PDA

View Full Version : BART Police kill unarmed man [video]


BittenApple
Jan 5, 2009, 06:36 PM
A 22-year-old man died Thursday after being shot on an Oakland train station platform by a transit agency police officer responding to reports of fighting on an arriving train, officials said.

CBS 5 (http://cbs5.com/crime/BART.shooting.police.2.898502.html)

[NSFW/GRAPHIC VIDEO of the shooting] (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3d2_1231077250)
Video Two (Better Video) (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e28_1231201578)


makes me sad too see this. very stomach churning...

bobfitz14
Jan 5, 2009, 06:42 PM
well isn't that just delightful. do you know at what point in the video the gun is actually fired? it's long and some points are loud so i don't know if i missed the gunshot or not.

EDIT: i think i found it, it's around the 3 minute mark...

BittenApple
Jan 5, 2009, 06:44 PM
well isn't that just delightful. do you know at what point in the video the gun is actually fired? it's long and some points are loud so i don't know if i missed the gunshot or not.

around 3 minutes into the video would show it and the reactions...

ErikCLDR
Jan 5, 2009, 07:13 PM
I am surprised they didn't have tasers. It seems most cops around here have a gun and then a yellow taser gun on the front of their belts.

bruinsrme
Jan 5, 2009, 07:28 PM
I am sure we will here more of this shooting of a model citizien.

Any leaks of the BART videos?

.Andy
Jan 5, 2009, 07:31 PM
I hope there is a thorough investigation - from the video it appears to practically be an assassination. Be interesting to hear what/if there are extenuating circumstances that caused the officer to take those measures.

Phat_Pat
Jan 5, 2009, 07:42 PM
just isnt right... why they shoot that guy? he was cooperating

mkrishnan
Jan 5, 2009, 07:46 PM
Here's a text news article summarizing....

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_11363911

Some people at the SF Bay Guardian are pointing to some past apparent uses of unnecessary lethal force by the police at the BART stations...

http://www.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id=7799

Apparently the police at BART have limited accountability to the public... I don't completely understand how/why they're different from other SF police in this regard:

http://www.sfbg.com/blogs/politics/2009/01/beware_the_bart_police.html

therealdt
Jan 5, 2009, 07:50 PM
I bet they officer in question will be exonerated. Trust me. This isn't the first nor the last time something like this will happen.

:mad:

The only thing that will happen, is the taxpayers will have to pay as a result of a lawsuit other then that, business as usual.

Counterfit
Jan 5, 2009, 09:24 PM
I am surprised they didn't have tasers. It seems most cops around here have a gun and then a yellow taser gun on the front of their belts.

Because TASERs are dangerous. :rolleyes:

Lord Blackadder
Jan 5, 2009, 10:36 PM
The officer involved was only working there two years - where was he before that? Could be an inexperienced newbie, an Iraq War vet with PTSD, or just a bad cop...could have been an accident, or something more sinister.

Either way it's a tragedy. As long as we have armed police in this country this kind of thing can happen from time to time - it's rare, fortunately, and I'm not sure the alternative is better. Hopefully the authorities can get to the bottom of this and if there have been abuses, to deal with it appropriately.

Abstract
Jan 5, 2009, 11:36 PM
The officer involved was only working there two years - where was he before that?

Not anger management.

FoxyKaye
Jan 5, 2009, 11:43 PM
I've been horrified watching this all day. That BART "police officer" essentially executed him. This is why BART Police shouldn't be carrying lethal force. I can't tell you how many times I've seen one of them threaten to use their gun when a real police officer wouldn't have even dreamed of doing so.

I'm not saying the guy they were arresting wasn't making trouble - gods know we've got enough punks on BART as well. But making trouble and being arrested for it is one thing, being killed by a glorified rent-a-cop is quite another.

Supa_Fly
Jan 6, 2009, 08:21 AM
BUt ... I think the right to guns has gone a little overboard.

1> What the FRAK are you transit enforcement officers carrying guns!? There is no REASON for them to carry guns even to breakup a fight. Its on the subway train, trains use glass or plexiglass windows. Train can be stopped midway between stations and the REAL police called in to trap suspects and deal with it.

Couple of shady things.

1> The girl that recorded the incident did as best she could, given the pandomonium. However there is a quick glimpse that the man just prior to being shot raised his two hands JOINED as if twisty tied. So why was he shot?

2> The officer is being represented by a Sacramento law firm. A call to that office was not returned. Thats fine, they don't legally have to respond, but I think just simply stating that we're taking a statement and co-operating with authorities would be sufficient.

3> BART spokesman Jim Allison Allison also reconfirmed that surveillance cameras at the station do not record. He said station cameras "historically" have not recorded what they view and are there primarily for "counterterrorism."

Hmmf! RIIIIGHT! Counterterrorism ... if that actually happened how the FRAK is homeland security going to get evidence or any leads on anything occuring if NO RECORDING is being done?! Shady!

4> BART police did seize some cell phones from people on the platform who said they had used the phones' cameras to record what happened.

- ILLEGAL! No probable cause or right to confiscate any personal artificates of ANYONE not involved. BAR NONE!

5> BART officials will only say the officer's gun "discharged." This is FRAKING 2009 not 1899!! Guns don't just randomly "discharge" in the HANDS of an officer. If by chance it honestly DID, then the officer is at fault for not maintaining firearm care & maintenance and thus manslaughter (no intent to kill) should be charged or similar.

