(06-21-2017 11:27 AM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote: That's a gross misrepresentation of what happened MPLS and you know it.
0:00 Shots fired at time
0:05 Tells Castile to not pull "it out"
0:13 Tells Castille again, don't move
0:21 Calls code 3 (Telling emergency vehicles coming to use lights and sirens)
0:22 Tells the other officer to remove the baby from the car
0:28 Castille sill alive, officer tells him not to move again
0:32 Calls again into the radio code3, medic needed.
He called for assistance 20 seconds after the shots were fired, while castille was still alive and moving and armed...
Fine.
The crux of the discussion was never about if Yanez did all he could to save Castille's life. That was just a side comment I made in the sense of how it looked to the jury (of the actual court, and the court of public opinion).
It was always about if Yanez was criminally negligent in the use of lethal force.
(06-21-2017 11:20 AM)Kaplony Wrote: Unless you are watching another video than the one linked in this thread then you do not have any insight because the video only shows the scene from the exterior rear of the vehicle, not inside and more specifically not where the shots hit.
(06-21-2017 11:20 AM)Kaplony Wrote: Since you obviously haven't gained an understanding before this time I'll type it slow so maybe you'll get it.
Just because you say so, does not make it true. Suffice to say, at this point you haven't convinced me.
Well you can continue to hold your ignorant, uninformed opinion. I know what I was trained on in my basic course and in every single in-service course I took on officer survival since and it's what I have been trying to tell you and have provided multiple video examples of all friggin' morning.
(06-21-2017 11:27 AM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote: That's a gross misrepresentation of what happened MPLS and you know it.
0:00 Shots fired at time
0:05 Tells Castile to not pull "it out"
0:13 Tells Castille again, don't move
0:21 Calls code 3 (Telling emergency vehicles coming to use lights and sirens)
0:22 Tells the other officer to remove the baby from the car
0:28 Castille sill alive, officer tells him not to move again
0:32 Calls again into the radio code3, medic needed.
He called for assistance 20 seconds after the shots were fired, while castille was still alive and moving and armed...
Fine.
The crux of the discussion was never about if Yanez did all he could to save Castille's life.
As you have been told several times. His first duty as a police officer, at that point, is to secure the scene so it's safe, not to look after the wounded.
(06-21-2017 11:56 AM)Kaplony Wrote: I know what I was trained on in my basic course and in every single in-service course I took on officer survival since and it's what I have been trying to tell you
Humans are stubborn. They believe what they've already decided they're going to believe, and no one is going to change their mind.
(06-21-2017 11:56 AM)Kaplony Wrote: and have provided multiple video examples of
The examples you provided are irrelevant to this exact circumstance. All that matters is what happened in this circumstance, for judging if Yanez was criminally negligent in the use of lethal force.
(06-21-2017 11:59 AM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote: As you have been told several times. His first duty as a police officer, at that point, is to secure the scene so it's safe, not to look after the wounded.
So now back to the discussion of if Yanez was criminally negligent in the use of lethal force ...
(06-21-2017 12:00 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote: The thing that he said which I really thought might be informative to you was that he himself was shocked by the number of times he fired.
For my part I think this discussion is going just fine, you have, unlike a lot of progressives, been willing to say maybe he was following the law.
The video helps me understand how it's possible for someone to be convinced that Yanez was not criminally negligent. I'm glad I watched it.
I'm still undecided if I feel he was. Regardless, the jury says he wasn't and he is no longer a police officer. Other than the inevitable civil suit that will be settled out of court, it is done.
(06-21-2017 12:00 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote: The thing that he said which I really thought might be informative to you was that he himself was shocked by the number of times he fired.
For my part I think this discussion is going just fine, you have, unlike a lot of progressives, been willing to say maybe he was following the law.
The video helps me understand how it's possible for someone to be convinced that Yanez was not criminally negligent. I'm glad I watched it.
I'm still undecided if I feel he was. Regardless, the jury says he wasn't and he is no longer a police officer. Other than the inevitable civil suit that will be settled out of court, it is done.
Well there could also be a federal civil rights suit, but this is one I don't think even Holder would have touched.
