17 yo girl killed by police--Now threats by Anonymous?

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow



Did you just now watch the video?

originally posted by: Tusks
The cop should have called for back up initially.

He got too aggressive.

She was almost a match for him strength-wise. Those girls can be surprisingly strong.

He got tired, or out of breath, she didn't.

He threw her head first onto the floor when he didn't have to.

Then she was Mad and intended to kill him--and she likely would have if he hadn't shot her.

He had to sit down almost immediately---out of shape? heart issues? hung-over? Something wrong physically.

Disturbed young individual with knife attacks poorly trained and ? physically challenged cop---gonna be a bad outcome.

Could easily have been worse---dead cop and dead girl.

Killed him with what? Her teeth?
The alleged knife was not as "described" and she may not have had it. She also appeared to be handcuffed at least partially because she lunged with one hand behind her back. He approached her so obviusly he wasn't afraid of what she might or might now have had. The other cops stood by and didn't help. She was subdued. She didn't even get up for a bit after he had subdued her. If he did his job he would have put his knee on her back until the other officers arrived.

Manslaughter charges for this cop.

Could have MUCH MORE EASILY been no one dead and a girl getting the help she needed at the psych ward.

a reply to: Domo1

Yeah I did. She is handcuffed when she lunged at him. DId you not watch the video more than once?

He wouldn't have approached if he felt in danger. She was handcuffed which is why he got off of her. He shot her solely for not following his commands despite her being cuffed. Watch it again.

If she actually had a knife ( which i doubt) she had plenty of time to stab him when they were walking to the chair and in the chair.
He gets complete control of her, cuffs her and then gives up control of her. The other cops stood around like the dimwits they are.

No need for shooting her. She was in custody and he let her go. Then shot her when she lunged at him while cuffed. This dept has had 3 bad shootings in 6 months.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

Killed him with what? Her teeth?

No, with the knife you can see in the video that was also recovered.

She also appeared to be handcuffed at least partially because she lunged with one hand behind her back

Yeah, you handcuff a wrist to a wrist. Partially handcuffed would be just like having a large bracelet.

He approached her so obviusly he wasn't afraid of what she might or might now have had.

He obviously didn't know what she wanted. She wouldn't tell the person on the other end of the phone why she wanted to speak to an officer. He comes in, she indicates she has a gun, then she reaches towards her jacket at which point he grabs her wrist and she begins fighting.

ETA: I think I confused which part of the video you were talking about here. I thought you meant the initial contact.

She was subdued.

No she wasn't, she was on the ground, still in possession of the knife, not cuffed and still a very real threat.

Manslaughter charges for this cop.

Which one?

a reply to: Domo1

When I said partially handcuffed, I didn't mean a loose wrist. I meant maybe not tight. She clearly had her hands behind her back when she lunged.

This is the cops fault. She was on her stomach on the floor with him on top of her. HE cuffed her and then got up before back up arrived and backed away. What sense does that make? Seriously answer that.

You know something is wrong with this video.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

Well to me it appears she has her hand and the knife well over her shoulder, something I don't believe would be possible if cuffed.

I'm not quite clear on what you mean by loosely cuffed. The only thing that would really allow would be slipping out of them. Are you thinking that not having the bracelets (I can't remember what they call all the parts of cuffs, been a long time since I had that training) tight on the wrists would allow her to move more freely? I would say in my experience that's really not the case. As long as you can't slip out, they don't give more than a few tenths of an inch of play.

The angle is unfortunate. The officer says he wasn't aware of the knife. He thought he was fighting for a gun. I'm thinking he probably disengaged when he saw the knife come out. I really don't think she was cuffed, but I am willing to take it into consideration, I've watched this video 10 times by now but sometimes you miss stuff.

a reply to: Domo1

She was absolutely subdued.


You see him cuff her a second after that shot.


Then he inexplicably gets off of her. He was never in any danger and she lays there face down for several seconds until other cops arrive. Ample time to cuff her if he didn't already (which I believe it shows him doing - hard to stab someone laying flat on your belly). The cop was NEVER in danger for his life.


She lunges at him while cuffed (one arm seems free but it isn't) (while other idiot cops stand around). I circled her arms behind her back.

The cops shouldn't and wouldn't have gotten off of her when he had control without cuffing her.