A) I don't care if the officer actually pressed the trigger or not he is at some fault (manslaughter II at the least). Why is he withdrawing a gun to a man, lying on his back on the floor?! Officer can use his foot or his body to "supress" the "assailant" to keep him at bay.

B) EVEN if the assailant is armed you do NOT FIRE until the assailant
- Takes a hostage and threatens lives; EVEN not right away!
- Is a danger to himself that affects OTHER lives!
- Officer's life is in danger; and even THEN should a warning be presented IMMEDIATELY, LOUDLY, and other officers can present threatening FORCE to persuade the assailant to reconsider. **** don't officers in the USA say "FREEZE" anymore?!
Either way officers are TRAINED and TAUGHT that their jobs they put their LIVES on the line and not to just simply fire in such a situation.

An autopsy by two coroners less influenced by BART or related city police, should be conducted. A REAL police investigation should also be conducted and if any of those confiscated cellphones where deleted of videos ... then suspicion to hide facts should be considered (is it not called abating and abetting criminal investigation).

Fight or no fight ... kids on NewYears Eve, morning of NewYears Day do stupid things! But they don't deserve to die because an officer cannot follow proper training or thought process correctly. Heck the BART officers looked like they had suspects all under control.

Supa_Fly
Jan 6, 2009, 08:28 AM
Because TASERs are dangerous. :rolleyes:

Yeah I know. Do you think this kids death would've caused this much suspicion if the BART officer used a taser and the kid died? How could you prove any intent to cause bodily harm of any kind??

The proper reasoning is that with a Taser you cannot control the incapacitation of an assailant. You cannot target a shoulder, leg, arm, knee, etc. However, how many times (heck even in movies), do you see a police officer trying to stop a bank robber, gang banger, etc by shooting them in the leg or the arm? Don't give me the excuse that the chest is a larger target - that is negligable with the many months of firearm, eyesight, and targeting training ALL officers receive with firearms.

Do you

Schtumple
Jan 6, 2009, 08:33 AM
Give a guy with a inflated ego a gun and there will be trouble...

cantthinkofone
Jan 6, 2009, 08:39 AM
Hmmf! RIIIIGHT! Counterterrorism ... if that actually happened how the FRAK is homeland security going to get evidence or any leads on anything occuring if NO RECORDING is being done?! Shady!


You really think homeland security is real? :p


- ILLEGAL! No probable cause or right to confiscate any personal artificates of ANYONE not involved. BAR NONE!


They were at a crime scene. I think it is legal.

therealdt
Jan 6, 2009, 08:48 AM
BUt ... I think the right to guns has gone a little overboard.

1> What the FRAK are you transit enforcement officers carrying guns!? There is no REASON for them to carry guns even to breakup a fight. Its on the subway train, trains use glass or plexiglass windows. Train can be stopped midway between stations and the REAL police called in to trap suspects and deal with it.

Couple of shady things.

1> The girl that recorded the incident did as best she could, given the pandomonium. However there is a quick glimpse that the man just prior to being shot raised his two hands JOINED as if twisty tied. So why was he shot?

2> Thats fine, they don't legally have to respond, but I think just simply stating that we're taking a statement and co-operating with authorities would be sufficient.

3> BART spokesman Jim Allison

Hmmf! RIIIIGHT! Counterterrorism ... if that actually happened how the FRAK is homeland security going to get evidence or any leads on anything occuring if NO RECORDING is being done?! Shady!

4>

- ILLEGAL! No probable cause or right to confiscate any personal artificates of ANYONE not involved. BAR NONE!

5> This is FRAKING 2009 not 1899!! Guns don't just randomly "discharge" in the HANDS of an officer. If by chance it honestly DID, then the officer is at fault for not maintaining firearm care & maintenance and thus manslaughter (no intent to kill) should be charged or similar.

A) I don't care if the officer actually pressed the trigger or not he is at some fault (manslaughter II at the least). Why is he withdrawing a gun to a man, lying on his back on the floor?! Officer can use his foot or his body to "supress" the "assailant" to keep him at bay.

B) EVEN if the assailant is armed you do NOT FIRE until the assailant
- Takes a hostage and threatens lives; EVEN not right away!
- Is a danger to himself that affects OTHER lives!
- Officer's life is in danger; and even THEN should a warning be presented IMMEDIATELY, LOUDLY, and other officers can present threatening FORCE to persuade the assailant to reconsider. **** don't officers in the USA say "FREEZE" anymore?!
Either way officers are TRAINED and TAUGHT that their jobs they put their LIVES on the line and not to just simply fire in such a situation.

An autopsy by two coroners less influenced by BART or related city police, should be conducted. A REAL police investigation should also be conducted and if any of those confiscated cellphones where deleted of videos ... then suspicion to hide facts should be considered (is it not called abating and abetting criminal investigation).

Fight or no fight ... kids on NewYears Eve, morning of NewYears Day do stupid things! But they don't deserve to die because an officer cannot follow proper training or thought process correctly. Heck the BART officers looked like they had suspects all under control.


lol, see post #9. I have no idea what country you live in, I'll I know is in the good Ole USA, this officer will be cleared of ALL charges. I'm fully aware of these types of 'incidents' and their outcomes. Nothing new. Business as usual.

