Shawna Cox Video from Inside LaVoy's Truck

a reply to: raymundoko

How can you tell the gun in the top photo (from Malhuer) isn't the same? It is only showing the butt of the grip, which is black in both photos. The slide (silver part) is holstered.

a reply to: Olivine

Because there is more than one photo of his holstered gun...His shoulder holster carried an all black pistol. His hip holster carried a revolver with a cream handle. His shoulder holster was a western style thumb break, meaning the hammer faced out, not up.

Edit: Also, he was big on a gun safety. He had all those holsters because they are the easiest and safest way to carry a weapon. Suddenly he decides to carry a "new" gun inside his jacket pocket?

a reply to: raymundoko

Simple questions:

Did Occupy Wallstreet people sit in armed?

Did the Occupy movement break any laws?

Did the Occupy movement endanger law enforcement lives at any point in time?

Did the people in the car have the opportunity to surrender peacefully?

It also was obvious for other poor passengers in the car, they had no idea why law enforcement was after them, while the adults knew full well what they were doing.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Olivine

Because there is more than one photo of his holstered gun...His shoulder holster carried an all black pistol. His hip holster carried a revolver with a cream handle. His shoulder holster was a western style thumb break, meaning the hammer faced out, not up.

Would you mind posting one of those photos? I've kept up with this event fairly well, and I can't find a better pic of lavoy with his 9mm. Thanks.

a reply to: yuppa

No its not. It's government 101.

Indiana's court system applies ONLY to Indiana and does not / cannot be applied to Oregon. The only way a court ruling in one state can be applied to others is at the FEDERAL level, which this case was not. If the federal appeals circuit gets the case on some type of appeal once state courts are done, and makes a ruling, that appeals ruling, in general, will apply to all states WITHIN that federal appeals circuit ONLY. If it makes it to SCOTUS there ruling, in general, would apply to ALL states.

This was a ruling (and now a law) in the state of Indiana and the Indiana court system. It does NOT apply to any other states - period.

My position has nothing to do with my chosen profession and the fact you are trying for the personal attack to shift focus away from the fact you are wrong is telling.

As for the Finicum comments I already stated im done with the debate. You guys believe what you want (and given the fact you are still wrongly arguing about the Indiana court ruling just reinforces that).

States are separate sovereigns, both, from each and every other state and with the federal government. How do we know a court ruling in one state does not apply to another? The full faith and credit clause of the US Constitution - Article IV Section 1.

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.[5]

Using your incorrect logic if a state court ruling could be applied to other states then there would be no reason for full faith and credit. Since the rulings arent applicable from one state to other states we need full faith and credit. Without full faith and credit states could refuse to recognize anything coming from another state -
* Drivers license
* Marriage certificates
* Birth certificates
* criminal convictions
* school / high school / college diplomas / degrees
* professional licensing
* etc etc etc

Tell you what -
Produce evidence that supports your "claim" that says the Indiana court ruling applies to other states. While you do that I will be continuing on considering you will never find the info because it doesn't exist. It applies ONLY to Indiana.

You need to stop making false / obscure claims. It does nothing but undermines your credibility.

You need to go back to your grade school / high school/ college and demand a refund.

a reply to: mzinga

Yes, they did break laws. Did you not read my source? RAPE WAS INVOLVED.

Did Occupy Wallstreet people sit in armed?

There were weapons yes. No guns. Several weapons (knives) were confiscated. Guns are not allowed inside NYC city limits, it's and auto 2 year jail term. Guns ARE allowed in Oregon, as well as where the protesters chose to occupy. Open carry is legal there.

Did the Occupy movement break any laws?

Yes, they broke the rules of the park which were put in place by the parks owners. The NYPD chose not to enforce those rules. Also, again: Yes, they did break laws. Did you not read my source? RAPE WAS INVOLVED.

Did the Occupy movement endanger law enforcement lives at any point in time?

They didn't have to. Law enforcement didn't try to forcibly remove any of them, nor did they issue felony arrest warrants for the organizers.

Did the people in the car have the opportunity to surrender peacefully

Chicken or the egg?

a reply to: Olivine

Even your picture is good enough. Zoom in and you can see the hammer. It's a black hammer and slide (facing towards the camera) and the grip is under his forearm.



This is the type of holster Lavoy had:

Source

Edit, it strikes me that while I am very familiar with my own Glock, I am NOT familiar with a Ruger. I do notice that the Ruger 9 has an unusual grip base and that I COULD be looking at that and not the hammer as I previously thought.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Indigo5

Edit. You've linked the autopsy report several times. How about you actually read it.

Source

First off...that is not a link to the Autopsy report, that is a link to an anatomy lesson, presumably so you can educate yourself on where the nipple is located.

You mean like where you said the exit wound was above the nipple? You were grievously mistaken and got corrected as you have done several times.

No...that was when (since you failed to specify during your ramble) I assumed you were talking about gunshot #2..which, and I quote.."Gunshot defect ABOVE and medial to left nipple".

media.oregonlive.com...

But when that didn't suite your BS claim that he was grasping a wound...You moved to gunshot #3 and shouted "Below the nipple" as if that must mean his lower left waist...

I then cited the autopsy report clearly showing it was only an inch below (at most) his left nipple...

No...he was not clutching a wound..he was reaching for the 9mm they found in that jacket pocket.

You can keep going crazy every time I point out facts if it helps you get through the day?

a reply to: Indigo5

Nobody "moved" to gunshot 3. Every post SPECIFICALLY SAID section 3c.

