Police shoot 13 year old carrying fake rifle.

reply to post by LittleBlackEagle


[url=http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2013/10/officer-will-face-disciplinary-hearing-in-shooting-of-mentally-ill-man.html/]> and here is a Police Chief that fought the system

reply to post by Dav1d


To answer your questions ok an AK 47 yes you can cut the barrel down and have it fire just fine. In fact it is done alot to shorten it.But you seem to be the fire arms expert showing how your view of the world must be correct. But to make an ak74 u involves a shorter barrel and replacing the rear ztock quite common to see in Afghanistan. They modify the aks to make them shorter and easier to carry. But due to you being an arms expert you expect the police to have the vast knowledge you do about arms. That police officer has probably never seen an AK in his life and obviously neither have you.

LittleBlackEagle
reply to post by Dav1d

 

yes four cops oh boy lets jump for joy the constitution has been restored. four cops out of hundreds of cases of police brutality everyday, most un reported, that's really reassuring i tell ya.

cops need to have their blue shield of death removed, no more immunity from any prosecution, personal responsibility and accountability, strangely the same thing that needs to be done to all govt. employees and elected scum bags. they all hide behind their govt. ID while committing crime after crime. lock them all up and start from scratch.

Excuse me do you have access to these hundreds of reports of police brutality daily? Id sure like to see that might change my mind and i to will believe officers are evil incarnate. Sounds to me you have issues with your government i would suggest becoming more active in your local government.Do you bother to attend the meetings they hold i doubt it but its there for you to voice your opinion. Then theres all ways helping local candidates win elections and they can help correcting problems pick a representative or for that matter run yourself. If enough people think like you do youll win. However what your doing is calling the system corrupt but take no action to correct it what does that make you? Theres an old saying if you arent part of the solution your part of the problem.

Oh and one more thing for all Internal affairs in every precinct take there job very seriously and as every cop knows there not there to look out for the officers. I can gurantee because of this he will probably end up with early retirement or a desk job his days as a patrol officer are over. The only question now is if what he did was criminal misconduct or not. Judging from what ive read so far id say no but again we dont have all the facts.And in case you notice there contradicting facts like the boy being shot 7 times couldnt have happened and all those rounds hitting fences and houses to. Because ive heard no mention of him reloading have you?

reply to post by dragonridr

The autopsy for a 13-year-old Northern California fatally shot by Sonoma County sheriff's deputies who thought his replica gun was real earlier this week shows he was shot seven times - within 26 seconds

A total of eight rounds were fired, according to a statement put out Thursday by Santa Rosa Police Lt. Paul Henry, whose department is investigating the death.

Seven hit the boy, and two were deemed fatal: One to the chest and the second to the hip. Other bullet wounds were found on his right wrist, left bicep, right forearm, right buttocks and hip.

www.nbcbayarea.com...

Seven hits...

It all happened very quickly. Santa Rosa police released a timeline - to the second - of the shooting:

3:14:15 - Dispatch creates report of suspicious person walking near Moorland and West Robles avenues.
3:14:19:- Deputies call for emergency asistance.
3:14:25 - Deputies notifiy dispatch that shots have been fired.
3:14:41 - Emergency crews asked to come to the scene.

4 to 10 seconds. Yet it is report "he was shot seven times - within 26 seconds". When did those other 16 or so seconds of shots happen? When he was down?

dragonridr
And in case you notice there contradicting facts like the boy being shot 7 times couldnt have happened and all those rounds hitting fences and houses to. Because ive heard no mention of him reloading have you?

Nice catch. And at least five of the shots seem to have been after he was prone and dying. In the back.

Now, if more of them had been when he was standing, I guess it being a little teenaged kid you might have got some through-and-through's, I'm not sure what the cops had, .40's? A .40 would easily punch through a little wormy kid, unless you were shooting frangible. But most of the shots seem to have been in the back after the kid was down, as far as I can tell.

But yeah, it doesn't add up, does it? It's like both of them were whaling away at the kid until they emptied the magazines, only one of them was sort of spraying and one was just turning the kid to hamburger.

Maybe they had a hold-out gun, so the junior deputy could have his unfired inspection sidearm in his holster when the other cops got there.