Supa_Fly
Jan 6, 2009, 08:56 AM
lol, see post #9. I have no idea what country you live in, I'll I know is in the good Ole USA, this officer will be cleared of ALL charges. I'm fully aware of these types of 'incidents' and their outcomes. Nothing new. Business as usual.

I'm in Canada. At any rate I think in the end you'll be right. Which is a very sad thing.

{QUOTE=cantthinkofone]They were at a crime scene. I think it is legal. [/QUOTE] Sure it may be legal, but why should transit officers NEED to carry firearms? In Toronto, only transit officers that ride with the cash box on wheels, carry them. And who wants to try to run with a wheel barrel full of change (120Lbs+)??

Lord Blackadder
Jan 6, 2009, 10:18 AM
5> This is FRAKING 2009 not 1899!! Guns don't just randomly "discharge" in the HANDS of an officer. If by chance it honestly DID, then the officer is at fault for not maintaining firearm care & maintenance and thus manslaughter (no intent to kill) should be charged or similar.

I disagree with quite a bit of what you're saying, but I'll just deal with this minor point. They say the gun "discharged" because the events have not yet been legally established; to say that the officer "shot" him or some such before that is established could foul up legal proceedings for various reasons. It's a minor point, but a significant one.

Oh, and BTW, even in 1899 it would be very unusual for a handgun to randomly discharge.

Oh, and I hereby arrest you for excessive use of "frack", unecessary use of capital letters and misspelling of "frack". :rolleyes:;)

I think this incident shows that these particular cops are not recieving enough training in the use of deadly force. They should stop carrying handguns until they are re-trained.

therealdt
Jan 6, 2009, 10:33 AM
I'm in Canada. At any rate I think in the end you'll be right. Which is a very sad thing.


I agree. It's very sad. This is the realtiy.

This kid (22 years) didn't deserve to die like this. Who cares if he was part of some fight, he was handcuffed. It shows his life meant nothing to this officer. No cameras working at the station, lol. Then we wonder why black folks distrust the boys in blue....:rolleyes:


just think if this wasn't recorded with a camera phone, we'll be saying well maybe the officer had a reason.


maybe the cop was reaching for his taser instead...that's possible. right?

Lord Blackadder
Jan 6, 2009, 11:52 AM
This kid (22 years) didn't deserve to die like this. Who cares if he was part of some fight, he was handcuffed. It shows his life meant nothing to this officer. No cameras working at the station, lol. Then we wonder why black folks distrust the boys in blue....:rolleyes:

Many of the "boys in blue" happen to be black, especially in urban areas. Police brutality is often linked with racism, and to say it isn't would be wrong, but if you assume that such brutality is always racially motivated you would be muddying the waters. The real problem is the quality of recruitment, vetting and training.

Abstract
Jan 6, 2009, 03:48 PM
I think this incident shows that these particular cops are not recieving enough training in the use of deadly force. They should stop carrying handguns until they are re-trained.

What? I don't want this wannabe cop with a gun ever again. Everyone else gets a gun. This guy gets nothing and patrols with a baton and a cool pair of aviators to keep his ego from falling too low.


just think if this wasn't recorded with a camera phone, we'll be saying well maybe the officer had a reason.


Exactly. That's the scary thing. We'd be reading about this on the news.....that a young man got shot by a police officer for threatening him. I doubt they'd let us know that this guy was cuffed, and by the looks of it, was lying on the ground (from what I see in the video).

Instead, we get the wonderful Scooby-Doo ending. Thank goodness for that girl and her camera. :)

Lord Blackadder
Jan 6, 2009, 04:25 PM
What? I don't want this wannabe cop with a gun ever again. Everyone else gets a gun. This guy gets nothing and patrols with a baton and a cool pair of aviators to keep his ego from falling too low.

When I said re-trained, I meant that particular police unit as a whole, not the idiot who shot the victim. Assuming the shooting was due to gross negligence (or worse) on his part, he should never wear a badge again.

FoxyKaye
Jan 6, 2009, 05:48 PM
Here: http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_11369405

Also, the local news channel that broke the video, KTVU, has a "BART Shooting" tab on their home page. It's flash, so I can't post a direct link, but http://www.ktvu.com is the station.

Several folks in the police world have come forward to say that the officer who did the shooting appears to have mistaken his gun for his tazer (which BART police also carry). However, the officer in question still hasn't made any statement regarding the shooting, which is unusual this many days later.

Frankly, I don't give a damn that BART police attend the same academy as regular police - they shouldn't be carrying guns, plain and simple.

benthewraith
Jan 6, 2009, 06:09 PM
However, the officer in question still hasn't made any statement regarding the shooting, which is unusual this many days later.

He's only doing what his police friends/lawyers are telling him to do. He probably will when he feels like its appropriate, or rather, they.

benthewraith
Jan 6, 2009, 06:11 PM
he should never wear a badge again.

They haven't stripped him from his badge at all? This idiot, assuming it was gross incompetence, should never be on any police force, anywhere.

TSE
Jan 6, 2009, 06:33 PM
I know a cop who is a great man and is very well educated, and he himself said that 95% of the fellow cops he works with are complete jackasses. I believe him. Joining the police is the easiest road to power over people.

