That the agent was threatened during the first shot through the windshield is arguable. The second and third shots were through the window of the driver’s door. The agent was definitely not in danger when he made those shots.
Furthermore, shooting a driver does not mitigate the deadly force of the vehicle. It increases the risk, as seen in this incident when the first shot incapacitated the driver and the vehicle then crashed.
Mine assessment:
First shot: increased the risk of the moving vehicle injuring people or damaging property, which was then realized.
Second and third shots: unjustified after the agent was already out of the vehicle’s motion.
It’s easy for some of us, in the safety behind our keyboards, sipping our coffees and having minutes or even hours to analyze what happened, to think Oh that asshole overreacted when we aren’t the one, in a split second, being run down by a vehicle. If I’m on that jury, I vote for reasonable use of deadly force by the agent. But of course y’all don’t have to agree.
No one was being run down by a vehicle. We all have eyes, you know. We can watch the video, which shows the only danger came after the driver was shot and therefore the vehicle was no longer in control.
I assume you’re talking about a completely different case. The person who shot the car was already well out of the way before shooting. It was nothing but retribution. That’s not even speculation, you can observe it clearly.
I know that the administration wants to use the excuse that he was traumatized because he had been dragged behind a different vehicle back in June during a similar stop, but if this guy was so jumpy because of a bad incident, it was irresponsible to put him in this position in the first place. This is not just a failing of one individual.
Yeah, bringing up the previous incident is an attempt to direct focus elsewhere.
Besides, in the previous instance, he reached into the vehicle through the window in an attempt to stop it. This is clearly contrary to any training an officer would receive, so either he didn’t receive training on traffic stops or he’s an idiot, or most likely both.
No matter what, the previous incident should have pointed out the need for training on traffic stops, and/or resulted in this particular agent getting reassigned. Rather than excuse this guy, it just highlights the systemic failures.
I’m curious what videos or information you’ve seen that led you to this decision. Did you watch the NYT analysis linked above? Does that change your understanding of the situation?
It will be interesting to see what comes out. Saw the latest vid posted. They say a grainy shot makes it look like he was struck, but the other angle shows he wasn’t due to the position of his feet. The thug by the door is blocking a better view.
I do not WANT to view this one way or another, but from what I see - the manner in which he is crossing in front looks like it was - at the very least - extremely close. Perhaps the car brushed him. As I see it, it almost looks like he sun around a bit, as tho he had been clipped. But I readily admit that what I have seen is not sufficient for me to express any interpretation with absolute certainty.
Will be interesting to hear which bullet killed her. While I can twist my brain to imagine how some might justify the first shot through the windshield, it will be interesting to hear the justification of the 2d and 3d shots.
Also interesting why the other 2 thugs did not have their weapons drawn.
I find myself remembering the asshole cop who shot the young man (Australian?) whose car was stuck (in Colorado?). The driver was frightened and would not exit his car, so one cop just decided to execute him.
That’s interesting and thanks for bringing that to my attention. That definitely does change things. The fact that he did get out of the vehicle’s way does not necessarily and objectively reasonably mean that the agent believed, in that very moment, that he would be able to get out of the way.
That law makes the legal arguments more interesting (for want of a better word) and we’ll have to see how the legal teams assemble those arguments.
Thanks again, David.
That said, anyone who is going to use deadly force (the driver and her car) against an armed agent is an idiot. Her team might win the case, and that would make her ‘right’, but she’d also be dead right.
If you’re going to attack an armed LEO, you’re stupid to begin with. We’re all human, and in the heat of that very moment, no matter how well trained anyone is, in the heat of that very moment you’re not certain how that armed, trained person is going to react. She gambled with her life, and unfortunately for her and her family and friends she lost it.
What am I missing? I haven’t read every post in this thread. I’m also out of town traveling on vacation, and don’t have good access to news sources. Internet is spotty here in the Philippines.
Added — I have good connectivity now at this particular hotel, but I’ll be back on the road in an hour so I’m not certain when I’ll be able to interact here.
What you’re missing is that she tried to drive away from the agents, after being directed to do so, not drive over any agents. That’s what the videos show. And then one agent shot her in the head.
The ICE agent was in danger because he was standing in the middle of the fuckin’ road, with his buddies directing traffic towards him. Most people learn at about the age of five not to play in the road.
Have you ever heard of diving in hockey? Google defines it as “embellishment or flopping, …when a player exaggerates contact or fakes being fouled by an opponent to draw a penalty”. Cops know how to do this too. They tried to pull her out of her car while it was moving and somehow that means that she assaulted them.
They also know how to give contradictory orders (“get out of the car” and “get out of here”) and then execute someone for not complying with one or the other or for being too slow to comply. Schoolyard bully stuff but with the force of law behind it.
It’s just as easy in the safety behind our keyboards, sipping our coffee to blindly side with authority over the individual, to cast aside our humanity and smugly call it patriotism.
There was one bullethole in the windshield. Even after that shot was fired, the car continued its turning motion. He then fired two shots into the driver’s side window; he was likely next to the car when the kill shot was fired, he was in absolutely no danger when he killed her. She was doing nothing that warranted lethal force.
Here’s what the videos show:
First, he approached a vehicle on foot from the front. For a guy was was supposedly dragged by a vehicle in the line of duty within the past six months, you’d think he wouldn’t approach another vehicle quite so recklessly. That was his first fuck-up. Second, he jumped out of the way of the front of the vehicle and shot simultaneously. Then, he then fired two more times when he was clearly standing next to the vehicle and she was clearly trying to leave the situation.
Why do we continue to hold untrained civilians to a higher standard in chaotic situations than the trained professional law enforcement officers carrying guns? This dumbass didn’t do one thing right in this situation, and now a kid doesn’t have a mom. But it’s her fucking fault? Fuck that.