Not Guilty: Officer who Shot Philando Castile


LS Syndicate said:
I applaud you for not backing down or shutting down in this debate. What many of us are trying to understand is: why are you scratching your head? Why are you 'dumbfounded'? THIS IS WHAT THE SYSTEM WAS DESIGNED TO DO! As an LEO, you should know that better than anybody. It's one thing to be angry and upset about it, because I believe you are. What I don't understand is why anyone would be shocked.
Click to expand...

Here's the thing. As much as you, I, and any other person with common sense knows that all aspects of this incident matter, in the interest of guilty/not guilty, most of it doesn't matter. The only thing that matters as far as guilty/not guilty is the span of time between when Castille told him he had a gun (which, IMO, sent Yanez into a panic, as evidenced by him drawing his weapon almost immediately) and the time the last shot was fired. What they are looking for is "was the use of force reasonable based on what the officer perceived". Is that fair? Not always, and I'm the first to admit that. I think part of the disconnect is that many are basing their opinion off the entire incident, but the acquittal was based on that small portion of the incident. And that's why I stick around here. Not to try to prove any type of solidarity, but to educate people on the reality of how these things play out, even when I don't agree with it.

If you ask me whether I believe that use of force was reasonable under the circumstances, my answer is no. My training dictates to me that a person that TELLS you they have a gun on them, legal or not, likely is not intending on using it on you. They are likely telling you so you won't use YOURS on THEM. Ask them where the weapon is, ask them where their ID is....tell them to keep their hands visible, and give me your name and date of birth. That way, I can get the information I need, and you don't have to reach around and even introduce an element of fear. If that still isn't enough, the officer can, and should, ask them to step out of the car and back towards their car, where they have a better view of their hands and actions......

So with that said, I can't imagine a scenario where, even though there was an obvious fear in the officer, that this fear was deemed reasonable NOT by the JUDGE, not by the "SYSTEM", but by the 12 folks charged with making the decision.
 
As long as Fourth Amendment’s “objective reasonableness” standard can be used to argue that deadly force or excessive force is not completely objectionable in these shootings, it will be difficult to convict a cop.
 



s phi s said:
Here's the thing. As much as you, I, and any other person with common sense knows that all aspects of this incident matter, in the interest of guilty/not guilty, most of it doesn't matter. The only thing that matters as far as guilty/not guilty is the span of time between when Castille told him he had a gun (which, IMO, sent Yanez into a panic, as evidenced by him drawing his weapon almost immediately) and the time the last shot was fired. What they are looking for is "was the use of force reasonable based on what the officer perceived". Is that fair? Not always, and I'm the first to admit that. I think part of the disconnect is that many are basing their opinion off the entire incident, but the acquittal was based on that small portion of the incident. And that's why I stick around here. Not to try to prove any type of solidarity, but to educate people on the reality of how these things play out, even when I don't agree with it.

If you ask me whether I believe that use of force was reasonable under the circumstances, my answer is no. My training dictates to me that a person that TELLS you they have a gun on them, legal or not, likely is not intending on using it on you. They are likely telling you so you won't use YOURS on THEM. Ask them where the weapon is, ask them where their ID is....tell them to keep their hands visible, and give me your name and date of birth. That way, I can get the information I need, and you don't have to reach around and even introduce an element of fear. If that still isn't enough, the officer can, and should, ask them to step out of the car and back towards their car, where they have a better view of their hands and actions......

So with that said, I can't imagine a scenario where, even though there was an obvious fear in the officer, that this fear was deemed reasonable NOT by the JUDGE, not by the "SYSTEM", but by the 12 folks charged with making the decision.
Click to expand...

You are giving you knowledge on it.....which is cool. I have been pulled over and told an officer that I had a weapon. The officer was alone and so was I. When I told him, he asked me to slowly retrieve my ID, insurance, then he asked for my permit information where the gun was located. I told him it is on the seat and unloaded. He gave me a warning for speeding and thanked me for telling him about the gun. I was going 90 in a 65. He could have taken me to jail but instead with my openness he let me go.

This officer in the Castile case should never be allowed to work on the street again.
 
The Founder said:
You are giving you knowledge on it.....which is cool. I have been pulled over and told an officer that I had a weapon. The officer was alone and so was I. When I told him, he asked me to slowly retrieve my ID, insurance, then he asked for my permit information where the gun was located. I told him it is on the seat and unloaded. He gave me a warning for speeding and thanked me for telling him about the gun. I was going 90 in a 65. He could have taken me to jail but instead with my openness he let me go.

This officer in the Castile case should never be allowed to work on the street again.
Click to expand...

Most stops involving people carrying licensed firearm happen in a similar fashion. This one didn't, and like I said, I can't for the life of me, figure this one out, without coming back to this cop was just a scary punk, and the word gun sent him into a panic. I agree, he should NEVER be on the streets again. He is a danger to the public, and even his partners.
 
s phi s said:
Most stops involving people carrying licensed firearm happen in a similar fashion. This one didn't, and like I said, I can't for the life of me, figure this one out, without coming back to this cop was just a scary punk, and the word gun sent him into a panic. I agree, he should NEVER be on the streets again. He is a danger to the public, and even his partners.
Click to expand...

I really want to read the court testimony.
 
The Founder said:
I always wondered how they came across these numbers.
Click to expand...
Attorney wants to get paid....Black folk do not know how much is a LOT of money. 3 million these days is NOT a lot of money when you take into consideration the attorney gets his cut (plus any upfront loans)....buy a house...childcare....money put away for college....etc, etc, etc.

I think potential earning power figures into the amount offered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top