This cop should be held on trial, and get a life sentence if found guilty so he can rot like he made that 22 year old guy.

I am not saying the 22 year old is innocent, but if he was unarmed, and from what I saw he was cooperating but the video was sketchy.

mkrishnan
Jan 6, 2009, 06:37 PM
Several folks in the police world have come forward to say that the officer who did the shooting appears to have mistaken his gun for his tazer (which BART police also carry).

Is this even vaguely probable for the kind of tasers they carry?

bruinsrme
Jan 6, 2009, 06:39 PM
They haven't stripped him from his badge at all? This idiot, assuming it was gross incompetence, should never be on any police force, anywhere.


I thnk it is pretty standard across the country that the officer is placed on administrative leave until the investigation is complete.
I beleive that means the badge and weapon are turned in.

Rodimus Prime
Jan 6, 2009, 06:41 PM
They haven't stripped him from his badge at all? This idiot, assuming it was gross incompetence, should never be on any police force, anywhere.

They can not legelly strip his badge until the investigation is over. They most they can do right now is suspension with pay.

It is my understanding with most police force any time they are involved in a shooting or they shoot there gun at some one they officer is suspended with pay and required to go to therapy. It is a standard proceeder even if the officer was clearly in the right to use their gun.

The Cop involved in the shooting is also told not to say anything to the media or any one until after the investigation.

therealdt
Jan 6, 2009, 06:44 PM
Many of the "boys in blue" happen to be black, especially in urban areas. Police brutality is often linked with racism, and to say it isn't would be wrong, but if you assume that such brutality is always racially motivated you would be muddying the waters. The real problem is the quality of recruitment, vetting and training.


Not so. Growing up I saw more white cops than cops of color.

How many unarmed white males you know that has been killed by the police?

I'm not saying it's racism, it's the realtiy. "they" most police has no respect for the life of someone of color. I can count on my hands and feet people I knew personally, or knew of that has been killed by the boys in blue and not one was white and not one was killed by a cop of color.


This is the sad truth, no playing the 'race card'. Just a reality we all must face.

My uncle was best friends with a vice cop and told him how he rides around with an extra gun just in case he has to shoot someone...leave the gun and say the perp was armed. This was in the early 80's.


I hear this isn't the first time this cop has been in this situation


just for the record, 4 of the people I knew ran from the police, 2 happpen to reach for something, 3 was chokehold, was this justified....all were under the age of 25. These are people I knew personally.

Lord Blackadder
Jan 6, 2009, 07:43 PM
Is this even vaguely probable for the kind of tasers they carry?

I would say probably not. Some tasers resemble handguns because that form factor is the most convenient to use. If he had one of those, I suppose there is a *tiny* chance he made an honest mistake. I wouldn't want to rule it out entirely.

BUT as soon as he drew his handgun, he should have felt the difference in weight and balance between the two weapons. Police armed with both types of weapons should have a very clear way of distinguishing between the two - make the taser a different color for example, or have the texture of the hand grips be very different so the officer can tell by feel which weapon he is grabbing.

Not so. Growing up I saw more white cops than cops of color.

How many unarmed white males you know that has been killed by the police?

All I'm trying to say is that simply passing this off as nothing more than a racially-motivated killing is a massive simplification at best and totally off-base at worst.

FoxyKaye
Jan 6, 2009, 07:52 PM
Is this even vaguely probable for the kind of tasers they carry?
Apparently so - this came to light during the news this AM. I didn't quite grasp it all, but something about how the tasers they use are pistol shaped, how they're supposed to pass them off to officers depending on the shift they're working, and how they're supposed to wear a gun on one specific side and a taser on the other in similar holsters.

Frankly, it sounded like a load of BS so the jury pool on the pending $25 Million lawsuit against BART isn't completely tainted. The same report went on to state that in some of the videos the officer who did the shooting looked shocked and horrified, as if he expected a different result. Again, there are at least two lawsuits pending and with all the press the videos are getting, the jury pool is getting rapidly tainted.

The only thing I took away from the whole report was that the tasers and guns do have some sort of similar shape. The rest of it sounds like early damage control.

n8236
Jan 6, 2009, 07:55 PM
Oakland is just ghetto, period. Except the hills.

For the people that BART police shouldn't carry arms, you obviously have no lived in or near Oakland long enough.

FoxyKaye
Jan 6, 2009, 08:10 PM
Oakland is just ghetto, period. Except the hills.

For the people that BART police shouldn't carry arms, you obviously have no lived in or near Oakland long enough.
Wrong on both counts. This is not an opportunity for Oakland bashing, and I've lived here for almost 10 years - including owning a home not in "the hills." Oakland has a long history of excessive police force and brutality, which despite whatever other problems the city has does not excuse this simple fact.

n8236
Jan 6, 2009, 08:16 PM
Wrong on both counts. This is not an opportunity for Oakland bashing, and I've lived here for almost 10 years - including owning a home not in "the hills." Oakland has a long history of excessive police force and brutality, which despite whatever other problems the city has does not excuse this simple fact.

Oakland's homicide count speaks for itself.

