Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Some More Cops Who Need to Be Fired


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

one day we'll get prosecutors who are actually attempting to win these cases. 

 

No we wont. What in the world makes you think there is ever going to be a fair shake at this? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Llevron said:

 

No we wont. What in the world makes you think there is ever going to be a fair shake at this? 

 

Once Sessions is no longer running the DoJ, they will eventually start paying attention to prosecutorial misconduct and collusion. But the public needs to start exposing it, so far we've only been able to expose police misconduct due to cellphone videos. The DoJ need to take notice of high profile cases like this and shutdown the BS when a prosecutor, like Moseley in the Freddie Gray case, is making mistakes so obvious and ridiculous it gives pause. 

 

And yeah, a fair shake isn't coming anytime soon. My "one day" was intended to mean within this decade. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

Funny, how prosecutors who work so closely with police keep going for charges we've seen multiple times won't stick. 

Prosecutors are in a bad spot also.  The video here is damning and people are not interested in justice, they want flesh.  If the prosecutor goes for Man 2, he is in cahoots with the cops.  Plus he is in over his head already against an FOP lawyer that defends cops for a living and rarely, if ever, loses.

Edited by TimmySmith
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

The window was up. There are photos that show it was up. 

 

Furthermore, people keep talking about PCP with this case. They found it in the car, I think it is high time we stopped giving police the benefit of the doubt when it comes to evidence found in cars. They can plant evidence, and they do.Especially in Tulsa, where they've already been caught doing just that in the past. http://www.newson6.com/story/14848917/former-officers-testify-against-tulsa-police

 

The real question is whether there was PCP in his system. So far, I've seen nothing that confirms that. Regardless, he didn't need to be shot dead and maybe one day we'll get prosecutors who are actually attempting to win these cases. 

 

In this case I think its unreasonable to claim they planted evidence. Even bringing that up tells me maybe you're too biased to be objective on this incident. 

 

e.g.

 

Its ridiculous to claim they planted PCP on a guy who's acting like he's on PCP without anything to back it up. 

 

Now how do I know he is on PCP? Is that a fact? No, of course its not a fact based on my opinion of of a helicopter view.  However, if I suspected that this guy was on something serious, based only on his actions before any information about PCP was released, then there's at least 1 thing that supports him being on PCP. And the  cops actually finding PCP in his car. 

 

While this doesn't mean the shooting was justified in any way or really change what happened in that moment the officer pulled the trigger; it sure as hell is important to understanding what happened. 

 

 

Question, based on your opinion, does that look like a stalled motorist or some dude on PCP?

 

Look at where he left his car. No one would EVER leave their car halfway blocking both lanes including oncoming traffic. Never. Even if your car exploded you'd try and get it to the shoulder, or at least only blocking one lane. Again, does that mean his car didn't stall or break down, or somehow he got stuck there? No of course not. 

 

But once again, in my life, when have I ever seen someone leave a car like that? Seemingly running in the middle of the road? That is behavoir exclusively for people very very ****faced drunk or on drugs. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

The window was up. There are photos that show it was up. 

 

Furthermore, people keep talking about PCP with this case. They found it in the car, I think it is high time we stopped giving police the benefit of the doubt when it comes to evidence found in cars. They can plant evidence, and they do.Especially in Tulsa, where they've already been caught doing just that in the past. http://www.newson6.com/story/14848917/former-officers-testify-against-tulsa-police

 

The real question is whether there was PCP in his system. So far, I've seen nothing that confirms that. Regardless, he didn't need to be shot dead and maybe one day we'll get prosecutors who are actually attempting to win these cases. 

 

 

do you have a link to the photos? the ones i found werent great.

 

according to wiki, he had a history of drug abuse, and the autopsy showed pcp and tcp in his system. 

 

even if he was high as a kite, if the window was open and he was reaching into the car, then maybe its at least understandable (i read that shelby, the cop, said she was trained that 'if a suspect reaches into the car, you make sure they dont get what theyre reaching for' or something to that effect) that the cop shot him. one could argue for use of a taser in that situation. still, then you'd get an argument for the ineffectiveness of a taser on a suspect high on pcp or tcp, and police apparently trained to recognize suspects who may be high on such drugs. 

 

if the window was closed, i think it makes for a worse case for justified shooting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Mooka said:

 

In this case I think its unreasonable to claim they planted evidence. Even bringing that up tells me maybe you're too biased to be objective on this incident. 

 

 

 I'm too biased to be objective? For bringing up the possibility that the dead victim may not have been on PCP, since they haven't said they found it in his system?  And that finding it in his car, when that department has been confirmed to plant evidence in the past is somehow unreasonable? Wow, ok. Who's the biased person here? 

17 minutes ago, grego said:

 

 

do you have a link to the photos? the ones i found werent great.

