N.Y. police kill groom near strip club

Lets view the incident from an innocent view point. The Victim "Bell" was leaving his party at 4:00 am. A place known to have questionable persons, but his best man suggested the place so he ( Bell) went along. As Bell was leaving being slightly intoxicated and knowing he had an important date later this morning ( marriage), he got into an argument with someone outside (for some unknown reason). Bell noting an unusually large amount of questionable looking people lurking about sticking their noses where it should not belong as far as Bell is concerned..( ndercover officers). and Bell notices that one of them is carrying a GUN. as was reported something mentioned about a gun.

Bell gets scared, gets into his vehicle and as he starts his car one of those people that was carrying a gun begins to approach him at 4:00 am. So Bell, not wanting to get involed in this questionable area of town at 4 am tries to leave, by brushing the individual, that is known to be carrying a concelled gun, out of the way and hits a van (police undercover van) that was blocking him in. Things start to heat up in Bell's mind now.. The situation as far as Bell is concerned is getting out of control in this questionable area at 4 am. Bell now really getting scared tries escape the potentially dangerous situation by backing up the car and escaping the only way he knew. Thus backing car up over the curb and hitting the gate. Then out comes many people from the VAN with guns being drawn. (in a questionable place at 4 am, can you say russian mob?). So Bell lurches his vehicle forward to escape the area but hits the closely parked van again and then the group of people start shooting at him and killing him.

Now, since the victim can't speak we have to give him the benefit of doubt, NOT the people left alive and supposedly train to deal with unusually situations and the ones who shoot people.

I say STUPID POWER HUNGRY COPS. Punish then to the fullest extent of the law, even prison.

Originally posted by SmallMindsBigIdeas

A groom is dead because he committed at least one felony and several misdemeanors......

Well now,
I got attacked without end on another thread because I said violation of the law had caused an event to take place.
Where is the outrage here on this statement?
How can you say "HE" is dead because "HE" did something?
What happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'? And even if he WAS guilty of commiting 'at least one felony' as you state, is the punishment death?
YOu are blaming the victim, but there is no outcry from the femanists because the victim isnt a woman.
Your words are wrong, SmallMinds.
Let me correct them for you....

A Groom is dead because he was shot by another man.

Now, you could argue that he wouldnt have been shot if he wasnt breaking the law, but be careful, because I have been told that logic of that nature borders on sociopathic behavior.

Originally posted by 11Bravo
Now, you could argue that he wouldnt have been shot if he wasnt breaking the law, but be careful, because I have been told that logic of that nature borders on sociopathic behavior.

I agree 11Bravo...

Posted by Infoholic
This is clearly an issue of police brutality, or an excessive use of force, or whatever wording you would like to use. As was mentioned in a post earlier by donwhite, they were not even proven to be "convicted felons".

Innocent until proven guilty. Sounds to me like either, as was said the "Russian Mafia" or something out of an old cowboy movie. We don't need law enforcement running around blasting their guns in the air trying to corral the general populous like a herd of cattle.

I had a long concversation on this with a friend who is following it on AOL.

These are the points I made to him..
*The club was known for illegal activities.
What is any proof is it that the group knew of this? If I were throwing a bacheloette party, and I wanted to take my girls to a male strip club, I would just look for one on the net, and go to the closest one.
Also consider that everyone says this guy was "straight and narrow" That being so, there would be no reason to suspect that he knew what olther activities were present at that club.
*There was some kind of altercation, some mention was made of a gun.
Would it be too far to speculate that the alrercation concerned the groom, and his friends and a friend mention, dude, they might have a gun, let's go.. They were leaving, and some unknown person walks up to their car..
Groom and friend are scred, they hit the guy, trying to get away from him, hit the car, back up, hit the gate, go forward, hit the car again..
That doesn't sound like someone thinking straight.. Whether it was fear or drinking, we don't know, the toxicoligy report hasn't been released.
*The cop was UNDERCOVER. Someone keeps making mention of this, as if that excuses eveything that they did.
But let's reiterate, these were UNDERCOVER cops. There was no way for this guy to know that this was a cop, or that this guy wasn't a part of the group that they had just had an altercation with, that may have had the gun that the friend mention.. Again, this is speculation.
But as far as is known, they never identified themselves as police officers, and shot off 50 rounds, 21 of which went into their car, the other 29 went into surrounding residential homes, a train station.. One of the reasons that police are no longer trained to shoot at moving vehicles.. Bullets have no ones names on them, and anyone that was in the train station could have been hit, anyone in their own homes could have been hit.. and you think the potiential loss of life was justified, because they struck a person they did bnot know was a cop, an unmarked car twice, and a gate:???
Fuurther, concider this, the number of police officers present, 7.. (the 5 that fired, and 2 that did not, based oin the latest yahoo new report), suggests less that there was an investigation, and more that there was a sting about to go down.
In either case, it would have been far simpler to give the information to uniforms, and let THEM handle it, instead of blowing their cover by approachoing the groom, and his friends who were leaving.
Yes, people do leave to get guns, and come back and start firing, but a stop by uniforms would have shown that these guys weren't looking for trouble.
Which may be why they left after the altercation.
There was a serious breach of procedure and a man is dead because oif it.
One can say what they will about training, ect, How long does it take to say, You do NOT fire at moving vehicles?
Try it. Something like 3 seconds?
How hard is that to keep in your head?
Do not excuse these police officers for what they did.
It is gung ho, gun happy cops like that, that gives police officers a bad name.
Don't get me wrong, I like cops, they have a thankless and dangerous job, but everything does not need to be answered with deadly force.
I just read one of SeimperFi's blogs, and he mentions telling a suspect to do something, and when the suspect refused, pulled his gun on him, and the suspect said, what are you going to do to, shoot me.. and took off.. These days, the answer too after seems to be YES, and someone gets shot.
THAT is the anger, THAT is the outrage.

she what happens when you take away peoples second admendment rights.
in north carolina anybody with a clean record and who passes a class can carry a concealed firearm legally. and during hunting season most pickup trucks have a rifle or shotgun in them. that is a wonderful detterrent to rampaging cops.