James L
Jan 6, 2009, 09:25 PM
The proper reasoning is that with a Taser you cannot control the incapacitation of an assailant. You cannot target a shoulder, leg, arm, knee, etc. However, how many times (heck even in movies), do you see a police officer trying to stop a bank robber, gang banger, etc by shooting them in the leg or the arm? Don't give me the excuse that the chest is a larger target - that is negligable with the many months of firearm, eyesight, and targeting training ALL officers receive with firearms.

Do you

B) EVEN if the assailant is armed you do NOT FIRE until the assailant
- Takes a hostage and threatens lives; EVEN not right away!
- Is a danger to himself that affects OTHER lives!
- Officer's life is in danger; and even THEN should a warning be presented IMMEDIATELY, LOUDLY, and other officers can present threatening FORCE to persuade the assailant to reconsider. **** don't officers in the USA say "FREEZE" anymore?!
Either way officers are TRAINED and TAUGHT that their jobs they put their LIVES on the line and not to just simply fire in such a situation.


How much time have you spent around police training? I work with the police in another service everyday, and participate in certain elements of their training. I gotta be honest, very little of what you have said here makes sense to me at all.

748s
Jan 7, 2009, 03:03 AM
How much time have you spent around police training? I work with the police in another service everyday, and participate in certain elements of their training. I gotta be honest, very little of what you have said here makes sense to me at all.

Have to agree with you.
A lot of the comments are straight out of television with no basis in reality.
I can't comment on the incident, I wasn't there.
A dodgy bit of video isn't reliable.

mkrishnan
Jan 7, 2009, 06:57 AM
The only thing I took away from the whole report was that the tasers and guns do have some sort of similar shape. The rest of it sounds like early damage control.

Yes, I googled some and it appears that, while some tasers look like this:

http://youredge.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/taser_533_1.jpg

There are others that look like this...

http://www.impactguns.com/store/media/taser_m18L.jpg

There were some pics on google images of the latter sort of design in all black, and at least it does vaguely look like a gun. It still seems sketchy to me that the person holding it and using it could be fooled, but okay, I'm sure that's something that a court can consider.

Supa_Fly
Jan 7, 2009, 09:08 AM
The proper reasoning is that with a Taser you cannot control the incapacitation of an assailant. You cannot target a shoulder, leg, arm, knee, etc. However, how many times (heck even in movies), do you see a police officer trying to stop a bank robber, gang banger, etc by shooting them in the leg or the arm? Don't give me the excuse that the chest is a larger target - that is negligable with the many months of firearm, eyesight, and targeting training ALL officers receive with firearms.

Do you


B) EVEN if the assailant is armed you do NOT FIRE until the assailant
- Takes a hostage and threatens lives; EVEN not right away!
- Is a danger to himself that affects OTHER lives!
- Officer's life is in danger; and even THEN should a warning be presented IMMEDIATELY, LOUDLY, and other officers can present threatening FORCE to persuade the assailant to reconsider. **** don't officers in the USA say "FREEZE" anymore?!
Either way officers are TRAINED and TAUGHT that their jobs they put their LIVES on the line and not to just simply fire in such a situation.

How much time have you spent around police training? I work with the police in another service everyday, and participate in certain elements of their training. I gotta be honest, very little of what you have said here makes sense to me at all.

I didn't train with the police, my late uncle however did train with the Toronto Police force and died at gunpoint. My father did go to spend 1 year training for service and decided against continuing when his brother in law died during that year.

The differences in our social cultures (Canada vs the USA) may be a major factor in what I posted above, that you quoted. Hence why I sound a bit looney.

Major differences that I'm aware of:
* Toronto Police must withdraw their weapon ONLY when harm to the public, themselves, or in a hostage situation is assessed.
* Toronto Police must always file a written and formal report for just withdrawing their weapon which will be investigated internally - and carry's penalty's if its deemed not warranted. And it doesn't matter if its fired or not, pointed at someone or not, or for a TV show.
* It would be difficult to find more than 15/100 citizens in Toronto to have a licensed/unlicensed firearm (at home/on them). Especially after last quarters successful police campaign to turn in your licensed firearm for a $1000 digital camera of your choice (over 2500 firearms where voluntarily submitted).

Many times in a threatening situation, a Toronto Police officer will first warn a suspect holding a weapon (with hand on their firearm, and a hand pointing to them) before withdrawing their weapon. Police here don't withdraw their weapon after pulling over someone drunk driving or a minor traffic voilation. OPP; that may be a different story.

From what you've seen James, have you seen an officer withdraw their weapon to an assailent NOT holding a weapon? Not endangering the public or themselves? Should an officer (Canadian/United States in a local city police force) withdraw their weapon mindlessly/habitually JUST because a weapon (knife, gun, night-stick, pipe) is shown/seen (initially) in the hands of anyone? or should a few seconds to assess the situation be done first? Don't police ever think of whats behind the target if a bullet is fired?

Antares
Jan 7, 2009, 05:23 PM
In an extremely stressful and dangerous situation, it is very easy to confuse what you are doing. You may pull your gun and fire, thinking you're actually holding a tazer and just stunning him. Sure, you can tell the difference between the two in a calm situation....however, not necessarily in stressed moment when you're not fully thinking about what your doing. Police are supposed to be highly trained and able to handle a variety of high stress situations. However, they are human too. They can make mistakes just as we all can. This officer may have not even realized what s/he was doing.

