• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Another cop murders a suspect

CynicalSkeptic said:
Did you watch the video? Scuffle is not the word I would use.

Cop asks him to take his seat belt off and opens the door (he remained calm in professional), perp pulls the door closed, puts the key in the ignition and puts the car in drive.

Cop pulls out his gun and shoots the fleeing suspect.
Click to expand...

That is accurate and doesn't paint a very good picture for the cop.

As soon as the cop saw that the guy was going to try to run he pulls his gun and shoots. The whole point of cameras is that you can later arrest the runner without having to kill anyone because you have them on film. Or maybe the cameras really are there only to catch cops behaving badly.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Or maybe the cameras really are there only to catch cops behaving badly.
Click to expand...


It can also exonerate cops in the case of someone alleging excessive force or similar complaints. So such cameras can in fact protect both police (from malicious, false complaints) and the public (by showing when officers act improperly).
 
No front plate, but cop pulled him over from behind. Cop would have called in the rear plate, and might have gotten an ID of the owner, maybe a known violent criminal? So he shot a fleeing "criminal" who was evading ultimate arrest?

That is about the best alternate interpretation I can see. CT starts here: Prosecutor arrests him, calling it murder, to avoid another Ferguson, a Baltimore redux. Will we see another Grand Jury? But this time we have film of the dead guy slamming the car door and startng to escape. Mayb e?
 
CynicalSkeptic said:
...

Cop pulls out his gun and shoots the fleeing suspect.
Click to expand...
Without even time for the guy to see the gun and change his mind. If the cop said, stop or I'll shoot, maybe the guy would have stopped and all the cop would have had to do was lie about why he pulled his gun instead of facing murder charges.
 
Of course part of the problem is the circularity of it. There's something to be said for a cop being upset when a person behaves badly and tries to flee from a simple traffic stop, or at least there used to be. Unfortunately, every time this happens it becomes more and more reasonable for a person to fear for his life when a cop stops him, and to behave badly out of fear and panic. The prospect of murder is dire, and threatening, aggressive behavior hardly allays it.

I was under the impression that it's usual for a driver to be asked to remain in the car for a routine traffic stop. It does not seem too far fetched to wonder if the driver was afraid for his life when the cop opened the door. It would be a lot easier to argue that the driver's life was not in danger if he had not been killed, I think.
 
Trebuchet said:
Slightly off-topic: The officer was with the University of Cleveland Police. Why the **** do we have Campus Charlies with guns?
Click to expand...
And why would they patrol the neighborhood beyond campus?

I wonder if there was even any student housing there?
 
casebro said:
No front plate, but cop pulled him over from behind. Cop would have called in the rear plate, and might have gotten an ID of the owner, maybe a known violent criminal? So he shot a fleeing "criminal" who was evading ultimate arrest?

That is about the best alternate interpretation I can see. CT starts here: Prosecutor arrests him, calling it murder, to avoid another Ferguson, a Baltimore redux. Will we see another Grand Jury? But this time we have film of the dead guy slamming the car door and startng to escape. Mayb e?
Click to expand...
If that was the case, 1) we'd know by now, and 2) then he didn't handle the stop correctly from the beginning.

Somewhere the cop did see the missing plate. The plate was in the glove box and you don't see the cop walk in front of the car to know that. He probably saw the front of the car as it turned a corner.
 
Dr. Keith said:
That is accurate and doesn't paint a very good picture for the cop.

As soon as the cop saw that the guy was going to try to run he pulls his gun and shoots. The whole point of cameras is that you can later arrest the runner without having to kill anyone because you have them on film. Or maybe the cameras really are there only to catch cops behaving badly.
Click to expand...
They didn't even need a camera to catch this particular criminal. The murderer had a good look at the "suspect" and had already run the plate number (which clearly didn't come back with any important results or the encounter would have gone differently from the start). The suspect flees, he calls it in, perhaps safely pursues while reporting progress, etc.
 
pantsorama said:
Not even that. He started the car after the cop pulled his gun. He was trying to get the hell away from there to save his life.

So where is the discipline for the other cops who lied for him. Isn't that accessory after the fact?
Click to expand...
If that happened, they should absolutely be fired then prosecuted for filing false reports.
 
I think the cops that backed the murderer up made statements they can get away with such as seeing scuff marks on the murderer's shoes or pants.
 
casebro said:
No front plate, but cop pulled him over from behind. Cop would have called in the rear plate, and might have gotten an ID of the owner, maybe a known violent criminal? So he shot a fleeing "criminal" who was evading ultimate arrest?

That is about the best alternate interpretation I can see. CT starts here: Prosecutor arrests him, calling it murder, to avoid another Ferguson, a Baltimore redux. Will we see another Grand Jury? But this time we have film of the dead guy slamming the car door and startng to escape. Mayb e?
Click to expand...

He was indicted by a grand jury. This one's going to court unless he pleads guilty before trial.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/samuel-...r-traffic-stop-murder-charges-body-cam-video/
 
CynicalSkeptic said:
Did you watch the video? Scuffle is not the word I would use.

Cop asks him to take his seat belt off and opens the door (he remained calm in professional), perp pulls the door closed, puts the key in the ignition and puts the car in drive.

Cop pulls out his gun and shoots the about to flee, but still stationary, fleeing suspect.
Click to expand...

Fixed
 
Trebuchet said:
Slightly off-topic: The officer was with the University of Cleveland Police. Why the **** do we have Campus Charlies with guns?
Click to expand...

Cincinnati, not Cleveland.

And the bottle of gin appeared to have been opened. no idea if any had been consumed, but if I remember right(I'm an Ohio native) liquor bottles had a tax stamp on the lid that was torn when you opened the bottle. (or is that a US thing and not a state thing?)
 
Last edited:
casebro said:
No front plate, but cop pulled him over from behind.
Click to expand...

You don't know what happened prior to this. DeBose could have been coming directly at the cop and then turned onto another street. Cop sees lack of plate and turns onto same street so that now he's behind him.

Steve S
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I watched a good proportion of the trial. I understand DNA evidence. He was guilty. The jury was snookered by the defense team tap dance.

Click to expand...

More that Marcia Clarke and Christopher Darden thought they had a slam dunk and acted like they were going to be stars (media stars). They were stars, just not in the way they hoped.
 
CynicalSkeptic said:
Did you watch the video? Scuffle is not the word I would use.

Cop asks him to take his seat belt off and opens the door (he remained calm in professional), perp pulls the door closed, puts the key in the ignition and puts the car in drive.

Cop pulls out his gun and shoots the fleeing suspect.
Click to expand...

This. However, I'll go with manslaughter, there is no pre-meditated intent here to make it murder. He fires when the driver starts the car and put it in gear. Watch the video closely. DeBose is putting his right hand to the key at the same time as he pulls the door closed with his left. The car then starts, and the reaction begins, followed by the shot. The gun is not out when the car is started, but the officer well and truly over reacts by drawing and shooting. I can understand that having a car drive off on you when you are right there is dangerous, but going to a gun, no, too much. He should have backed off, headed back to his car and chased the guy down.

Having said that, the driver isn't totally innocent. He was in the process of running for no apparent reason. If he was suspended, so what? It's a ticket, big deal, running isn't worth your life, or someone else's.

This is, IMO, another result of the US's gun culture. USAers go for their guns far too fast, and not just the cops, the public do it too.

However having said that, it's still not reasonable to fear for your life when pulled over. These incidents are a fraction of a percentage compared to the number of interactions and traffic stops that occur peacefully and without incident every single day, even between White Cops and Black drivers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom