BREAKING: Dashcam Video Just Released Shows Cop Murder Zachary Hammond

a reply to: alienjuggalo

How can you not blame the kid? Sure the cop could have just let him go, but he didn't. The kid drove the car away, and the cop was running toward the car. I think most cops with restraint could have handled this without the kid getting shot, but you can't do this one over.

Emotions aside, this was something the kid risked when he disobeyed the cop. I honestly wish it never happened, but it did.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

And stop pretending like cops can read minds--decisions on guilt don't fall with LEOs, it falls with the court system. LEOs are just there to bring you to the court system if it's probable that you committed an illegal act.

Just decisions on death fall on them.

a reply to: network dude

How can you not blame the kid?

Because he was shot in the back, and that makes it 100% the cops fault.

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
a reply to: jhn7537

so you just effing shoot him? Because he might hit someone wow?

Yes, you take the risk off the road... The car can be looked at as a weapon.

So, what if the officer allowed the driver to speed away and what if that car hit some children crossing the street on their way to school? Then what? It could have been avoided... We can create a million hypotheticals, but the fact remains that if the guy would have complied he would still be breathing today...

a reply to: alienjuggalo

he was shot. The cop surely didn't have the ability to decide where to put the bullet.

I honestly do get the outrage on this one. It never should have happened. But if you don't use the blanket "all cops are evil and want to kill civilians" mindset, you have to at least understand his point of view. He reacted to the aggression of the kid. The kid drove his car away from the cop who had ordered him to stop.

I wonder if all the cop haters really know what it's like on the other side? Might be good to get some perspective.

The point when the officer fires, he is not in any danger of being hit by the car. He is clearly to the side. In the autopsy, the bullets are found to go into the kids side and back. The officer clearly says "he tried to hit me" which is obviously not the case. An officer is not allowed to jump in front of a car and claim that the driver tried to kill him. This case could go either way, depending on the judge. I think if you take into account that the office tried to block the car with his body, that should negate the claim that the driver "tried to hit him". Therefor negating the "need" to use deadly force. The officer put himself in danger.

Selling weed is not a felony or an act of violence. The cop went all lethal weapon on the kid for no good reason.

a reply to: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
Because he was shot in the back, and that makes it 100% the cops fault.

Or the rear of the left shoulder and his side.

But, you know, that's the same as the pretending that the cop shot the guy in the back.

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
Just decisions on death fall on them.

That's right...Mr. Hammond did nothing wrong, here. I keep forgetting that all criminals shot by cops are innocent, and that it was only the cop's decision that exacerbated the confrontation.

/sarc

Should you not drive away when a cop has a gun pointed at you but tired of hearing that he deserved to get shot because of that. Seems like we are getting closer to judge dredd style policing. These days it seems that if you don't do exactly what they cop says you deserve what ever happens next.

originally posted by: DanDanDat
If officers picked and chose what laws they defend and which ones they don’t things like this won’t happen as much.

Seriously?
That's how you think things should work?
What if the officer has a personal acceptance towards something else you don't like?

People need to cut the victim bull. Everyone on earth knows they shouldn't run from the cops (or disobey LEO instructions). The driver could have obeyed and then dealt with it properly. He ran like a coward and chose to act that way and, while I agree that death is tragic, the officer did not use excessive force.

You're saying that the officer can't judge the person, yet you judge the officer. Give it a rest. One camera angle and internet ranting doesn't make you any expert on the situation.

originally posted by: jhn7537

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
a reply to: jhn7537

so you just effing shoot him? Because he might hit someone wow?

Yes, you take the risk off the road... The car can be looked at as a weapon.

So, what if the officer allowed the driver to speed away and what if that car hit some children crossing the street on their way to school? Then what? It could have been avoided... We can create a million hypotheticals, but the fact remains that if the guy would have complied he would still be breathing today...

That is alot of what ifs? How about reality? he would have pulled over in a block or 2 and giving himself up. he wasnt even speeding away he was trying his best to avoid the damm cop.

You cant just shoot him because he might be a threat. Might be? So now we justify it on maybes and might bes?

a reply to: SlapMonkey

There is middle ground of saying he didnt need to be shot and acting like he was innocent. Though, he is innocent until proven guilty. I agree he was wrong in doing what he did, but don't at all think shooting him was the answer.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Should you not drive away when a cop has a gun pointed at you but tired of hearing that he deserved to get shot because of that. Seems like we are getting closer to judge dredd style policing. These days it seems that if you don't do exactly what they cop says you deserve what ever happens next.

I don't think that is what's being said here. Once the kid decided (in a split second) to run instead of give up, he took his life and that of his passenger into his own hands.

If you were stopped, and decided to drive away from a cop with his gun drawn, would you expect him to shoot, or walk away?

(and again, I don't think this kid should have been killed, but he was)

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
Just decisions on death fall on them.

That's right...Mr. Hammond did nothing wrong, here. I keep forgetting that all criminals shot by cops are innocent, and that it was only the cop's decision that exacerbated the confrontation.

/sarc

What did he do wrong? Again he was not even the target of the undercover investigation. All criminals shot are not innocent. But this one was.

originally posted by: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: jhn7537

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
a reply to: jhn7537

so you just effing shoot him? Because he might hit someone wow?

Yes, you take the risk off the road... The car can be looked at as a weapon.

So, what if the officer allowed the driver to speed away and what if that car hit some children crossing the street on their way to school? Then what? It could have been avoided... We can create a million hypotheticals, but the fact remains that if the guy would have complied he would still be breathing today...

That is alot of what ifs? How about reality? he would have pulled over in a block or 2 and giving himself up. he wasnt even speeding away he was trying his best to avoid the damm cop.

You cant just shoot him because he might be a threat. Might be? So now we justify it on maybes and might bes?

So, you're making the assumption that he would have speed away and just pulled over a block or two away??? come on, man... In reality, people don't speed away, this isn't "Cops" or some movie, most (99% of people) would pull over to square things away with the police... Stop making excuses for this kid.

a reply to: alienjuggalo

And it wasn't "he might be a threat", he WAS a threat, when you're in a car, made of steel, speeding away from a cop with a loaded gun, you are a threat...

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
he would have pulled over in a block or 2 and giving himself up.

Really? and you know this how?

there's speculation, then there is what you did there. Just wow.

originally posted by: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
Just decisions on death fall on them.

That's right...Mr. Hammond did nothing wrong, here. I keep forgetting that all criminals shot by cops are innocent, and that it was only the cop's decision that exacerbated the confrontation.

/sarc

What did he do wrong? Again he was not even the target of the undercover investigation. All criminals shot are not innocent. But this one was.

so driving the car for a drug sale is legal?

seriously, you are not helping your point here.

Why not just get ride of the 5th and 6th Amendments and just allow cops the power of summary execution!

Speeding? Bang!

Smokeing a bit of pot? Bang!

Walking on the grass? You bet it should be the death penalty!


USA!USA!USA!

You can assume all you want, until it happens to you. Some people especially teenagers panic.

Panic doesn't justify breaking laws, rules, etc. The driver knew full well he was ignoring the cop and being a **** - the driver didn't panic. People see cops and run and then CLAIM to have panicked. That you believe this is telling of your own judgment abilities.

The driver saw the cop, figured "F This, I'm outta here" and bolted instead of complying. He made a choice. Period.