XnavxeMiyyep
Jan 7, 2009, 05:38 PM
While the cop should be charged as anyone else would be and have no hope of getting this job again, he will probably receive no more punishment than being suspended with pay.

bruinsrme
Jan 7, 2009, 06:03 PM
Only if we could all be so perfect.

I feel for the family's and their loss and hope 24 million will ease the their pain, maybe even put some of it back into their community.

Abstract
Jan 7, 2009, 06:17 PM
Have to agree with you.
A lot of the comments are straight out of television with no basis in reality.
I can't comment on the incident, I wasn't there.
A dodgy bit of video isn't reliable.

How about 5 or 6 dodgy videos? There are far better videos of the incident, and IMO, even the use of a taser would have been out of line. He was on the ground, and the other cop already had his knee on his neck. There was no kicking and such. Even if the victim was talking smack, or squirming a bit, that should be treated as a TYPICAL situation when you're dealing with such a person. Well, it's typical for a real cop. I don't know if fake cops have seen the same.

bruinsrme
Jan 7, 2009, 06:18 PM
How about 5 or 6 dodgy videos?

do you have any links to the videos?

Abstract
Jan 7, 2009, 06:32 PM
http://www.ktvu.com/index.html

There's an entire BART SHOOTING tab.


EDIT: See HERE. (http://video.google.ca/videosearch?q=BART+shooting&hl=en&emb=0&aq=f#q=BART%20shooting&hl=en&emb=0&aq=f&start=20) Good angle, although I've seen the same video in much better quality. I can't find it though.

bruinsrme
Jan 7, 2009, 06:33 PM
thank you gonna take a look.

James L
Jan 7, 2009, 10:07 PM
The differences in our social cultures (Canada vs the USA) may be a major factor in what I posted above, that you quoted. Hence why I sound a bit looney.

Well, first off I'm Canadian so I'm not sure there are any cultural differences. Well you are from Toronto, but the only part of that I hold against you is your hockey team, which sucks.

:)

Secondly, my sincere condolences to your family in regards to your uncle's LODD. I have had to attend several of these funerals, and it is always hard.

Now, on to replying to your message...

Here are the areas I disagree with you on:

1) You CAN control the incapacitation of an assailant with a Taser to some degree. You can control the initial delivery of energy, and repeated deliveries. Taser's work against the nervous system of the body, so it doesn't really matter where the barbs hit. when you are hit with a taser it sends the energy into the central nervous system, causing massive muscle contractions and hopefully incapacitating the subject.

2) Shooting center mass is not an excuse, it is an absolutely proven necessity in firearms training. When faced with an assailant who has the potential to kill or maim, in a time sensitive pressure situation, you aim for the biggest target and neutralize the threat. The chest provides you a target about 18 inches wide, by 2 or 3 feet tall. At any significant distance that is a small target, made even more difficult to hit in a pressure situation because it is moving and often targeting you at the same time. Moving arms and legs are insanely difficult targets to hit, and usually do not neutralize the threat. There is a MUCH larger chance of missing an arm or leg, allowing the assailant to continue attacking you, and creating a greater risk of the stray bullet hitting an innocent person. People who think the police shouldn't shoot center mass either don't shoot handguns themselves, watch too much tv, or both.

3) If an officer's life is in danger and it is necessary to neutralize the threat... it gets neutralized. Hopefully escalating levels of force can be used. Hopefully the assailant's actions allow time for the officer to warn them. At the end of the day, however, if an assailant is threatening the life of a police officer and the officer shoots them it is not the fault of the officer... it is the fault of the assailant. Personal responsibility is a powerful thing.

4) In regards to your knife comment, a knife is an INSANELY HUGE threat... in close quarters easily equal to or worse than a gun. Many studies have shown that it takes an officer an average of 1.5 seconds to draw his weapon and fire one unsighted round. The average person can rapidly cross 14'/second. If the assailant attacks with the element of surprise he can cross 20 feet and stab/slash the officer before the officer can even get off a sighted shot at center mass... let alone attempting to aim for a limb. People in no way respect the threat of a knife enough. If I was an officer and felt the threat of a knife was present anywhere within 30' of me you can bet your ass I would be thinking of defending myself.

Please note I am not commenting on the original post at all, but more about your comments regarding police tactics and abilities. Like any occupations there are good cops and bad ones, but there are also universal truths about defensive tactics in life threatening situations, and your comments didn't seem in sync with these tactics.

Now, back to mocking your hockey team.

:D

bruinsrme
Jan 7, 2009, 10:42 PM
Well, first off I'm Canadian so I'm not sure there are any cultural differences. Well you are from Toronto, but the only part of that I hold against you is your hockey team, which sucks.

cmon Toronto does suck half as much as those other so called Canadian hockey teams

me_94501
Jan 8, 2009, 01:03 AM
Officer quits:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/07/BA2N155BAH.DTL

Protests turn to riots in Oakland:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/07/MN2N155CN1.DTL

Here's a choice quote:

Nia Sykes, 24, of San Francisco, a protester who was with the group, said, "I feel like the night is going great. I feel like Oakland should make some noise. This is how we need to fight back.
Nothing wrong with protesting, but you fight The Man by destroying your own community?? :confused:

rhett7660
Jan 8, 2009, 10:02 AM
Officer quits:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/07/BA2N155BAH.DTL

Protests turn to riots in Oakland:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/07/MN2N155CN1.DTL

Here's a choice quote:


Nothing wrong with protesting, but you fight The Man by destroying your own community?? :confused:



The roving mob expressed fury at police and frustration over society's racial injustice. Yet the demonstrators were often indiscriminate, frequently targeting the businesses and prized possessions of people of color.



