Cops kill yet another black guy for probably no reason

[BobTheDonkey]

"what was he doing in that neighborhood anyways?"

"well, maybe he was up to no good"

"probably had a criminal record"

So, when has anyone on this thread posted any of those comments?

Congrats, you're as biased as Ginger has been on this.

I don't know about anyone else, specifically, but I don't care about the driver's past - what he did, or didn't do, right in his life. All that I'm discussing here is what happened the night of the incident because that is all that matters.

It does not matter if he had a criminal past. It does not matter if he was on track to become Valedictorian of his class. It does not matter if he made it a point to spend his weekends helping old ladies cross the street. His past did not matter on the night of the incident.

What matters, and is worthy of discussion, is what happened that night. And what happened that night certainly appears to have been a kid got drunk and stupid and put the lives of Officers and other bystanders in danger and he was therefore shot. It is a ************* tragedy that he died because of one stupid night - do not belittle his life or the lives of the Officers involved because of your own prejudices.

 

[WildCat]

Why doesn't everyone just calm down and wait for the investigation, for Heaven's sake???

Why do you hate The Internet?

 

[Thunder]

So, when has anyone on this thread posted any of those comments?

Congrats, you're as biased as Ginger has been on this.

I don't know about anyone else, specifically, but I don't care about the driver's past - what he did, or didn't do, right in his life. All that I'm discussing here is what happened the night of the incident because that is all that matters.

do not belittle his life or the lives of the Officers involved because of your own prejudices.

Good thing the investigation is complete.

oh...wait.....riiiiiiiight.

and btw, I hold no prejudice against my second-cousin, who is a Captain in the NYPD.

 

[SonOfLaertes]

There was no gunfire, at least, not that I've seen in any news reports, (ETA) other than the shots fired by the Officers.

I do agree that the Officer who rapped on the driver's window was doing the correct thing (large brawl, clearing the scene) and was not racially profiling or attempting to start an altercation with the driver.

I never said there was gunfire originating from that vehicle. I am only saying that gangs use vehicles to pull up to crowds and carry out drive-by shootings regularly. The shooters can pull up quickly and get away quickly, with the added bonus of protection from retaliation provided by the car. A prudent, experienced cop will secure any vehicle in this scenario. A prudent, experienced cop will also assume that the occupants of the car are heavily armed. They usually are. Not this time, I suppose, but the odds say armed.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I never said there was gunfire originating from that vehicle. I am only saying that gangs use vehicles to pull up to crowds and carry out drive-by shootings regularly. The shooters can pull up quickly and get away quickly, with the added bonus of protection from retaliation provided by the car. A prudent, experienced cop will secure any vehicle in this scenario. A prudent, experienced cop will also assume that the occupants of the car are heavily armed. They usually are. Not this time, I suppose, but the odds say armed.

Oh, I'm in complete agreement with you on this. Just wanted to clarify for everyone that there were no reports of gunfire other than those of the Officers.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Good thing the investigation is complete.

oh...wait.....riiiiiiiight.

and btw, I hold no prejudice against my second-cousin, who is a Captain in the NYPD.

So then you have evidence to back up your assertions regarding your previous post?

 

[Thunder]

So then you have evidence to back up your assertions regarding your previous post?

assertions?

I made assertions?

I know of no such thing.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

assertions?

I made assertions?

I know of no such thing.

So then it was an attempt to derail?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Two points that have repeatedly been missed here.

Drawing a conclusion based on inadequate information is fine as long as you recognize you are drawing a TENTATIVE conclusion. It is often useful to discuss tentative conclusions. It is a straw man to attack a tentative conclusion on the basis one would judge a final or more certain conclusion.

And the point that has been run into the ground and still some people don't get: When two sides give a different version of events, you cannot read the participants' minds. Therefore the only way to draw a tentative conclusion about which version of events is more likely true and which isn't, is to apply ASSUMPTIONS which are beyond the evidence in front of you.

Did the kid hit the gas and run into the cops? Or did the cops overreact and exaggerate the story to explain their mistake? No evidence besides contradicting statements in the first few news reports answered which version was true. Regardless of which version you think more likely, you cannot draw that conclusion without some preexisting beliefs about either cops or young males or both. I'd say young black males but that would be too speculative even if I suspect it is the case.

If someone applies a bias but knows that is occurring, can articulate the reasons for applying the bias, that is reasonable. If someone cannot see the bias they have applied to their conclusion, that is not a good thing.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Two points that have repeatedly been missed here.

Drawing a conclusion based on inadequate information is fine as long as you recognize you are drawing a TENTATIVE conclusion. It is often useful to discuss tentative conclusions. It is a straw man to attack a tentative conclusion on the basis one would judge a final or more certain conclusion.

And the point that has been run into the ground and still some people don't get: When two sides give a different version of events, you cannot read the participants' minds. Therefore the only way to draw a tentative conclusion about which version of events is more likely true and which isn't, is to apply ASSUMPTIONS which are beyond the evidence in front of you.

Did the kid hit the gas and run into the cops? Or did the cops overreact and exaggerate the story to explain their mistake? No evidence besides contradicting statements in the first few news reports answered which version was true. Regardless of which version you think more likely, you cannot draw that conclusion without some preexisting beliefs about either cops or young males or both. I'd say young black males but that would be too speculative even if I suspect it is the case.

