CCW holder killed reaching for ID.

[3point14]

I dunno, personally... I think that when an armed police officer who you've just informed about your gun starts loudly and repeatedly screaming "don't reach for it! don't pull it out!" and then even goes so far as to reach into your car and try to stop your hand from getting where it's going... it's pretty clear that he wants you to halt all hand movements and keep your hands where he can see them.

You'd think he might say that then? You know, being a trained professional and the one in charge of the situation. Concise, clear, accurate communication was what was required. I'd score that 0/3.

 

[Hlafordlaes]

... Mr. Castile being black was one of many factors which would put any officer, or any stranger on the street walking near him, a little bit more into the "weariness zone" than if these attributes hadn't been present. Each of the following things edged him deeper into that zone:

1. Male rather than female
2. Able bodied rather than crippled
3. Young rather than elderly
4. Normal height and body mass rather than super scrawny
5. Black rather than White or especially East Asian
6. Smelling like weed rather than not smelling like weed
7. In kind of a crappy car rather than a BMW or something
8. In normal clothing rather than a suit
9. Not wearing glasses

Damn, you actually went on record with that. And see it as normal. And post with a username proclaiming at least passing familiarity with skepticism.

 

[3point14]

Damn, you actually went on record with that. And see it as normal. And post with a username proclaiming at least passing familiarity with skepticism.

Half of those mean 'poor'.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

You'd think he might say that then? You know, being a trained professional and the one in charge of the situation. Concise, clear, accurate communication was what was required. I'd score that 0/3.

Well, if you stop your hand movements he will probably provide more clarity about what he wants you to do. Further instruction and communication will follow because the situation can calm down again. You can then make it clear that you weren't reaching for it, but rather your ID.

He can then nervously chuckle as he tells you "yeah, for future reference, Mr. Castile... not a good idea to go fishing around in your pocket area after you've just told an officer you have a firearm. That could've gone really badly. We're trained to react. Anyway... I appreciate you letting me know. I need to secure that weapon before we continue. Please step out of the car."

If, however, you continue your hand movements... he is going to feel like he has no time for elaborate communication and his instincts are going to kick in and he'll reasonably feel that shouting something like "don't reach for it!" (yes, even if you're not reaching for it) should be sufficient to impress upon you that you should stop moving your hands.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Well, if you stop your hand movements he will probably provide more clarity about what he wants you to do. Further instruction and communication will follow because the situation can calm down again. You can then make it clear that you weren't reaching for it, but rather your ID.

He can then nervously chuckle as he tells you "yeah, for future reference, Mr. Castile... not a good idea to go fishing around in your pocket area after you've just told an officer you have a firearm. That could've gone really badly. We're trained to react. Anyway... I appreciate you letting me know. I need to secure that weapon before we continue. Please step out of the car."

"Now I need to secure the weapon. Where is it?"

"Here, officer."

"I told you not to go for the weapon!"

Bang.



The officer was giving confused commands that Castile didn't know how to follow, then shot him because he thought he was doing something different to what he was told. He might just as easily decided to shoot him for refusing to follow the instruction to get out his ID if he was scared and incompetent enough.

Dave

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Damn, you actually went on record with that. And see it as normal. And post with a username proclaiming at least passing familiarity with skepticism.

Are you telling me that you don't think people view males as more potentially threatening than females, say in a dark alley scenario?

Or that the young and fit aren't perceived as more potentially threatening than the elderly and infirm?

The able bodied more so than someone in a wheelchair rolling toward you on a dark and desolate city street in the bad part of town?

C'mon.

Is the only one of those that you object to the racial one? Because that one is just as justified, if not more so, by crime statistics as the other ones in the list. It's very, very justified.

You say I'm signing off on it. Well, I don't know if that's how I'd characterize it.

Am I signing off on and approving of the fact that many men are going to be thinking sexual thoughts about an attractive young female they see? Even if she's a coworker, a subordinate, a student, whatever? Or that at the very least they're going to notice she is what she is, and probably think a bit differently and act a bit differently toward her than they would if she were a pot bellied, balding 55 year old male?