I couldn't agree more.

BittenApple
Jan 8, 2009, 10:38 AM
Here is another video (a much more clear one) showing the officer going for his gun (and not the taser!) standing up and shooting him.

Video Two (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e28_1231201578)

BlackSnow
Jan 9, 2009, 03:53 PM
I believe in innocent until proving guilty, so I won't accuse the cop of anything. Because I wasn't there and it's not fair with hearing the whole story from both sides, or in this case, one side and the evidence. But the cop isn't looking to good at the moment. But we do not know much about the events before the videos. Most people would start the camera after the confrontation started.

Avaj
Jan 9, 2009, 04:00 PM
just sad :(

therealdt
Jan 10, 2009, 02:07 PM
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/N._Orleans_cops_shoot_man_in_0109.html

total of 3 that we know about..

there's no other way to start the new year

spork183
Jan 10, 2009, 02:23 PM
Here is another video (a much more clear one) showing the officer going for his gun (and not the taser!) standing up and shooting him.

Video Two (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e28_1231201578)

guy only been there 2 years. No history of shooting people in the back. BART police just started using tasers. Watch his motions in the video. There is no way he thought he was using deadly force.

Should he have been trained better? HY. Should he even have been deploying his taser at that time? Doesn't look like it, but I wasn't there.

"execution, is the killing of a person by judicial process for retribution and incapacitation" (courtesy of wikipedia)

It also SAH was not an execution, no matter how much people want to incite anger.

Double standard? You bet. Anyone outside of law enforcement fires that shot, they're in custody instantly. Many people don't connect the double standard.

For all that, this was a tragic freaking accident.

branjosef
Jan 11, 2009, 02:13 AM
I remember back in the day when police were actually friendly. You saw them and thought good things. Now they act all arrogant, their vehicles are designed to be intimidating and when you see them you think "Am I speeding?" even if you are stopped at a red light.

I feel no sympathy for law enforcement. I dated a cop once. She was the biggest head case out there and to think, thats who people call in an emergency. They need higher testing or screening standards to ensure a higher caliber of people doing that job.


* sorry if I upset any police... I know not all are bad and don't mean it that way.

FX120
Jan 11, 2009, 09:09 PM
guy only been there 2 years. No history of shooting people in the back. BART police just started using tasers. Watch his motions in the video. There is no way he thought he was using deadly force.

Should he have been trained better? HY. Should he even have been deploying his taser at that time? Doesn't look like it, but I wasn't there.

"execution, is the killing of a person by judicial process for retribution and incapacitation" (courtesy of wikipedia)

It also SAH was not an execution, no matter how much people want to incite anger.

Double standard? You bet. Anyone outside of law enforcement fires that shot, they're in custody instantly. Many people don't connect the double standard.

For all that, this was a tragic freaking accident.

I said this on another board, there is no excuse for this to happen. None.

This guy should recieve the same legal treatment that any of us would recieve, had the same happened.

Imagine telling the judge after sentencing "I swear I thought it was a tazer!". You'd be laughed at the whole way to prison for manslaughter.

heehee
Jan 14, 2009, 08:46 AM
Ex-officer arrested in BART shooting (http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/14/BART.shooting.arrest/index.html)

(CNN) -- The former police officer accused of shooting an unarmed man at a northern California commuter train station was arrested Tuesday in Nevada, authorities told CNN affiliate KGO-TV.


Oscar Grant, 22, was killed January 1 in a shooting at a subway station in California's Bay Area.

Former Bay Area Rapid Transit officer Johannes Mehserle was arrested on a fugitive warrant connected to the fatal shooting, KGO reported.

MacNoobie
Jan 14, 2009, 02:59 PM
*Sigh* another black man shot and its the Rodney King beating riots all over again, if it'd been a while dude shot by a black cop he'd been vindicated already and this would be "just another guy got shot" case.

Wheres the uproar when a white persons killed by a black man? or are whites too chicken to rise up?

Cavemate K
Jan 14, 2009, 03:16 PM
Mistaking a firearm for a taser is not that unusual when you see how the taser is designed to look. I saw a picture of one that was both the same shape and color as a standard issue LEO firearm.

Seriously folks, if you think that the mistaken taser defense is unrealistic, do you honestly believe that this BART cop intended to kill a restrained, unarmed man in front of all those witnesses and the potential for the presence of camera phones? Look at the cop's reaction: it's clear he realized that he screwed up on a catastrophic scale.

Personally, I've grown up riding BART frequently and have seen plenty of shady stuff at their stations (which are often located in rough neighborhoods) and I'm glad that they carry firearms, but in this particular instance, that policy set the stage for an irreparable tragedy. Hopefully, the next time an officer pulls whatever weapon he or she is armed with they'll think of this case and the four year old girl that now no longer has her father.

Cavemate K
Jan 14, 2009, 03:31 PM
*Sigh* another black man shot and its the Rodney King beating riots all over again, if it'd been a while dude shot by a black cop he'd been vindicated already and this would be "just another guy got shot" case.