I think he made the one key mistake, not being clear with his directions "don't reach for it" instead of "put your hands up". But I don't think that rises to *criminal* negligence.
In a magical, perfect world -- I would've wanted Yanez to fire one shot, as non-lethal as possible given the circumstance, and then reassess the situation. I understand, much better now than before, that may just be way too much to ask ...
(This post was last modified: 06-21-2017 12:22 PM by MplsBison.)
In a magical, perfect world -- I would've wanted Yanez to fire one shot, as non-lethal as possible given the circumstance, and then reassess the situation. I understand, much better now than before, that may just be way too much to ask ...
In a perfect world I wish he had just said "let's see your hands" and not shot him at all
(06-21-2017 12:00 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote: The thing that he said which I really thought might be informative to you was that he himself was shocked by the number of times he fired.
For my part I think this discussion is going just fine, you have, unlike a lot of progressives, been willing to say maybe he was following the law.
The video helps me understand how it's possible for someone to be convinced that Yanez was not criminally negligent. I'm glad I watched it.
I'm still undecided if I feel he was. Regardless, the jury says he wasn't and he is no longer a police officer. Other than the inevitable civil suit that will be settled out of court, it is done.
Well there could also be a federal civil rights suit, but this is one I don't think even Holder would have touched.
I think he made the one key mistake, not being clear with his directions "don't reach for it" instead of "put your hands up". But I don't think that rises to *criminal* negligence.
There's all this talk about reaching for his wallet, but the officer asked for his registration and license and he gave him something when he first got to the car window.
(06-21-2017 12:26 PM)bullet Wrote: There's all this talk about reaching for his wallet, but the officer asked for his registration and license and he gave him something when he first got to the car window.
So you're saying that you wish it were the case that he was reaching for a gun, instead of a wallet?
(06-21-2017 12:00 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote: The thing that he said which I really thought might be informative to you was that he himself was shocked by the number of times he fired.
For my part I think this discussion is going just fine, you have, unlike a lot of progressives, been willing to say maybe he was following the law.
The video helps me understand how it's possible for someone to be convinced that Yanez was not criminally negligent. I'm glad I watched it.
I'm still undecided if I feel he was. Regardless, the jury says he wasn't and he is no longer a police officer. Other than the inevitable civil suit that will be settled out of court, it is done.
Well there could also be a federal civil rights suit, but this is one I don't think even Holder would have touched.
I think he made the one key mistake, not being clear with his directions "don't reach for it" instead of "put your hands up". But I don't think that rises to *criminal* negligence.
There's all this talk about reaching for his wallet, but the officer asked for his registration and license and he gave him something when he first got to the car window.
Yea I saw that too... But I had thought if he had already handed over the wallet then that would have come out.
(06-21-2017 12:26 PM)bullet Wrote: There's all this talk about reaching for his wallet, but the officer asked for his registration and license and he gave him something when he first got to the car window.
So you're saying that you wish it were the case that he was reaching for a gun, instead of a wallet?
That's terrible.
So you're saying you hope Yanez shot him in cold blood rather than self defense?
I read somewhere early on that he was going for the wallet because he had a concealed carry card in it. Not sure if accurate but would fit with the scenario.
(06-21-2017 09:09 AM)South Carolina Duke Wrote: Where was Castille's wife/"friend girl" ..huh? Oh yes, she was there filming her man bleed out live streaming on Social Media.
Shouldn't she be held to some standard as well?
She did nothing wrong.
She got out of the situation exactly what she put into it... nothing!
She was looking for a gotcha moment against the PO-PO and get her some 15 minutes of fame.
Moral of the story listen.. to commands and comply and these types will stay alive.
(06-21-2017 09:09 AM)South Carolina Duke Wrote: Where was Castille's wife/"friend girl" ..huh? Oh yes, she was there filming her man bleed out live streaming on Social Media.
Shouldn't she be held to some standard as well?
She did nothing wrong.
She got out of the situation exactly what she put into it... nothing!
She was looking for a gotcha moment against the PO-PO and get her some 15 minutes of fame.
Moral of the story listen.. to commands and comply and these types will stay alive.
