North Carolina police kill unarmed deaf man using sign language

originally posted by: roadgravel
Kinda hard for a deaf person to hear sirens.

The only thing I can say to that is I am always looking in rear view mirror and am watchful for emergency vehicles.

I read somewhere on a site that deaf people are excellent drivers. Can't remember where, as it was a while ago.

a reply to: texasgirl

I am not saying that the man didn't make a mistake, but saying someone ignores warning for a sensory input they do not have is out there.

I wouldn't be surprised if deaf driver do often pay better attention than most. A common distraction is eliminated.

While police here in the UK aren't generally armed as a matter of course, this is actually one of my prime fears.

I am profoundly deaf, and while I can hear sounds, I can't hear sufficiently well enough to hear speech, and because I am deaf, and have been since birth, I can't hear myself speaking. This means that while not technically "mute", most people can't understand what I am saying. I too communicate with sign language, lipreading, and written text. I carry a tablet to write things down on for people who don't understand sign.

Fortunately, I have only had good contact with the UK police, so far. Most have realised I am deaf, the second they hear me try and speak. But yes, this kind of outcome has long been one of my fears.

That's very sad indeed,,they must have released he was trying to communicate with them, if not,, then they still didn't have the right on just killing him.

a reply to: BMorris

Think the UK Police have already tasered a blind gentleman, they apparently claimed they mistakenly thought his white cane was a Samurai sword!

Moral of the story is be careful when around our boys in blue, disabled or otherwise, there are none to bright and don't care who they hurt. Fact is most of them don't even fully understand the laws they are supposed to uphold.

www.theguardian.com...

Another paid vacation for a trigger happy cop.

What was the "encounter" use of sign language? I guess there's no witness video, just whatever the Charlotte PD releases...

This both saddens and angers me. Only in America are you shot dead for speeding and then exiting your vehicle, unarmed.

Enough is enough. I cannot imagine things getting worse, however, unless things start to change from the tippy top on down, I believe they will.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Terrible story.

Being deaf doesn't mean you can ignore police and sirens.

I can't...

Just re-read your post and think about it. Idk if you mean to be a troll or you're just not thinking before sharing your opinion on the matter?

If someone is DEAF they CANNOT HEAR.

Doubt he was ignoring the lights, either. It was daytime and they aren't noticed as easily as at night.

I know I HEAR the sirens before I ever SEE the lights, especially during the daylight hours.

Seems that he did stop when he noticed the lights, before he got to his home.

But since he was deaf, guess he was just trying to get away with speeding. Luckily this cop put an end to this very dangerous deaf man. /sarcasm

a reply to: jjkenobi

"Being deaf doesn't mean you can ignore police and sirens".

Priceless!

I think you may find that unwillingly it does indeed mean you can ignore police sirens.

Guess if i was blind i should still see your point of view?

a reply to: jjkenobi
Really you can't be serious?Face palm,and a eye roll...

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Terrible story.

Being deaf doesn't mean you can ignore police and sirens.

Say what again??? Is this a parody post? Seriously?????

a reply to: roadgravel

The $$ should be retrieved from police pension fund's..you want to watch a mess clean itself up.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Yes, no doubt the dumbest thing I have read today.

Wow. 3 pages deep and no one has mentioned Trump, Hillary, or Obama. An ATS first!!!

a reply to: BrokedownChevy

Yet you had to. Thanks for doing it.

The problem here appears to be that standard operating procedure of police appears designed to protect officers, at the expense of those they interact with.

Perhaps we should disarm the police. I realize the criminal element is ARMED, but why would they shoot at an unarmed police force? At first blush that may seem like a stupid question, but I'm not so sure it is.

Perhaps if an officer can't figure out how to arrest someone with a billy club, a shock wand, and a tazer, he should try again some other time.

I realize that's a little extreme and would make it impossible to deal with situations where armed criminals were running rampant, but couldn't we at least make firearms a last resort? As in, if a cop pulls his gun BEFORE he knows for CERTAIN that a gun has been drawn against him, he loses his badge?

Seriously, I don't have the answer. But this stuff is getting ridiculous.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: cuckooold

Seems to me that a deaf driver should have a special plates or some other identifier for police and EMTs.

Only if the cop has plates that say
"Will Shoot Unarmed Disabled People"

So, basically this is how this thread has gone so far:

- Post OP that feeds into anti-police rhetoric and emotions, especially playing on the blind-man aspect of it

- All people who hate police use of force (justified or otherwise) chime in and spout out the usual hatred toward police

- People start attacking each other and start fighting perceived hatred with more hatred (a ridiculous tactic, btw)

- Two days later, nothing is resolved

Here is how this post should have gone:

- Post OP and discuss the situation with what known facts that we have so far (officer attempted to pull a man over for speeding; said occupant who happened to be deaf did not comply or yield to the flashing lights for more than two miles, apparently; something happens during the chase that cause both vehicles to be damaged; driver exits vehicle; detective say that the LEO and occupant got into "an encounter" of unknown details; occupant shot by LEO and died at the scene)

- Every commenter realizes that without the noted dashcam or bodycam footage, speculation concerning the justification of the shooting is inappropriate and ignorant to do, so instead, everyone comments on how we need said footage and how disappointing it is that someone may have lost their life over miscommunication (and maybe question why someone wouldn't pull over for more than two miles of being followed by flashing lights).