Wheres the uproar when a white persons killed by a black man? or are whites too chicken to rise up?

I think the more reasonable option instead of "rising up" would be to open the channels of dialogue which often get cut off in the face of political correctness.

synth3tik
Jan 14, 2009, 03:37 PM
serious questions should be (need to be) raised if it is found that the gun accidentally went off, especially if the suspect did not grab the gun away.

MacNoobie
Jan 14, 2009, 07:57 PM
I think the more reasonable option instead of "rising up" would be to open the channels of dialogue which often get cut off in the face of political correctness.

Yeah try telling that to all those angry African Americans that are pissed because a white guy shot an unarmed African American. I would love to open a dialog but it wont help very much at all trying to talk to people and get the violence to subside. Its like trying to ask a bully politely to stop doing what ever it is that he's doing.. just doesn't work that way.

Dont get me wrong its tragic that this man died over something so stupid and I believe the white cop should get whats coming to him pending and investigation. It just irks me when I see African Americans in an uproar turning over cars, rioting all over the place and somehow people understand their pain but if a black cop kills a white unarmed man and I protest.. everyone screams racist.

Now the other part of all of this is that these stations are located in rough neighborhoods. I'm not really surprised that the cop had carried a gun on him, maybe he was trained for tazer's simply forgot and shot the dude out of instinct and past training because you can see his reaction I don't think anyone would intentionally shoot this dude in front of everyone with a camera phone. I also don't blame this guy for running either, yeah he shouldn't but it was either dying at the hand of a mob or a court.

agreenster
Jan 16, 2009, 08:38 AM
Ive really tried to analyze this video, and my amateur opinion is that the gun went off accidentally. He was a rookie, inept cop for sure. The gun went off as he stood up, so it's likely he over-squeezed the trigger. I just cant believe he intended to kill an unarmed, detained man in front of two hundred witnesses. And afterward he put both hands to his head as if to say "oh my god, what just happened?" It has all the signs of an accidental shooting, but even accidents shouldnt come without punishment, since more is expected from police. But to label it as intentional murder, and for people to riot over it is out of line in my opinion

What a terrible shame for all involved.

FX120
Jan 16, 2009, 01:09 PM
Mistaking a firearm for a taser is not that unusual when you see how the taser is designed to look. I saw a picture of one that was both the same shape and color as a standard issue LEO firearm.

Seriously folks, if you think that the mistaken taser defense is unrealistic, do you honestly believe that this BART cop intended to kill a restrained, unarmed man in front of all those witnesses and the potential for the presence of camera phones? Look at the cop's reaction: it's clear he realized that he screwed up on a catastrophic scale.

Personally, I've grown up riding BART frequently and have seen plenty of shady stuff at their stations (which are often located in rough neighborhoods) and I'm glad that they carry firearms, but in this particular instance, that policy set the stage for an irreparable tragedy. Hopefully, the next time an officer pulls whatever weapon he or she is armed with they'll think of this case and the four year old girl that now no longer has her father.

Firstly, if you've ever held a Taser X26 you'd know that they're nothing like a standard issue Glock 22. The grip is significantly smaller, with only two fingers on the grip, and the trigger is placed inside the frame of the weapon. Not only it it a different shape, it also weighs MUCH less than a firearm. And if that isn't enough, it also doesn't have traditional sights, only a laser sight.

And if somehow this numbskull STILL managed to get the two confused, IT STILL DOESN'T MATTER. You're not allowed to make a mistake like this. Period. There is no excuse. No matter what the reason, no matter how it happened, it does not matter. All that matters is that this officer shot and killed a restrained person.

This guy should recieve the same treatment as if any of us had done the same, manslaughter.

rhett7660
Jan 16, 2009, 02:53 PM
Officer quits:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BA2N155BAH.DTL

There is a reason behind him quitting. Officers Bill of Rights come to mind. His department cannot talk to him now about the shooting. Since an officer is compelled to talk about an incident with IA and that testimony can be used against you in a criminal proceeding. That is the main reason for the resignation.

Cavemate K
Jan 26, 2009, 02:24 PM
Firstly, if you've ever held a Taser X26 you'd know that they're nothing like a standard issue Glock 22. The grip is significantly smaller, with only two fingers on the grip, and the trigger is placed inside the frame of the weapon. Not only it it a different shape, it also weighs MUCH less than a firearm. And if that isn't enough, it also doesn't have traditional sights, only a laser sight.

And if somehow this numbskull STILL managed to get the two confused, IT STILL DOESN'T MATTER. You're not allowed to make a mistake like this. Period. There is no excuse. No matter what the reason, no matter how it happened, it does not matter. All that matters is that this officer shot and killed a restrained person.

This guy should recieve the same treatment as if any of us had done the same, manslaughter.

Agreed. Manslaughter sounds like the right call. I just don't buy into the idea that he intended to murder Mr. Grant right there in front of dozens of witnesses and colleagues. The officer clearly deserves to be punished, but IMO, not for murder.

alfmil
Jan 27, 2009, 04:06 AM
Luckily for the victim (and unlucky I suppose for the officer) that the iPhone has not gained more market share - otherwise there very well could have been no video of the incident.

No still shots either without zoom capability.