Cops kill yet another black guy for probably no reason

[Modified]

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.

If you single-frame through that, it's pretty clear that the front of the car hit the guy.

 

[Modified]

The upright position might fool you into thinking he's still walking here, but those are his legs draped over the hood. He's already been hit by the front of the car and had his legs knocked out from under him.

 

[Uncayimmy]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_117824cc83baf1f6b1.jpg[/qimg]
The upright position might fool you into thinking he's still walking here, but those are his legs draped over the hood. He's already been hit by the front of the car and had his legs knocked out from under him.

This hi-res version confirms your analysis:

 

[Modified]

I was hit quite similarly twenty years ago - bumper to the ankle, head smashing into but not through the windshield - except I was on a bike and my forward momentum carried me to the median (grass, thankfully). I also did 1 1/4 turns as opposed to this guy's 3/4 turn.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Here ya go:

I stand by that statement. It speaks to a physical impossibility, not some facts in the case. The facts in the case are tentative conclusions. And if you kept reading, I think most people are saying the cop was in front of the vehicle and the statement that anyone ended up on the hood by being hit by the side mirror was an erroneous description of events.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

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.

Hit by the mirror? You are simply taking a different case and trying to make it fit. I don't know where on the car the guy is first hit, but it doesn't appear to be the side mirror.

 

[NYCEMT86]

I stand by that statement. It speaks to a physical impossibility, not some facts in the case. The facts in the case are tentative conclusions. And if you kept reading, I think most people are saying the cop was in front of the vehicle and the statement that anyone ended up on the hood by being hit by the side mirror was an erroneous description of events.

According to the press conference given by the Mount Pleasant Police Chief, there is some confusion as to whether Officer Hess (the officer on the hood) was struck first by the vehicle and a second Officer was injured while helping Officer Hess or if the second Officer was struck first by the car mirror and Officer Hess was then struck and ended up on the hood.

I tried to comb through all the newspaper articles to find a better description of what may have occurred, but nearly all articles are going with

Henry drove off after a police officer tapped on his window. He then struck Hess, a Pleasantville officer, who landed on the hood and fired into the car with Beckley, a Mount Pleasant officer, as Henry drove toward him, authorities said. The car stopped after crashing into a cruiser.

or

Officers were breaking up fights, police said, when "a vehicle parked in the fire lane" accelerated. A police officer tried to stop the vehicle, which Henry was driving, but its mirror struck the officer and the officer "ended up on the hood," said police.

So it's hard to say exactly what unfolded until the investigation is completed and the information is released to the public.

 

[Belz...]

I stand by that statement. It speaks to a physical impossibility, not some facts in the case.

Physical impossibility. Sure thing, Ginger.

 

[sgtbaker]

Hit by the mirror? You are simply taking a different case and trying to make it fit. I don't know where on the car the guy is first hit, but it doesn't appear to be the side mirror.

Yes because taking past situations and using them to apply probability to current situations that have nothing to do with those past situations would be bad, right?

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.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Yes because taking past situations and using them to apply probability to current situations that have nothing to do with those past situations would be bad, right?

Exactly. Shame on me for stumbling across a video that at first glance seemed to demonstrate what I described. What's worse is that I found a higher resolution version and admitted that my analysis of that video was wrong. How decidedly unskeptical of me!

Did you see where somebody gave me grief for actually checking my body position with my hip against the driver's side mirror on both of our cars? Shame on me! What kind of skeptic does that? That same person accused of me of lying when I said as teens we tried to hit each other with our cars, yet when I produced videos of teens today doing the same thing, not a peep.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

When someone shows how getting hit by the side mirror on a car moving forward results in a person being thrown onto the car hood rather than being hit, knocked down, or caught and dragged beside the car, lets see it. Otherwise acting all incredulous that I said it wasn't physically possible is just grandstanding.

Remember, even in this case it doesn't appear to have been the cops' story. It was something likely mis-reported.

 

[Uncayimmy]

When someone shows how getting hit by the side mirror on a car moving forward results in a person being thrown onto the car hood rather than being hit, knocked down, or caught and dragged beside the car, lets see it. Otherwise acting all incredulous that I said it wasn't physically possible is just grandstanding.

Grandstanding? Meaning to conduct oneself or perform showily or ostentatiously in an attempt to impress onlookers? I don't see that. What I saw was you insisting that the cops were lying based on this story because you were unable to imagine how one could be struck by a mirror and "end up" on the hood of the car. Nobody said that the mirror threw him onto the hood. We covered this already.

Remember, even in this case it doesn't appear to have been the cops' story. It was something likely mis-reported.

Yep, it's a moot point now.

 

[brenn]

It seems to me that most of this thread is, as NYCEMT86 pointed out, is probably arguing about something that was just misstated by the press. That's the bad thing about trying to sort these incidents out from press reports - I've been involved in a lot of things that were on TV and in the papers and the reports range from "wrong" to so completely incorrect I can't even recognize them as the same event.

 

[Belz...]

When someone shows how getting hit by the side mirror on a car moving forward results in a person being thrown onto the car hood rather than being hit, knocked down, or caught and dragged beside the car, lets see it.

I thought we did a few posts ago...

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Update. From the Boston Globe:

The finding of "no true bill" indicates that the grand jury found no criminal wrongdoing by police who fatally shot Henry during the early morning hours of Oct. 17 outside a bar at a shopping center in Mount Pleasant, about 30 miles north of New York City.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2011/02/no_indictments.html

Seems the grand jury didn't agree with the OP of this thread.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Update. From the Boston Globe:



http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2011/02/no_indictments.html

Seems the grand jury didn't agree with the OP of this thread.

Thanks for digging up this thread. I read the Judge's verdict in yesterday's paper and then promptly forgot to find this thread to update it...

But don't worry, the "yeah, well, the Judge is just covering for the murdering Cops" will start shortly.

 

[bigred]

While this is a horrible incident... I do think you're inserting race where it may not apply.

RACIST!!

If a cop shoots a black guy, he's a racist! All the blacks in jail? A nation-wise racist conspiracy!!

(Absurd as that all is, you'd be amazed how many people actually believe that, or something similar)

Update. From the Boston Globe:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2011/02/no_indictments.html

Seems the grand jury didn't agree with the OP of this thread.

That's because they're racists. Probably all belong to the KKK. Duh.

KNEEL before the mighty race card you bastages! On your knees!

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Thanks for digging up this thread. I read the Judge's verdict in yesterday's paper and then promptly forgot to find this thread to update it...

But don't worry, the "yeah, well, the Judge is just covering for the murdering Cops" will start shortly.

Actually, I think it will be the "yeah, well the Feds are still investigating, so it's not over yet" crowd.

I take it you are in the Boston area or NY State?

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Actually, I think it will be the "yeah, well the Feds are still investigating, so it's not over yet" crowd.

I take it you are in the Boston area or NY State?

Yeah, I'm in NY. About an hour away from Mt Pleasant. Actually drive through the area on a pretty regular basis.

 

[slingblade]

KNEEL before the mighty race card you bastages! On your knees!

So, is this your new personal meme?