 

according to wiki, he had a history of drug abuse, and the autopsy showed pcp and tcp in his system

 

even if he was high as a kite, if the window was open and he was reaching into the car, then maybe its at least understandable (i read that shelby, the cop, said she was trained that 'if a suspect reaches into the car, you make sure they dont get what theyre reaching for' or something to that effect) that the cop shot him. one could argue for use of a taser in that situation. still, then you'd get an argument for the ineffectiveness of a taser on a suspect high on pcp or tcp, and police apparently trained to recognize suspects who may be high on such drugs. 

 

if the window was closed, i think it makes for a worse case for justified shooting.

 

The bolded is what I was not able to find. Do you have a link for that? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

Once Sessions is no longer running the DoJ, they will eventually start paying attention to prosecutorial misconduct and collusion.

 

i dont know about that. this kind of thing has been happening forever. why wasnt anyone paying attention under holder?

1 minute ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

 I'm too biased to be objective? For bringing up the possibility that the dead victim may not have been on PCP, since they haven't said they found it in his system?  And that finding it in his car, when that department has been confirmed to plant evidence in the past is somehow unreasonable? Wow, ok. Who's the biased person here? 

 

 

i think hes saying that because if you google 'terrence crutcher pcp', the toxicology results are all over the place. ;)

 

but, yes, cops can and do plant evidence, no doubt. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

 I'm too biased to be objective? For bringing up the possibility that the dead victim may not have been on PCP, since they haven't said they found it in his system?  And that finding it in his car, when that department has been confirmed to plant evidence in the past is somehow unreasonable? Wow, ok. Who's the biased person here? 

 

I'm pretty sure, without looking, that this is not a disputed fact. And I'm assuming, unless I'm missing something, that yes, this guy had PCP in his system. Is there something I'm missing where it wasn't concluded that he had PCP in his system?

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-tulsa-police-shooting-terence-crutcher-pcp-20161012-story.html

 

 

What I was trying to explain to you, which maybe you're not getting, is that you can tell he is on PCP, based on his actions. That appears like a man on PCP to me so much as to I actually singled out PCP, a relatively uncommon, out-dated drug that I have very little experience dealing with based on a helicopter video.

 

And I thought this was common knowledge at this point that he was on PCP, which is why I think its a little weird you're still going on about this planting of evidence. Unless I'm missing something about a faulty autopsy or something. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mooka said:

 

I'm pretty sure, without looking, that this is not a disputed fact. And I'm assuming, unless I'm missing something, that yes, this guy had PCP in his system. Is there something I'm missing where it wasn't concluded that he had PCP in his system?

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-tulsa-police-shooting-terence-crutcher-pcp-20161012-story.html

 

 

What I was trying to explain to you, which maybe you're not getting, is that you can tell he is on PCP, based on his actions. That appears like a man on PCP to me so much as to I actually singled out PCP, a relatively uncommon, out-dated drug that I have very little experience dealing with based on a helicopter video.

 

And I thought this was common knowledge at this point that he was on PCP, which is why I think its a little weird you're still going on about this planting of evidence. Unless I'm missing something about a faulty autopsy or something. 

 

Ok. It's not weird, because nothing I'd seen until now showed he was on PCP. Until I saw it, and based on their history, I was not....and usually will not, take a PD's word for it when they've proven they will lie their ass off. But yes, he had PCP in his system. The window was still up, and it's still not a justification for shooting him. Despite the need for those to vilify the victim as much as possible. Everyone is who is tripping off a drug, or mentally ill, doesn't need to be shot dead by police. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, grego said:

 

i dont know about that. this kind of thing has been happening forever. why wasnt anyone paying attention under holder?

 

Why wasn't anyone paying attention decades ago? Because like police misconduct, this country has believed the narrative that prosecutors are always trying to win their case. For many people, it wasn't until cellphone videos began exposing police brutality that they stopped believing PoC were just making excuses or lying. It makes sense, that prosecutors have avoided attention considering their job isn't easily recorded. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mooka said:

Its also very clear, even when this story came out and it was phrased as a cop shooting a stalled motorist with his hands up; that this wasn't just someone with PCP in his system or someone who they found PCP in his car or on his body: This dude was tripping balls. Completely whacked out. I could tell that way before they even said anything about PCP.

 

I didn't know that being high warranted instant execution. I was under the impression one might have to physically attack a police officer to warrant getting shot and killed. I'm sick to death of pathetic, frightened, trigger-happy cops getting away with killing people. There's no ****ing accountability for it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

The window was up. There are photos that show it was up. 

 

 

Looks like to me the windows are down just like the sunroof is open.

 

To me whether the window was up or down is kind of important to say the least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the sunroof is open, I don't know anyone can look at those pictures and definitely say the windows were down. 

 

Attorney Benjamin Crump, center, one of the attorneys for Crutcher's family, says that Terence Crutcher's hands were up as he speaks during a news conference about the shooting death of Crutcher, Sept. 20, 2016 in Tulsa, Okla.