In any event, I agree that the plates should have noted that he was deaf ASSUMING that the vehicle was registered to him--it's possible that it wasn't.

So, I'm going to take the route of how responses should go in scenarios like this and say, I really want to see the video footage, here, because this seems really odd. Regardless, it's sad the he lost his life--it's sad when anyone loses their life to a LEO, even if it's justified.

this will continue to happen, and if you get stopped, you will save your own life if you imagine the LEO's being 5 years old, holding a gun, and wanting candy that you have. don't raise your voice, show your open hands at all times, no sudden movements, no talking back, obey every command they give you....any policeman that is trying to stop you in your vehicle, are ready to shoot you, if they feel the least bit threatened, physically or verbally.
even our own police chief here in Stockton said at a community meeting that there is a "war on cops"....this is how LEO's perceive citizens, as being in a battle zone, and a threat to their own survival

a reply to: SlapMonkey

something happens during the chase that cause both vehicles to be damaged; driver exits vehicle; detective say that the LEO and occupant got into "an encounter" of unknown details; occupant shot by LEO and died at the scene)

Well, that was NEW news to me, so I had to do some research. Seems the trooper purposely "bumped" Harris during the pursuit. Witnesses say Harris' car spun out of control when he came to a stop and immediately existed his vehicle.

The articles that I looked at didn't say for sure, but are making a big deal about "unmarked" police cars, and how their light systems work.

So, my question is, was the trooper in an unmarked vehicle when he tried to pull Harris over? Did the trooper follow procedure or did he put on his siren first, drive belligerently, scaring Harris into believing he was being pursued by some road rage nut, and then he put on his lights and called for back up. Perhaps Harris believed the police were chasing his road raged attacker.

Also, they say the chase went on for some 7.5 miles. I'm wondering if the off ramp that Harris finally took was the first available off ramp. Maybe he saw the lights, but didn't feel safe, for whatever reason, stopping on the freeway and kept driving until the next exit. When the trooper deliberately rammed him with his vehicle, Harris flipped out, and kept driving till he got to a "safe place".

originally posted by: windword
Well, that was NEW news to me, so I had to do some research. Seems the trooper purposely "bumped" Harris during the pursuit. Witnesses say Harris' car spun out of control when he came to a stop and immediately existed his vehicle.

Why was that information news to you? It was detailed in the "slightly less sensational version" linked to in the OP.

Regardless, it sounds like you're describing a PIT maneuver, which is a perfectly acceptable and a relatively safe way to end a chase. Obviously, if this went on for the 7+ miles that you mention instead of the between 2 and 3 miles that I thought someone else had noted, it's perfectly acceptable to end such a pursuit in that manner. That part of the incident, if accurate, is a non-issue.

The articles that I looked at didn't say for sure, but are making a big deal about "unmarked" police cars, and how their light systems work.

I'm not sure why--every time that I've seen an unmarked car with their flashers on, it's readily obvious, whether they're coming up behind me or from a distance in another direction. With the heightened visual sense that the average deaf person has, this is not a viable excuse that he might not have noticed the lights (of course, that's just my opinion at this point, as I don't know if his vehicle lacked any mirrors, if his rear window was blocked somehow, if he also has vision problems, etc.). Again, we'll have to wait until all the details come out for these questions to be answered.

So, my question is, was the trooper in an unmarked vehicle when he tried to pull Harris over? Did the trooper follow procedure...

Good questions, but we don't have official answers or videos to substantiate or discredit such answers yet, so I don't know.

... or did he put on his siren first, drive belligerently, scaring Harris into believing he was being pursued by some road rage nut, and then he put on his lights and called for back up. Perhaps Harris believed the police were chasing his road raged attacker.

Also, they say the chase went on for some 7.5 miles. I'm wondering if the off ramp that Harris finally took was the first available off ramp. Maybe he saw the lights, but didn't feel safe, for whatever reason, stopping on the freeway and kept driving until the next exit. When the trooper deliberately rammed him with his vehicle, Harris flipped out, and kept driving till he got to a "safe place".

And then you devolve into massive speculation and what-if scenarios--I'm not going to take part in that. Feel free to raise those questions with someone else, though, as there seem to be plenty of people in this thread readily happy to confirm or deny such questions, even though they have zero facts to back it up.