I’m not saying there’s concrete proof of murder here, but it sure looks that way. Is it POSSIBLE he did this to himself? I guess…but I find it extremely unlikely.
It’s a standard fictional detective find. “The victim couldn’t have killed himself - he was left handed, but the bullet entered his right temple.” Some people might be relying too heavily on fiction. However, it doesn’t make much sense for a left-handed person to use his right hand to shoot himself. Unless he was trying to frame the cops? :dubious:
I don’t think anyone questions that he could reach a hidden gun, especially if it was a small .22 or something. There is some skepticism over how being frisked twice a gun was missed. How big was this gun? A pocket deringer?
But I have spent a few moments here trying to simulate having my hands cuffed behind my back and somehow get a gun around to point at my temple. If he was a world-class contorionist maybe, but it seems highly unlikely.
I think it plausible that he was trying to ditch the gun and somehow made it go off instead. I would be much more comfortable with this theory if there were indications of a bullet ricochet inside the police cruiser. I would find it more plausible that he accidentally discharged the gun, it ricocheted and hit him in the right temple, than he somehow managed to point the weapon at his head while still handcuffed behind his back, and managed to hit his right temple.
One detail that would help is knowing the angle of entry of the bullet. An upward shot is just in the realm of possibility, a downward shot or straight on shot I have not been able to duplicate.
Thanks for providing the link to the actual report. I would find it hard to take an article written by “The Decider” I tend to dismiss it. After reading the report it seems very unlikely that the police killed him. Unless it is a complete fabrication. It seems like there were several witnesses right there. And there probably is a video. It would be extremely hard to cover up or fabricate under the conditions as they are known now. Other information may come out.
I missed the part about him being shot in the right temple. Who said this? It wasn’t in the police report that I could see.
I’m suspiscious that this is one of those ‘facts’ that is reported in the news, but doesn’t have any substantation, and may be found to be an incorrect report.
May be he was, but like I said, I’ve been around enough to know the initial reports in the newspapers are wrong often enough.
Note also,in the police report, they performed a Terry frisk, which is a limited pat down. THey didn’t have the right to do a more complete frisk. I can see that doing a more invasive pat down would have caused constitutional issues for these circumstances.
In the grand spirit of paper towel tube experimentation… I made a loop of twine that keeps my hands within an inch or so of each other. As in, it takes a bit of work to get both hands into the loop. Behind my back, I insert my wrists within the loop. I can pretty easily pick up my son’s toy drill and point it at my face.
I go with a two. It’s possible, especially if the guy got his little gun past the first search, and didn’t want it caught in a followup search. A thorough external investigation is required.
I don’t want to jump to conclusions before the incident is fully investigated. I find it hard to believe that police would murder a suspect with no apparent motive, but I also find it hard to believe this guy somehow managed to conceal a gun through two searches, and shoot himself in the temple while his hands were cuffed behind him. Also wondering why neither police officer reported hearing a gunshot–I suppose that is possible, the weapon is reported to be a small caliber handgun, maybe a .22 or .25. The suspect allegedly being left handed and the wound being to his right temple is another anomaly…
That’s a very good point..I seem to remember learning that shots to the temple, particuarly with small caliber rounds, don’t actually bleed much. The report narrative indicates quite a bit of blood, which would more consistent with him shooting himself elsewhere.
Oh bugger. I accidentally voted the first choice when I meant the last choice. I misread it as saying “there is zero possibility the incident could happen the way the police are describing it.”
Just clasp your hands behind your back and then try to bring them up to your temple. Yeah, it didn’t happen like that.
I would suspect that a police officer was pointing a gun at him as he got into the car and then accidentally pulled the trigger.
What about ballistics? The fact that cops do not carry small caliber handguns?
ETA: I’m defending the cops here?
-
I don’t know - maybe? I mean, I think it’s more likely that an officer might be carrying a small caliber gun occaisionaly than that the victim was carrying such a gun and shot himself with it.
-
Do we have ballistics info? The article linked in the OP just says: “A small caliber handgun was reportedly found beside him.” It doesn’t say anything from ballistics or forensics that that was the gun that killed him (although the police story wants us to think so.)
