11:10 AM   #55
Inner Dirt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Beaverdam Virginia
Posts: 12,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by zico20 View Post
[/B]

Are we watching the same video? The door to his room was behind the guy and it was closed. The cops had no problem going past the dead guy to get to his room. The cops could have easily cuffed him while others went to the room.

The cop was looking to kill him, he got his wish. We should be thankful their were not little kids with him, they would not have been able to follow those directions and the cop would have gunned them down to.
Or someone who is deaf, mentally challenged, has a physical disability, or doesn't understand English well either. Some of the fellow law enforcement's reaction to this execution is down right pathetic, some act like there is no such thing as an unjustified shooting. Many act like if you don't follow even a simple order you get shot. What happens if you are physically unable? I would have gotten killed in that situation also as due to destroyed shoulders I can't raise even a hand above by head without using the other arm to assist. I also could not crawl like that, I would fall over because by legs are weak from spinal cord damage. I look like a normal 56 year old just walking and talking. I don't appear disabled until I have to perform a physical task. I would be a dead man there also.
Inner Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 11:13 AM   #56
Inner Dirt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Beaverdam Virginia
Posts: 12,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by highnote View Post
A jury acquitted the cop. A jury also acquitted O.J. Simpson.

Does that mean O.J. is innocent?

Most people believe O.J. killed his wife and her friend, but the jury felt there was reasonable doubt.
Do you seriously believe that? The verdict was nothing but revenge against a supposed racist system. If O.J. was white, he would have been found guilty and gotten a max sentence.
Inner Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 11:21 AM   #57
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner Dirt View Post
Do you seriously believe that? The verdict was nothing but revenge against a supposed racist system. If O.J. was white, he would have been found guilty and gotten a max sentence.
Where in my post did I say what I believe?

I stated that what most people believe are the facts.

Most people believe O.J. was guilty.

The jury acquitted him.

His attorneys put reasonable doubt into the minds of the jurors.

You might be right that it was a revenge verdict to acquit O.J. But since I don't know what was in the minds of the jurors, I could only hypothesize about what was in their minds. Hypothesizing is not the same as facts.

The attorney(s) for the cop put reasonable doubt into the minds of the jurors. That doesn't mean the cop was innocent or guilty. It means the jury found him not guilty. Using your logic, maybe it was a revenge verdict by a pro-cop jury?

I have no opinion on whether the cop was innocent or guilty. I wasn't at the shooting and I wasn't in the courtroom. It could all be fake news planted by Russians for all I know.

Last edited by highnote; 12-11-2017 at 11:26 AM.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 11:31 AM   #58
Racetrack Playa
regular user
 
Racetrack Playa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 37,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage View Post
A video of what actually transpired would be too prejudicial for the jury to see?

WHAT?

WOW...that's insane...that can't be true, can it?

These cops were on trial for the shooting and killing of this man, and the video of the shooting and killing of the man was not allowed to be shown in court?

Seriously?
I believe the jury saw the shooting video, however a photo of the shooters gun was NOT shown to the jury. A custom engraving on the dust cover, read
"You're Fuc*ed"
__________________
donut believe the hype...

Last edited by Racetrack Playa; 12-11-2017 at 11:33 AM.
Racetrack Playa is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 11:48 AM   #59
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner Dirt View Post
Do you seriously believe that? The verdict was nothing but revenge against a supposed racist system. If O.J. was white, he would have been found guilty and gotten a max sentence.
Also, the defense attorneys and the prosecuting attorneys had a hand in picking the jurors for the O.J. trial. The defense got their client acquitted.

You might be right that it was a revenge verdict, but the fact is, O.J. was found not guilty. Just like the cop in Arizona. Not guilty.

It might be the case that O.J. is guilty and the cop is guilty. All we can say for certain is that the juries acquitted them. People are free to believe whatever they want about either of those trials, but the fact is, the jury's decision is final.

Last edited by highnote; 12-11-2017 at 11:51 AM.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-11-2017, 11:53 AM   #60
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racetrack Playa View Post
I believe the jury saw the shooting video, however a photo of the shooters gun was NOT shown to the jury. A custom engraving on the dust cover, read
"You're Fuc*ed"

Very prophetic...
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.