The round that missed may have been the one in the house. I thought there were 2 possible hits on a fence which could have been ones that went through him. Even one of the fence rounds could have made the house.

Doubt we will even get real info about this.

Edit:

Would the coroner falsify the record to make the police look worse? Claim 7 when it was less.

roadgravel
reply to post by dragonridr

 

The autopsy for a 13-year-old Northern California fatally shot by Sonoma County sheriff's deputies who thought his replica gun was real earlier this week shows he was shot seven times - within 26 seconds

A total of eight rounds were fired, according to a statement put out Thursday by Santa Rosa Police Lt. Paul Henry, whose department is investigating the death.

Seven hit the boy, and two were deemed fatal: One to the chest and the second to the hip. Other bullet wounds were found on his right wrist, left bicep, right forearm, right buttocks and hip.

www.nbcbayarea.com...

Seven hits...

edit on 10/27/2013 by roadgravel because: tag

Yep and 5 more into fences and buildings apparently which tells me he was outside of effective range of about 150 ft, and shots went astray.Which means when this all starts they were no where near the boy.So im waiting to see how that fits in the story but something isnt right. But this is my speculation and im sure when they complete the investigation will be able to figure it out. However i dont believe anyone claiming they know what happened as fact it is merely a guess. But to many people in this thread are taking everything as fact theres no evidence they shot him while he was down and from the distance i expect unlikely.Though i can think of one scenario the officers lost sight of him in the tall grass and thought he ducked not realizing he was hit. Again more speculation but thats all it is so why doesnt everyone discuss possibilities but dont try to play things off as fact.

theres no evidence they shot him while he was down

Except for w witness who stated that. Was he correct?

roadgravel

theres no evidence they shot him while he was down

Except for w witness who stated that. Was he correct?

The witness wouldnt have been between the officers and the boy so i have a feeling this is just a statement from outrage. The communities really pissed who blames them but you saw the same thing in the Treyvon shooting as well. Family and friends just make things up thinking they need to lie to help conviction. So you have to be real careful the motivation of the witness.

In an interview with KTVU-TV, Ethan Oliver says he witnessed officers fire shots into Andy Lopez after the teen had fallen to the ground. Oliver lives across the street from the field where the shooting took place in Santa Rosa, Calif. He says he walked outside after hearing two gun shots and saw Lopez already on the ground. "Then the cops went at it again and unloaded like 6 to 7 shots,” Oliver said. KTVU asked him "if he meant that the deputy shot Lopez while he was on the ground." And Oliver stuck to his claim, stating that was "exactly what I saw."

Link

Not very far from the shooting.

roadgravel
Would the coroner falsify the record to make the police look worse? Claim 7 when it was less.

I had a friend go to court once over a knife fight, they actually got into an argument as to whether some of the wounds were through-and-throughs, and was the doctor properly dividing the wounds by two to get the right stab count?

But you'd hope that wasn't the case here.

I could see where several of the wounds could be caused by one bullet making two wounds. Like the wrist or arm hit entering another part of the body. The number of bullets in the body would say much about that. That fact doesn't seem to have been released.

dragonridrFamily and friends just make things up thinking they need to lie to help conviction. So you have to be real careful the motivation of the witness.

Somewhere in the pile of links upthread are a couple where the witnesses watched the kid fall onto the rifle, then the cop shouted for him to get up and move away from the rifle, and when he was too dead to comply, they opened up the second time and put five to seven more rounds into him when he was on the ground. This sort of agrees with the quote just posted.

And I just read another where they admit that some of the shots were in the back, they just didn't admit to how many. But it's hard to get shot in the ass when you're facing the cop, IMO. Plus, unless the cop was banging away like a M4 on full auto, the kid's going to be on the ground before you get eight shots with a big handgun into him. And they admit they turned him over and saw the rifle was a fake and the pistol was transparent. So he's face down at the end by the cop's own statement.

So, yeah, it sounds like they ground him up after he was face down. YMMV. Unless you (a) discount their admission he was shot in the butt and (b) think the cop could put six shots at point blank range into a kid that goes maybe a buck ten and him not be on the ground.

