What’s Smapti’ DSM?
So I guess the large gun-shaped object lying on the ground during the 20 seconds between is just an artifact of the Matrix, then.
Then I await the department’s finding that the rifling on the bullet within Officer #1 is consistent with Officer #2’s weapon. I’m sure that the anarchist propaganda websites advocating this conspiracy theory will link to it the instant it is released.
Why is it no surprise that Smapti thinks that the Los Angeles Times is an anarchist propoganda website?
More like an artifact of your imagination, you imbecile. Are you talking about that small, dark object on the sidewalk next to the car tire, which is already there when the video begins?
The LA Times is not reporting that Officer #2 shot Officer #1. It is reporting that Officer #1 was shot with Officer #2’s weapon and that investigation as to who did the shooting is pending.
All of this is immaterial anyway, as the entire encounter would not have occurred if the suspect hadn’t decided to run from the cops in the first place.
So if they’d shot him right away, the second officer wouldn’t have been wounded?
Poor thing, he’s started counting officer #1 officer #2 and then got confused and started counting officer #2 officer #1, all the time studiously ignoring the facts before him.
If the suspect had never chosen to run in the first place, his officer-assisted suicide would never have occurred.
Oh, I’m assuming you don’t care a whit about the suspect, just the officers. Should they have shot him immediately to spare the officer the injury?
Wait a minute, I want to go back to this one. I recognize Smapti that you believe that a manslaughter charge is appropriate here; for the record I agree. I just want to clarify: you think the officer accidently pulled his gun out of his holster, accidently aimed with both hands, accidently fired, and then re-holstered his weapon all in ~3 seconds?
He then reported that he has a male in the car “that refuses to get out” and did not report he had shot anybody until 11 minutes after paramedics arrived. Look, I don’t know what was going through this officer’s head, but their was nothing accidental about it. Why do you believe this was accidental?
I have to admit being similarly unclear - is it common for police officers to approach car accidents with weapons drawn?
I think there is a difference between a wild chase and crash as opposed to a run of the mill accident, but that being said, he executed the guy.
Well, almost. The driver’s still alive, though possibly paralyzed for life.
Eh, no. He’s dead.
Also post #7456
I stand corrected.
The object by the car tire appears to be a pair of sunglasses. Given that the video appears to be deliberately pointing out that the officer had possession of his weapon directly before and after the shooting, it is amusing that someone could watch it and strongly insist that the opposite is true. Is it just hopefulness that nobody else will watch the video for themselves?
Possibly, but I think it is more that he actually believes what he says he is seeing. Scrambled eggs in his brain pain et ali.
They just released the audio of the officer’s radio call when he pulled up to the accident scene:
Officer: (Extremely agitated)There’s an overturned car, and the driver appears to be dead. What should I do!?!?
Dispatch: Ok, calm down. First, you need to make sure that the driver really is dead.
Silence for several seconds, then BAM!
Officer: Ok, he’s dead, now what?
Yeah, I’ll go to hell for this.
You have no idea. I brought this case up with Smapti earlier in this thread and we had a back-and-forth (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8) which ended in him flatly equating the killings to “putting down a dog.”
Sad to, again, hear of law refusing to prosecute executions.
Ohhh, but I get now!
Suspects who do not obey police officers immediately are like “rapid dogs” who need to be killed–despite whatever confusion about the situation!
Well, that explains a lot.
How did we ever doubt Smapti?
It’s not like a highly trained police officer could be confused as to the guy he shoots?
Right?