I mean, I don't know if I'm signing off on these things so much as I'm simply being realistic about them. But what are the last few decades if not one big war against noticing. One big war against acknowledging unpleasant or inconvenient realities.

 

[3point14]

Well, if you stop your hand movements he will probably provide more clarity about what he wants you to do.

Because the trained professional hasn't provided enough clarity in the first place? Top work by the LEO there.

Also, maybe the LEO should have said 'Sir, just stop moving' That would have worked.

It appears the uniformed officer who initiated the interaction was so scared he couldn't even say what he wanted to say. It's okay though, because the thin blue line that backs him up is happy if he said vaguely and imprecisely what he sort of wanted then shot the bloke for actually doing as he was told, not what the LEO though he was telling him.

Further instruction and communication will follow because the situation can calm down again. You can then make it clear that you weren't reaching for it, but rather your ID.

Or, you know, the LEO could have said what he actually wanted the innocent, soon to be shot dead man to do. Again, with the highlight that one of these two people is a professional doing the job he was trained to do, invested with the authority of the state (or county or whatever)

He can then nervously chuckle as he tells you "yeah, for future reference, Mr. Castile... not a good idea to go fishing around in your pocket area after you've just told an officer you have a firearm. That could've gone really badly. We're trained to react. Anyway... I appreciate you letting me know. I need to secure that weapon before we continue. Please step out of the car."

All the responsibility to be calm and communicate clearly falls on the civilian. I get it.

If, however, you continue your hand movements... he is going to feel like he has no time for elaborate communication and his instincts are going to kick in and he'll reasonably feel that shouting something like "don't reach for it!" (yes, even if you're not reaching for it) should be sufficient to impress upon you that you should stop moving your hands.

Elaborate communication? You think telling someone to stop doing something they are not doing is elaborate communication.


There's a world of difference between 'stop moving', which is what the LEO should have said and 'stop reaching for your gun' which is what he said. A man cannot stop doing something he has not started doing.


Maybe, if the same consequences accrued to policemen who ********** up like this as would apply to a civilian then they'd be taught to be better communicators under pressure because, you know, that's their job.

 

[Dr.Sid]

Castillo actually clearly said 'I'm NOT reaching for it' .. I can certainly see myself acting the same. Now if I seen the policeman aiming at me, I might freeze .. but the thing escalated from 'we're just talking' to 'now you're dead' so fast, Castillo just didn't switch into survival mode fast enough. Well at least now we know, with US police, 'fast enough' means 'police is in sigh' ..

 

[Dr. Keith]

If he had a legit CCW permit, he would have had some training too.

In my state it is pretty minimal. From what I've heard it focuses on not taking your gun into certain places and what sort of signs places have to use to warn you that your gun is not welcome. Oh, and the list of places that can't exclude you, even if they want to have a gun free area.

Not sure in other states.

 

[jimbob]

Not speaking for him, but aside from the danger of maniacal, panicked, trigger happy cops, it is advisable to stay in your car as much as is reasonably possible when pulled over on the shoulder. The driver's side is especially problematic.

Just to keep from getting hit by other motorists.

IN NC they passed a law a while back making it compulsory to move over to a farther lane away (where one exists) as soon as practicable whenever you see any sort of emergency vehicle (including cops) on the shoulder of the road.

You can get ticketed for failing to do so.

Cops, emergency personnel, and yes, drivers, were getting whacked too often by unobservant (or sometimes too eagerly observant) passing traffic.

I do that wherever I see any vehicle on the hard shoulder. Anomalously stopped cars in particular are likely to open doors

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Been watching every video about this case I can find (as long as it's from some kind of fairly prominent source) and in the process I've heard the audio many more times now.

I still stand by what I've said, but the more times I see the dashcam video, the lower my opinion of the officer and his actions sinks.

I still believe Castile was stupid not to halt all motion, but Yanez fired too fast. I do feel Castile's disclosure about having the gun should have bought him a bit more benefit of the doubt and I think Yanez screwed up.

Obviously, I can't know exactly what he saw Castile doing with his hands. The verdict is probably still correct, but if he'd been found guilty I wouldn't have been particularly surprised or upset on his behalf.