Remember, there were two shots, a pause, then a group of six or seven. I'm thinking the two shots did the trick, the others were superfluous, but I don't think a 13 year old kid is going to be standing there with a couple of rounds in him to still be upright for the next set.

roadgravel
I could see where several of the wounds could be caused by one bullet making two wounds. Like the wrist or arm hit entering another part of the body. The number of bullets in the body would say much about that. That fact doesn't seem to have been released.

Unless the kid is just a swiss cheese, you can often stick plastic probe rods through to determine if it's a single bullet wound.

Marshall, he tagged that guy maybe 11 or 12 times with a pretty serious blade. And the guy lived. I would not have believed it.

dragonridr
Yep and 5 more into fences and buildings apparently which tells me he was outside of effective range of about 150 ft, and shots went astray.

If you think they got 7 of 8 shots on target at 150 feet with a sidearm in that situation, I've got some Arizona oceanfront property for you.

Again more speculation but thats all it is so why doesnt everyone discuss possibilities but dont try to play things off as fact.

The news is already saying he got at least one round in the ass, meaning they fired at him after he was down. The other locations are sort of ambiguous unless the coroner reveals which side was the entry wound.

I think there is about the same possibility of Pelosi marrying Rush Limbaugh that the kid took 7 rounds in an upright position. If you like possibilities.

reply to post by Bedlam


See i was thinking about that we would get rookies into Afghanistan that would end up shot in the rear alot. Its natural when people drop down and think there on the ground to stick there but in the air. If the first shots missed hit the fence for example and the boy goes prone it would actually explain alot of the wounds. This also explains how the theory was that he laid on the gun. They started shooting and he did what anyone would do duck and cover. All ill say is dont be quick on trying to find ways to convict the officer unless you actually have been in a situation where shots are fired. Theres not alot of time to think you just react. And 20 seconds is a horrendously long time ive seen several people die in seconds.

roadgravel
The round that missed may have been the one in the house. I thought there were 2 possible hits on a fence which could have been ones that went through him. Even one of the fence rounds could have made the house.
Doubt we will even get real info about this.
Edit:
Would the coroner falsify the record to make the police look worse? Claim 7 when it was less.

Never happen - IMHO........if anything it would be just the opposite - to give the police the benefit of the doubt. Happens all the time. Most ME's (Coroners) will come down on the side of the authorities rather than the victims.

Bedlam
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Hobbs Act violations by LEOs aren't civil rights issues. It has to do with consistent false reports, taking bribes, running crime rings out of the PD, shake downs of citizens and the like. Right now, there's an officer going down at BPD for false reports, Kendell Richburg. They dug up enough crap that they're going to go through BPD with a fine-toothed comb now.

Again, not that it's germane with Lopez, although if the cops ended up filing false reports and have consistently been doing so when they go through the records, it might come up at that point.

false reports, taking bribes, running crime rings out of the PD, shake downs of citizens and the like

Everything you pointed out is a crime under State Law. The Feds get involved when crimes cross state lines or when those crimes directly violate the civil rights of citizens.

The Hobbs Act was enacted to:

"(a) Whoever in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce, by robbery or extortion or attempts or conspires so to do, or commits or threatens physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both."

The important thing to note in the act is the term "commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce".

The Federal Government has jurisdiction when it comes to commerce, whether its inter or intra state. The act is geared towards the crimes of Robbery / Extortion / Conspiracies -

"Section 1951 also proscribes conspiracy to commit robbery or extortion without reference to the conspiracy statute at 18 U.S.C. § 371. Although the Hobbs Act was enacted as a statute to combat racketeering in labor-management disputes, the statute is frequently used in connection with cases involving public corruption, commercial disputes, and corruption directed at members of labor unions.

The Hobbs Act criminalizes both robbery and extortion, where:
"robbery" means the unlawful taking or obtaining of personal property from the person or in the presence of another, against his will, and
"extortion" means the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right."

Both of which, when committed by a person acting under color of law, are civil rights violations. The Hobbs act was designed to deal with organized crime that crosses state lines (IE Federal). The Hobbs Act uses the Commerce Clause as its base.

Does the Hobbs act apply to this situation in California? No

Based on the information thus far the Federal Government has no standing to use the Hobbs Act.
Based on the information thus far the Federal Government has standing to use 42 USC 1983 though.

The Hobbs Act is very specific in how and under what circumstances it is applied. In this case, thus far, there is no report of extortion or robbery.