Do you sincerely think this was handled correctly? That taser or mace wouldn't have worked? Do you sincerely believe any of these cops lives were in danger. No other cops appear to have drawn their weapons until she gets up and runs. I don't think she intended on stabbing him with the cuffs just attacking out of anger that he treated her so roughly.

a reply to: Domo1

Go to the post I link and click the links. It appears she has the knife in a position I don't think would be possible if she was actually cuffed.

Post showing knife in hand

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

You see him cuff her a second after that shot.

K lemme watch it again. I'll update this in a few.

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Domo1

Go to the post I link and click the links. It appears she has the knife in a position I don't think would be possible if she was actually cuffed.

Post showing knife in hand

NO YOU DON'T SEEM TO GET IT. SHE WAS IN FACT handcuffed. Look at when she got shot. Her hands don't go up for a reason. What you see that makes you think she isn't is her swining both hands to her right behind her back so her right hand is briefly visible. She was one hundred percent handcuffed. It is not debatable. Watch the video again.

SHE IS CUFFED. That is what the cop was doing and that is why he got up.

SHE IS HANDCUFFED. If you can't see that you are blind.

So this cop shot a handcuffed woman solely because she came at him. She had no way to harm him. He could have put his hand on her hand and stopped her in her tracks.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

Go to 10:49 in the video. Watch her hands when she gets up, she's clearly not cuffed.

I think that she may have had a cuff attached to her left wrist when he had her on the bench (yo can even see a flash of metal).

When he has her on the ground I believe he only has control of her left arm, then produces the knife, you see the cop at this point reach under his coat and grab his firearm, then back up.

originally posted by: GogoVicMorrow
This is the cops fault. She was on her stomach on the floor with him on top of her. HE cuffed her and then got up before back up arrived and backed away. What sense does that make? Seriously answer that.

You know, this is the part I absolutely cannot comprehend. It really does appear that he has her subdued, face down, with his weight on top of her back. Cuffed or not why would the site of a knife, as some suggest, cause him to unsubdue her? It defies logic. So he appears to have control and he sees a knife she cannot use and he relinquishes control? She even remains face down for several moments after he gives up control.

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

Go to 10:49 in the video. Watch her hands when she gets up, she's clearly not cuffed.

I think that she may have had a cuff attached to her left wrist when he had her on the bench (yo can even see a flash of metal).

When he has her on the ground I believe he only has control of her left arm, then produces the knife, you see the cop at this point reach under his coat and grab his firearm, then back up.

That's what I meant by partially cuffed, because one hand is obviously tied (maybe to a belt loop), but after watching and watching I think she was completely cuffed. She doesn''t use her hand to get up she uses her elbow. Which is possible with cuffing (lol i'm doing a home experiment right now). She remains with her hands behind her back from that point on. Never puts them up, even when being shot or falling. She would've moved them when shot.

Either way, please, do you think this couldn't have been avoided if the cop had kept her subdued until the other officers arrived. I also think the cuffing is why the officers didn't move. They saw she was cuffed. If she wasn't why didn't the officer.

Basically. Did this woman need to be killed. Was the officer really in fear for his life in your opinion? Should he have been in your opinion. Either way it's the officers bad work.

originally posted by: FraggleRock

originally posted by: GogoVicMorrow
This is the cops fault. She was on her stomach on the floor with him on top of her. HE cuffed her and then got up before back up arrived and backed away. What sense does that make? Seriously answer that.

You know, this is the part I absolutely cannot comprehend. It really does appear that he has her subdued, face down, with his weight on top of her back. Cuffed or not why would the site of a knife, as some suggest, cause him to unsubdue her? It defies logic. So he appears to have control and he sees a knife she cannot use and he relinquishes control? She even remains face down for several moments after he gives up control.

Yes.. There is something very wrong. This is on the officer. He could have easily subdued her again. At least one hand was definitely behind her back. Why not mace her? or taser? Why didn't other officers help?

It really does NOT make sense. She laid there forever. I think she lunged at him purely out of anger for the headplant. Not to kill him.

After more reading. She was bi polar and was apparently tasered once. It also says it appears while on the ground he had her hands (both behind her back). It says he appears to handcuff her. Why would he have both hands behind the back and NOT handcuff her. It was most likely a cry for help. It also says she had a large butcher knife which i can't see.