 

Although I haven't seen it. The family's lawyer said they've had the video enhanced and can tell there was blood on the driver side window. But I'm sure much better photos of evidence like that should've been taken, and would've been used in the trial. There has to be better photos than just still shots from the helicopter. 

Edited by Gamebreaker
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gamebreaker said:

I see the sunroof is open, I don't know anyone can look at those pictures and definitely say the windows were down. 

 

 

 

So how can you look at those very same pictures and definitely say the window is up ?

Edited by Spearfeather
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Spearfeather said:

 

So how can you look at those very same pictures and definitely say the window is up ?

 

I didn't say without a doubt the windows are absolutely up. I said it looks like it was up. Can we both agree that still shots from the helicopter really suck? Why aren't their photos of the crime scene? That has to exist somewhere. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

I didn't say without a doubt the windows are absolutely up.(   The window was still up, - Gamebreaker ) I said it looks like it was up. Can we both agree that still shots from the helicopter really suck? Why aren't their photos of the crime scene? That has to exist somewhere. 

 

Can we agree in the photos I posted, that the driver side window has the same " look " as the sunroof ( which you agree " looks open " ) but that the windshield has more of an opaque look to it ?

 

To me the sunroof and the windows look open.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Spearfeather said:

 

Can we agree in the photos I posted, that the driver side window has the same " look " as the sunroof ( which you agree " looks open " ) but that the windshield has more of an opaque look to it ?

 

To me the sunroof and the windows look open.

 

No, the sunroof and window don't have the same look at all to me. Sorry. That sunroof should be tinted, which means being able to see directly into the vehicle and clearly see the passenger seat tells me it's open. The front side windows don't come tinted from the manufacturer. No way they could have the same look unless the victim tinted the windows on his own. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

Why wasn't anyone paying attention decades ago? Because like police misconduct, this country has believed the narrative that prosecutors are always trying to win their case. For many people, it wasn't until cellphone videos began exposing police brutality that they stopped believing PoC were just making excuses or lying. It makes sense, that prosecutors have avoided attention considering their job isn't easily recorded. 

 

Right, but you said this stuff will stop once Sessions is out if office. Its been happening since before he came along. Why do you believe it will happen when he's gone? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't get why the window being up or down hasn't been investigated further or definitively answered? It seems like a fairly important detail to me.

 

I know the family was questioning it early on, and if I'm his attorney, I'm trying to disprove that.  

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/09/20/terence-crutcher-shot-hands-heres-definitive-proof/amp/

 

This site has some pics, but they aren't any better than any others. It does look like the window could have been down a few inches and it also looks like he was reaching into the car through it. 

 

Tough to say definitely. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, grego said:

 

Right, but you said this stuff will stop once Sessions is out if office. Its been happening since before he came along. Why do you believe it will happen when he's gone? 

 

Momentum, I guess. People are aware of how things are, and although Sessions can hinder progress while he's in office, I just have faith the next head of DoJ won't be living in the '80's. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ExoDus84 said:

 

I didn't know that being high warranted instant execution. I was under the impression one might have to physically attack a police officer to warrant getting shot and killed. I'm sick to death of pathetic, frightened, trigger-happy cops getting away with killing people. There's no ****ing accountability for it.

 

I didn't know anyone said it did. 

 

You all are arguing against a narrative that doesn't really apply to this specific case no matter how much you want it too. I still think its because the original story was the police shooting a stranded motorist who had his hands up. Like around the same time was the *SC shooting of the guy with the book/gun. The book/gun narrative ruined everyone's conceptions of the story and what happened. 

 

Terence Crutcher is a victim and can be victim shamed I suppose, but he's only a victim in the moment of the shooting.

 

He was not harassed by police, he was not pulled over, not profiled for his race or appearance, not randomly checked, he is not a casualty of the War on Drugs, they didn't look up his history and harass him for an easy arrest, or harass him for some BS reason. He was on drugs, was hallucinating his car was going to explode like a psycho standing in the middle of the street blocking traffic. 

 

Doesn't mean he deserved to get shot and die, but it doesn't mean he himself has no accountability on what happened. 

Edited by Mooka
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Mooka said:

He was not harassed by police, he was not pulled over, not profiled for his race or appearance, not randomly checked, he is not a casualty of the War on Drugs, they didn't look up his history and harass him for an easy arrest, or harass him for some BS reason. He was on drugs, was hallucinating his car was going to explode like a psycho standing in the middle of the street blocking traffic. 

 

Doesn't mean he deserved to get shot and die, but it doesn't mean he himself has no accountability on what happened. 

 

The victim doesn't have any accountability for getting killed, seeing as how he didn't do anything that warranted a lethal response. He didn't deserve to be killed any more than a mentally disabled person would if they were placed in the same situation. Acting strange around an officer, because of either being high or due to any other mental instability, does not warrant a lethal response. This is just another case of an officer's gross negligence causing the death of somebody who didn't need to die.

 

Only in America, it seems. Anywhere else in the civilized world and the guy probably would have earned a baton strike and a few stitches.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...