Source

Autopsy report Page 2, III, C. says left side exit wound

Source

He had TWO exit wounds on his left side. One from his 4th rib and one under his left pectoral

Both are very clear. I really can't tell if you are intentionally lying or just repeating what you are telling yourself in your head because you think it's true.

The link was so you could have an anatomy lesson about what medial means. You are confusing it with AML (Anterior Mid Line). Yes, it means towards the middle, buy my point stands that the wound exited below his pectoral basically below his nipple on the left side of it. You are the one who tried to google stuff and failed miserably. I've linked the autopsy more than you have. You link it, but it seems you've never actually read it unless someone referred you to a specific spot. Lazy.

3 shots, pop pop pop, no prior shots

originally posted by: Indigo5
Finicum had multiple opportunities to have a peaceful resolution to this and at every opportunity he chose to continue the escalation.

Nah... the Feds escalated the event by burning people off their land.

originally posted by: Indigo5
By "peaceful" and "driving"...do you mean fleeing the police and FBI while armed? Or rushing full speed toward a roadblock?

Peaceful enough to not murder anyone...

while armed? haha yeah right, did you see them brandish any firearms at the police... NO... sure they had guns in the truck, just like millions of other Americans, that doesn't justify murder.

You mean rushing towards a blind ambush.

setting up an ambush road block etc....
This is getting old...Calling a felony arrest an "ambush" is just plain dumb..
NO...It is not an "Ambush"...just cuz the criminals were white and country...

I didn't see a felony arrest, I saw a ambush... it's very clear as they had snipers in the trees, that makes this hidden
roadblock a ambush.

The felony arrest is a trumped up BS charge against peaceful protesters, setup to murder them all if need be.

He very nearly got those women killed because he didn't want to go to jail.
He knew there was a warrant out for him..
No warrant out for the Shawna and Victoria...
He could have stepped out of the truck at the first stop and surrendered.
He could have told the women to exit the car then, just like Ryan Bundy?...
He didn't get out because he didn't want to go to jail..
He didn't tell the women to leave the car because he hoped their presence would protect him while he fled.
Nothing heroic there..

The FEDS nearly got everyone killed, because of their BS warrants and stealing land.

You have to be delusional to think LaVoy used the girls for protection.... LaVoy had the balls to stand up to tyranny.... That makes him a modern day Hero, as well saving everyone in the truck by redirecting gun fire.

It's being said that the FBI agent didn't just omit that he fired his weapon, he actually LIED and said he did NOT fire his weapon and that is why an investigation has been launched. Other OSP officers however marked him as the person who fired the shots as Finnicum was exiting the vehicle.

I now believe the FBI agent intended to cause a shootout, but it seems the OSP officers were very well trained and did not just start firing away when the FBI SNIPER missed twice. If anything the OSP officers seem to have handled this case very well, and most likely took all direction on how to perform the stop and where to place the road block from the FBI agents.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Indigo5

The link was so you could have an anatomy lesson about what medial means. You are confusing it with AML (Anterior Mid Line). Yes, it means towards the middle, buy my point stands that the wound exited below his pectoral basically below his nipple on the left side of it.

I am not sure how much longer I can entertain your crazy town?

You do realize you were claiming that "Medial" meant the bullet exited through the center of his nipple?

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Indigo5

Medial to the nipple means in the center of the nipple.

Glad I was able to clear that up for you, but it is really fascinating how you keep angrily accusing me of lying while changing your claims to suite the links and evidence I provide?

a reply to: imitator

The felony arrest would have happened at the first stop if Lavoy had complied with officers requests. It was a legal stop and he was legally obligated to comply whether he agreed with it or not. He could have contested anything he felt was unlawful in court.

a reply to: Indigo5

No, I did not claim it exited the center of his nipple. Another lie bro? I said it exited BELOW HIS PECTORAL basically center of the nipple for reference purposes. I am convinced you are not lying on purpose. I really think you believe you are saying accurate things...it's kind of sad. You do realize everyone can read our posts here right?

Medial to the Nipple and Lateral to the nipple means it exited in line with the nipple, on the inside of it to be exact and below the pectoral. I said center so people would know where to place their hands when trying to enact reaching for a wound in the area.

3 shots, pop pop pop, no prior shots

You also ignore that he had a perforated left lung.

a reply to: raymundoko

Right, LaVoy had options, so did the Feds and OSP.... neither turned up well.

a reply to: imitator

Lavoy didn't have an option once he was pulled over...he should have complied.

a reply to: raymundoko

you mean pulled over by thugs pointing lasers into the truck.... yeah he had lots of options.

a reply to: imitator

Call them thugs all you want, they have the weight of the law giving them the power to perform their duty. From what I can tell the OSP did everything they should have done. I hold the FBI at fault here, just like Ruby Ridge.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Indigo5

No, I did not claim it exited the center of his nipple. Another lie bro? I said it exited BELOW HIS PECTORAL basically center of the nipple for reference purposes.

(a) These are your words..

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Indigo5

Medial to the nipple means in the center of the nipple.

(b) "Medial to the left nipple" ...as the report states....Indisputably means NOT the center of the nipple but beside the nipple toward the center of the chest. Medial means inward toward the center..

Couldn't help myself because you still seem confused .."bro"

a reply to: raymundoko

You don't think the OSP knew about the hidden roadblock and snipers? They are just as accountable as the Feds...