If someone applies a bias but knows that is occurring, can articulate the reasons for applying the bias, that is reasonable. If someone cannot see the bias they have applied to their conclusion, that is not a good thing.

So, you're attempting to make the claim that concluding that multiple Officers were injured by the driver's vehicle is an invalid conclusion?

 

[Belz...]

Two points that have repeatedly been missed here.

Drawing a conclusion based on inadequate information is fine as long as you recognize you are drawing a TENTATIVE conclusion

So claiming that something is impossible, for instance, should be considered tentative ?

 

[brenn]

And the point that has been run into the ground and still some people don't get: When two sides give a different version of events, you cannot read the participants' minds. Therefore the only way to draw a tentative conclusion about which version of events is more likely true and which isn't, is to apply ASSUMPTIONS which are beyond the evidence in front of you.

Did the kid hit the gas and run into the cops? Or did the cops overreact and exaggerate the story to explain their mistake?

Well, a couple of things lean me toward the kid being at fault. First (from having been a police oficer, trained them, etc.), the police deal with this stuff daily, so a street disturbance on this scale isn't very exciting to them and nobody is more aware of the trouble they can get into by overreacting than the police.

But, from the actual evidence, something is conspicuous by its absence: while the news stories now say, in some, that he actually struck 2 cops, even the friend who was in the car and also got shot in the arm (so may be less than sympathetic to the cops) just makes contrary statements about the driver's "reason" for moving the car, but never claims he didn't hit the 1 or 2 cops (depending on newspaper). Nothing about what happened when he moved it or hwo the kid wiht the .13 BAC went about moving it.

I'm thinking that when the family and friends have already hired a lawyer, made public statements, contacted the White House (one story at least), etc., they would have at least made the claim that he didn't really hit the cops, if it didn't happen.

 

[brenn]

A little more about the BAC. At this point, they seem to be on the $$$ train and the lawyer is hoping for DOJ to get involved because that simultaneously gets him more publicity and helps him get money with less work/investment. A good break in a case like this could literally make a plaintiff's lawyer rich, both from this case and future cases he gets as a result.

Lawyer blasts leak of victim’s alcohol level
Calls for fed probe into cops’ killing

***
“I’m not going to let police character assassinate this man in the eleventh hour,’’ attorney Michael Sussman told the Herald.

***
Henry died on Sunday after being shot by police outside Finnegan’s Grill in Thornwood, N.Y. There are conflicting stories about what led to the shooting. Police said cops opened fire after Henry’s vehicle struck two officers. The family of Brandon Cox, 20, of Easton, who was also in the car, said Henry was trying to move out of a fire lane.
***
Sussman said last night the anonymous report — carried by The Associated Press — that stated Henry had a blood alcohol level of 0.13 shows police have “no integrity.” The legal limit for driving in New York is 0.08.

“This was not a DWI stop. Everybody knows Danroy was waiting for friends,” said Sussman, who added the parents deserve to see any autopsy results first before they are “leaked” to the press.

 

[Architect]

Why do you hate The Internet?

This conversation is just the 21st century equivalent of a bunch of old fishwives........

 

[eeyore1954]

"what was he doing in that neighborhood anyways?"

"well, maybe he was up to no good"

"probably had a criminal record"

Where did this come from?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So, you're attempting to make the claim that concluding that multiple Officers were injured by the driver's vehicle is an invalid conclusion?

Depends. Is there any corroborating evidence like an ED report or is it just cops covering their actions?


We are at a point here that if the kid was drunk, that clearly affects one's judgement. If drunk, you might think you can get away for cops on foot. If the evidence eventually supports that version, so be it.

What has been bothering about this thread is, 1) since I think cops lie and cover for each other, I was attacked for that position alone, and 2) for whatever reason, some people seem to think my belief cops lie and not all kids are lawbreakers was biased, but their conclusions cops aren't likely to lie and most kids are bad was not biased.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So claiming that something is impossible, for instance, should be considered tentative ?

You'll have to show me where I said something was impossible if I'm supposed to comment on this.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Depends. Is there any corroborating evidence like an ED report or is it just cops covering their actions?


We are at a point here that if the kid was drunk, that clearly affects one's judgement. If drunk, you might think you can get away for cops on foot. If the evidence eventually supports that version, so be it.

What has been bothering about this thread is, 1) since I think cops lie and cover for each other, I was attacked for that position alone, and 2) for whatever reason, some people seem to think my belief cops lie and not all kids are lawbreakers was biased, but their conclusions cops aren't likely to lie and most kids are bad was not biased.

Where, exactly, did I say the kid was "bad"? I didn't. I have stated that the kid did something "stupid", but never, ever have I posted that I think this kid was a bad kid. You're strawmanning me, again, Ginger.

Give me a reason that in this incident we should trust the kid more than the officers (and by reason, I mean evidence, not just your assertion that there are bad cops out there... )

 

[Belz...]

You'll have to show me where I said something was impossible if I'm supposed to comment on this.

Here ya go:

Yeah, like explaining how this scenario is even possible, let alone likely: How can being hit by a car's mirror result in one ending up on the hood? It's not physically possible with a car moving forward.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Here ya go:

Here's a video showing how it can happen. Of course, this driver, well, you know, actually stopped, so the guy came off the hood. However, it's pretty clear that the front of the car didn't hit the guy.