You are full of shit. Oh the poor policeman, isnt it so tragic that he had to suffer this..
Pretty routine for a SWAT team I imagine.
Well it is the middle of the fucking night. I doubt he is surprised that it is dark
Ready to strike? You fucking asshole, the guy was on the other side of the room standing perfectly fucking still. I know you are invested in painting a nice picture for the poor Policeman but stop misrepresenting the situation.
I can think of one way. Tell the perfectly still man to drop the golf club. A crazy idea I know, but these are crazy times we live in.
He reacted like he was playing Call of Duty, shooting on sight. I doubt SWAT teams are trained to kill first and ask questions later.
From what? There was no identified threat. The only thing identified was a man standing still holding a pipe/bat/club/sword above his head. And thats not enough to warrant murdering him.
I can’t speak to criminal culpability, but morally, there’s something very wrong here. The officer didn’t even stop to give the guy a chance to drop his golf club or say “don’t shoot”. He gets shot literally the second the flashlight is on him, which is one second after the door has been kicked in and a bunch of SWAT guys are charging in. He’s not advancing on the cop, the cop is advancing on him.
If it was homicide, it was “constructive homicide”. I’m not a lawyer, so I can’t say whether he should be charged. But if I was police chief, I would be seriously reconsidering the existence and use of my SWAT team.
No. Your summary conflates two facts: learning that there were reports of domestic violence, and learning that Chournos had moved out.
So here’s my chain of events: cops learn that Blair and Chournos live together, cops learn there have been reports of domestic violence from Blair, cops plan a raid and get a warrant, cops pull over car that they believe is being driven by Blair, they’re wrong but they raid the house anyway, Blair is shot, cops then learn Chornous had moved out.
Just to highlight this point: I may be naive, but in my mind, if a cop is uncertain about someone’s state of mind, their duty is not to employ lethal force until the state of mind is reasonably clear.
If the guy is charging you, his state of mind is clear. But I’ve heard it argued in defense of nighttime, no-knock raids that the whole benefit is catching them asleep when they aren’t ready to defend themselves. If that’s true, then it kind of argues against the state of mind that allows a cop to shoot to kill.
Unfortunately, the law doesn’t really track with your mind. It says that if the officer reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent an acotr inflicting death or serious bodily injury, he may use deadly force, regardless of the “state of mind” of the actor.
So Bricker is saying here that it’s okat to make assumptions about a guy who has been accused (by whom?) of hitting his girlfriend, but we can’t make assumptions about the guy who shoots another man down in cold blood in his own home.
I’ll take a stab at this:
[ol]
[li]Don’t be a criminal[/li][li]Don’t associate with criminals[/li][li]Don’t be mistaken for a criminal[/li][li]Don’t unknowingly live across the hallway from a criminal[/li][li]Don’t be known to criminals who might spuriously identify you as a criminal while making a deal with the police[/li][li]Upon awaking in the middle of the night, be immediately aware of your surroundings and who is breaking into your house–police or criminal. Having correctly ascertained who is breaking into your house, take the correct action[/li][li]When confronted by police, know what the correct response to their presence is from their perspective. For instance, if you’re holding a golf club, don’t freeze in a threatening manner. But don’t move to get rid of the golf club either.[/li][/ol]
What does it say about the officer creating a situation where he’s unable to make a reasonable judgement that the use of deadly force is necessary?
Plainly what happened here is that SWAT trains for combat, and what we saw was a combat response. The officer started his chant of “POLICE SEARCH WARRANT”. Then the door was down, he was charging in, he saw a target, and he pulled the trigger. I doubt that anything like a conscious thought passed through the officer’s mind; it was all well-honed reflexes. The fundamental breakdown is in creating the situation where it was those reflexes that decided the outcome rather than the compliance, or lack thereof, of a meth-head.
Well which is it young fella? You want I should freeze or get down on the ground?
Mean to say, iffen I freeze, I can’t rightly drop. And iffen I drop, I’m a gonna be in motion.
Ya see- Raising Arizona
CMC fnord!
I can’t decide which is sadder, what happened or the lengths Bricker will go to to defend it.
This may be comedy, but I watched a video of a cop at a traffic stop a couple years ago where the guy is sitting on the ground, leaning against the car. The cop has his gun out and is yelling “GET UP GET UP”. The guys starts to get up and the cop pushes him back down with his foot, continuing to yell “GET UP GET UP”. The guys says “what do you want me to do?!” “GET UP GET UP” So the guy starts trying to get up. Then the cop shoots him.
The punchline is that the cop was acquitted of assault with a deadly weapon.
What fucking warning was given to dead man? All I heard was “Police” and “search warrant”. Which of those is a bona-fide warning? I only heard declarations then gunshots. The instructions came after the killing. So that is what ya think a warning is? Dumbshit.
The officer has stated clearly that he did not NOT know what was in dead man’s hands. He assumed it might be a weapon, but obviously one that could not reach him if he challenged the now-dead man. Kinda silly to say there was a threat when cop says “I DID NOT KNOW IF THERE WAS A THREAT - he had something in his hands while he stood there” ~so I shot him. Is that part understandable at all? There was nothing more than presumption of danger here and stating afterwards that deadly force was used because that is what we train to do (also clearly stated, and I hope that comes back to haunt that killer). This is how that Dept wanted them to do things - Standard Operating Procedure. Shoot first - then look around.
I wonder how many people forget about those words on most cop cars “To protect and serve”. The dead man got deception and immediate-death served unto him. The cops job is NOT protect other officers. That is secondary. It is to protect and serve the public - not *just *other cops, dipshit. I get the impression that it is thought that training is about killing. Nope, it is about NOT shooting people who do not attempt to assault them. There was no indication that anyone was being attacked - other than the dead man in his execution.
And no valid warrant was present there, and warrant had been obtained through false statements/info from police - and there was no attempt to even go get it when it was discovered that in their hurry it had been left elsewhere. Just a “Don’t tell me that” which equates to ignoring laws and ‘guidelines’. Right? Is there no duty to do things by the book any more? That killing was going to happen then and there, with proper paperwork or not. Shooter knew he could not produce a warrant, but figured he’d kill someone just the same. I feel that killer enjoyed killing him since all steps were taken to keep danger to dead man as high as possible. By intention.