 

[Mumbles]

I do that wherever I see any vehicle on the hard shoulder. Anomalously stopped cars in particular are likely to open doors

Same - and I used to do it when cycling in the street in Boston, as well, since a suddenly flung open door is a potentially fatal threat.

 

[Mumbles]

Not where I live. The only thing the police told me when I got my CPL was to keep the permit on me when I was carrying a concealed pistol.

Castile did nothing to justify this treatment, but got shot for it anyway. The police officer's actions were complete BS. It does society no good to have these delicate flowers with badges and quick trigger fingers walking around among non-violent persons.

Much like the case of Trayvon Martin being murdered, the simple fact is that the black guy involved had no clear option on what they could have done to avoid being attacked - and no, I'm not at all interested in people who insist on peddling the old "black brute" myth where Martin was super-strong and spewing jive talk, or where Castile suddenly decided, after numerous stops, that this time he was going to murder a cop.

I mean that, if Castile not reached for his wallet, he could have ended up being beaten and jailed, if not shot, anyway. Meanwhile, all the cop had to do if he "felt threatened" was to ask Castile to put his hands on the steering wheel, and proceed from there. Much like Zimmerman made every decision that led to him shooting Martin because he was "afraid" of the guy he was stalking, it was the cop's decisions and actions that naturally led directly to the situation that he was so frightened by.

 

[Dave Rogers]

I still believe Castile was stupid not to halt all motion, but Yanez fired too fast. I do feel Castile's disclosure about having the gun should have bought him a bit more benefit of the doubt and I think Yanez screwed up.

Obviously, I can't know exactly what he saw Castile doing with his hands.

Most specifically, do we know that Castile actually carried on moving his hands, or did he in fact do exactly what he was told, stop moving his hands and get shot anyway?

Dave

 

[Dr.Sid]

Most specifically, do we know that Castile actually carried on moving his hands, or did he in fact do exactly what he was told, stop moving his hands and get shot anyway?

Dave

He was not told to stop moving .. he was told not to pull the gun out. And he responded he's not doing that .. but he clearly continued moving, doing something else .. thus in his mind he did obey order - he was not pulling the gun. He thought it's clear he's not doing it. The cop didn't think it's clear.

 

[Mumbles]

He was not told to stop moving .. he was told not to pull the gun out. And he responded he's not doing that .. but he clearly continued moving, doing something else .. thus in his mind he did obey order - he was not pulling the gun. He thought it's clear he's not doing it. The cop didn't think it's clear.

To fe fair, he was told to stop moving - after the cop shot at him 7 times, hitting him several times, and almost shooting the young girl that he claimed he was trying to protect.

So...Yeah, still a murderer.

 

[ponderingturtle]

If this is the extent of the information we're going to get on this particular incident, then here's my opinion:

The whole thing is nothing short of a tragedy that could have been prevented.
Could the officer have not freaked out and shot? Obviously, yes.
Could Mr. Castille have just quit moving avoided getting shot? Probably, yes.

But the officer is (supposed to be) the professional in this situation, not the driver or CCW holder. I think the determination of whether he is criminally negligent is a subjective one that a jury has answered. Obviously not to the liking of some, but in any case I dont see how this amounts to a murder. There was no intent on the officer's part to go out and kill a guy. He was just trying to do his job, and maybe on a better day it doesnt go down like that. Who knows?

But frankly, I don't see where race is particularly relevant in this discussion. This is not a Mark Furman type who is known to collect Nazi memorabilia some other racist sociopath. The guy is hispanic which kind of falls outside the accepted narrative, and was also quite clearly shaken, disturbed, who knows what else by the incident. Is it possible that Mr. Castille's being black put Mr. Yanez on edge? Sure it's possible. But it's not a fact you could prove.

Except that you know it really has been proven in experiments that police do shoot at lesser levels of threats for black people because of intrinsic biases.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Aaaand we're back to the civilian having to keep his cool because the trained, paid for it, LEO can't.

Police find black people with guns terrifying, that is why black people should know that the second amendment does not apply to them.

 

[alfaniner]

$3 milion settlement avoids wrongful death suit.

 

[quadraginta]

Anyone want a pool on how long it takes Officer Yanez to get hired on by a different police dept. somewhere else?