It will be interesting to see what the medical examiner has to say about the angle of the shot and how close or far away the gun was. I wonder if there was any powder residue?
This doesn’t happen..cops don’t force handcuffed arrestees into the back of cars at gunpoint.
That’s sweet.
Less caustically: I don’t believe Merneith meant that the cop was following proper procedure by doing such a thing.
I couldn’t lift my arms more than a couple of inches. I have seen multiple people who could either bring their arms up around in front while cuffed or bring them all the way around from the back. It makes a lot more sense than pointing a gun a him while they were putting him cuffed in the back.
This will most likely be very easy to verify. There is certainly video from one car. Most likely from both cars. This was not something that happened in the basement of the police station.
Then allow me to re-iterate:
Cops don’t do that. It is to his tactical advantage to have positive control over the subject from the moment he’s under arrest. That means that he would rather have hands on him until he is seated in the car. Forcing someone to do something at gunpoint is pure Hollywood.
To get on board with** kayaker** (ha!), there would be no reason for fantasy cop to use a .22 or .25 in such an instance, since he has a .40 or .45 at his disposal. Besides, even the ones that carry backups don’t opt for such a small caliber as .22 or .25.
ETA: You’re going to lose this one in the end. Shoulda stuck with polls about anonymous trillionares.
According to the report there were two witnesses that saw them put him in the patrol car. If they took him out again for some unknown reason you would be able to at least hear it on the tape. If it was done outside of the car there would be ample evidence. Unless something else comes out I think its going to be very apparent if the story is false.
No kidding.
What I’m saying is - I suspect it was an accident, not that they deliberately shot him in their own backseat. Mind you - I don’t think all police officers are above shooting a handcuffed suspect, just that they’re not usually dumb enough to deliberately shoot them in their own car.
I suspect a cop was pointing a gun at the suspect and accidentally pulled the trigger and is now trying desperately to cover his ass with help from his partner.
Doesn’t a dashboard camera point out the front windshield of the patrol car? How then does the video from it tell you anything about what happened inside the car?
Then you might be good enough to give a few examples where a police officers has deliberately shot a handcuffed suspect. Thanks.
They record audio. And some have a second camera that records the interior.
In the first place, this is not a competition, so it is impossible for me to win or to lose.
In the second place, I am willing to be proven wrong. For instance (and I should have written this earlier), I too am somewhat disturbed, or at least perplexed, that the police report I linked to upthread does not specify that the wound was to the temple. If someone can demonstrate that the wound was to the midsection or leg, I’d be more willing to believe the police version of events. Likewise if the dashboard cam video is released and shows the whole thing unambiguously. But that last seems unlikely to me. Are those cams typically aimed at the interior of the vehicle? (Not a rhetorical question; I don’t know.)
In the third place, I’ve been handcuffed. While I’ll concede that young Mr. Carter might have been able to dig out a small handgun hidden at the small of his back, I do not believe he could possibly have shot himself in the right temple while doing so – at least not directly. And while it is conceivable that a ricochet might have caused his death, it seems quite improbable to me; it is far more believable that a rogue cop was either menacing him with a gun and shot him accidentally (and incompetently), or that said rogue cop shot him on purpose. (The accidental & incompetent scenario is more likely to me than the purposeful explanation, by the way, as the latter required even more stupidity.)
In the fourth place, I’m not alleging the cop was manhandling the kid while placing him into the vehicle, but rather that he (or she) did so while the kid was already in the vehicle.
In the fifth place … nah, I’ll skip that one. The reason I put a poll on this was because I didn’t want to go to the Pit.
Like 6-8 says there will at least be audio.
The timeline of the reports says they put him in the car. They took the other two subjects out of whatever patrol car they were in and brought them back to their vehicle. They drove off. The one officer came back and found Carter shot. The two that left should be able to confirm that he was in the back of the patrol car when they left. Even if it is only audio you should be able to hear if the door is opened again before the shot. If the other patrol car was behind it you can get the coverage from that. Or its possible it is a system that has an inside camera but that is less likely.