Do we think he got on her, hand her hands behind her back, saw a butcher knife on the floor and despite it not being in her hand got spooked and backed off. She was a beautiful young girl with problems.
This is no doubt an eff up on the cops part. She lunged, so no murder, but manslaughter easy. He had her under control, why did he give that up!!!???

Okay do a google and include handcuffed. Articles are stating she was in fact handcuffed.

I personally believe she was handcuffed and the arm we see swing out to the left was because she was also pulling her other cuffed arm in that direction too. Enough for us to see giving the illusion of a free arm. When she was subdued he could have easily taken any knife.

This cop messed up and it cost a young woman her life. I can't completely hate him like I do that cop firing into the car of young girls in Denver because the video is confusing, but I am absolutely sure he was not in fear of his life and deserves some punishment. This dept is notorious for bad shoots.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

Man I watched it a lot and she clearly has both hands free when she gets up. You can even see her touch her face over the cops shoulder though it's less obvious.

She uses her right hand to push herself up from the floor, and her left is in front of her body and face when she starts standing. No way was she cuffed. I don't doubt that left arm was hurting and that's what we see when she makes the final approach and only raises her right with the knife.

I'm not gonna lie, I questioned it. It took me a few times re-watching, and I really don't mind admitting it if I'm wrong. I was willing to concede that if she was cuffed it changed everything. Yeah someone can still be very dangerous with a knife even if cuffed behind their back, but in this situation it would have completely changed things. If she had only one hand cuffed to a belt loop or something it wouldn't have changed my opinion much, you only need the hand with the knife free to get stabby.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

After more reading. She was bi polar and was apparently tasered once. It also says it appears while on the ground he had her hands (both behind her back). It says he appears to handcuff her. Why would he have both hands behind the back and NOT handcuff her. It was most likely a cry for help. It also says she had a large butcher knife which i can't see.

Dude... We know all that. She had also tried to commit suicide before.

All of these things have been discussed.

It appears she went there looking for a confrontation with police to suicide by cop. Which is why she wouldn't tell the person that answers the phone after hours why she wanted to speak with a cop, and why she told the cop that responded that she had a gun, and why that cop would have gone for her wrist when she started reaching in her jacket.

I will eat a TON of crow if it's proven she was actually fully handcuffed,it would also completely change my opinion. I just don't see how it was possible the way she got off the floor and touched her face. If she was it had to have been in the front, which would be bizarre because it looks like she is clearly on her face.

It's not going to be manslaughter. She had a knife in her hand.

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

Man I watched it a lot and she clearly has both hands free when she gets up. You can even see her touch her face over the cops shoulder though it's less obvious.

She uses her right hand to push herself up from the floor, and her left is in front of her body and face when she starts standing. No way was she cuffed. I don't doubt that left arm was hurting and that's what we see when she makes the final approach and only raises her right with the knife.

I'm not gonna lie, I questioned it. It took me a few times re-watching, and I really don't mind admitting it if I'm wrong. I was willing to concede that if she was cuffed it changed everything. Yeah someone can still be very dangerous with a knife even if cuffed behind their back, but in this situation it would have completely changed things. If she had only one hand cuffed to a belt loop or something it wouldn't have changed my opinion much, you only need the hand with the knife free to get stabby.

No.. try it for yourself. She uses her forearm to get up. You can see the officer get his cuffs. If you believe what you say, then why didn't he cuff her? Why does she NEVER put her arms out in front of her when she goes after the officer. That is how you threaten someone with a knife no?

She is cuffed. She uses her elbow and forearm to get up. If what you allege is true why didn't the officer cuff her? He had her arms behind her back. When she lunges forward she does so with her hands behind her back.. that's unnatural and nonthreatening.

Can we at least agree that the this is the cops failure?

a reply to: Domo1

Didn't say it would be manslaughter, said it should be.

Her hands are not infront of her when she lunges, agreed? They are saying she had a knife in front of her. Where did the knife come from? Was it in her hand when the cop had her under control? Did he not search her? It clearly shows him reach for his cuffs and she lunges with her hands behind her back.

Why did he get up? Why not keep her subdued or pepper spray her. Why let a perp out of your control without cuffing them.

Do you not agree that this is a major eff up on the police part? Why did she lay there for so long. He had ample time to get her under arrest. I would have cuffed her and dragged her to her feet, as well as searched her.

In reality, the one fact, she didn't need to die.