LMAO, that is a good point..
Though, no need to give those kind of cops any more reason to fire on someone, they already use the I thought they had a gun excuse too often.

Originally posted by whatukno
Why was a married man leaving a strip club on his wedding night?

Last moment of freedom and strange.....

I agree that it is not in high moral standings, but you have the rest of your married, not so free life to be moral.

Kansas has the same ability to get a concealed carry permit.

You are correct, FalseParadigm, they don't need to have any more reason than they already abuse of the "I thought he had a gun" idea.

So now I'm confused after thinking about that... is the concealed carry permit a means for us to protect ourselves?, deter criminals?, or give the bad cop initiative to shoot first and ask questions later?

The policeman involved will be fired and prosecuted, for shotting to many rounds specially the one officer that fire 38 by himself.

Because is no witnesses and no gun, the whole here said of one man asking to have another man look for his gun in a car will probably stand and will be used to show that the police had the right to act due to intention.

Still they will get fired and the civil rights groups will be happy and the family will say than justice was served.

Here is a link to an article from the NY Daily News which has a first-hand eyewitness account of this tragic incident, NY Daily News. I also came across another article earlier which had an interview with, I believe, the photographer at the strip club who recounted a similiar version. I'll post that link as soon as I retrieve the web page.

www.nydailynews.com...

On a side note, for those thinking that being at a strip club on the morning you are to be married is a cause for suspicion, it's actually not unusual at all. I've been married for 5 years and on the eve of my wedding, myself, my Best Man and one of my Groomsmen went bar hopping, ended up at a strip club in Windsor and I didn't get home until a little after 4:00am. I was married later that day, haven't been to a strip club since and all is well.

Originally posted by darkskills
Here is a link to an article from the NY Daily News which has a first-hand eyewitness account of this tragic incident, NY Daily News. I also came across another article earlier which had an interview with, I believe, the photographer at the strip club who recounted a similiar version. I'll post that link as soon as I retrieve the web page.

www.nydailynews.com...

Wow, reading that, they did nothing wrong and tried to leave peacefully, the police did not announce themselves and approached the car with a gun, they shot an already wounded man as he was lying on the ground.

They should all be arrested for murder but they wont. Everything that party did was understandable. Everything the police did was not. What they did was indefensible.

Up to 7 armed but incognito police officers discharged 50 or more rounds in a residential neighborhood and missed every shot except for 20 rounds that went into a speeding vehicle. It was unclear how many occupants were in the vehicle or whether it sped after begin shot or before it was shot. The only witness who could clear that up is dead. Fortunately, by gunshot and not by auto crash. After all, it is the superiority of guns as instruments of death that is the lesson to be learned here. If you must kill someone, even a stranger, even a person in a motor vehicle speeding away from you, even so, it is better to kill him or her by gunshot - say funshot - that by knife or club.

It is regrettable the victim was to be married later that day; now the gifts will have to be returned. Say hello FedEx. But such is life in the city, and made all the more exciting by the proliferation of guns and the popular culture that thinks S&W stands for Saved and Watching for the 2nd coming! 280,000,000 guns and counting! God Bless America!



[edit on 11/27/2006 by donwhite]

Don, I have no idea where you were coming from there in that post.
No idea.
What we have here is an over-zealous, gung-ho, under-trained, police force that revels in using deadly force.
Your post seemed like a tyrade for gun control, if I read it correctly.
What does the NRA have to do with guns in cops hands?

Originally posted by marg6043
The policeman involved will be fired and prosecuted, for shotting to many rounds specially the one officer that fire 38 by himself.

Well maybe, but I predict what will happen is that in order to appease those which are upset over this they will probably bring some charges on the officers involved. The officers will then get acquitted by a jury and go somewhere else to serve or retire from the force altogether, at least some will.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Well maybe, but I predict what will happen is that in order to appease those which are upset over this they will probably bring some charges on the officers involved. The officers will then get acquitted by a jury and go somewhere else to serve or retire from the force altogether, at least some will.

Exactly what I think, its the same everywhere, police get a free pass to lie, kill, cover up and fake evidence without fear or reprisals.

Originally posted by WestPoint23

The officers will then get acquitted by a jury and go somewhere else to serve or retire from the force altogether, at least some will.

I agree that this issue has made it to the big media circus and poltiicans will get involved becasue civil rights groups are already involved.

Now I agree that all the policeman will be charge and acquited but one of them the one that fired the most rounds. Perhaps he will become the fall guy on the whole deal.

Originally posted by Flyer
...its the same everywhere, police get a free pass to lie, kill, cover up and fake evidence without fear or reprisals.

Not really, anyway, seeing as how we still don't know exactly what happened it's too early to say what the right outcome of any trial should be, or if a trial is necessary at all. Personally I'm not a big fan of being sued in civil court for public service, no matter what, so I hope that does not happen either.

Right now here in my neck of the woods a family and small town residences are calling on civil right groups to help with the killing of another man by a white officer while serving a warrant at the place where the man was working.

The store workers all are calling the killing also unnecessary and that the events to the man killing was different from the police statement.

Then we have the Atlanta elderly lady that also will be made into a big deal.

Already rallies for peace are schedule on the one man that was killed in my area.

It most be hard to be white and a police in this days dealing with people of other ethnic backgrounds.

Even if the police is not guilty they have to face all kind of scrutinies by everybody involve, from civil rights groups to politicians and society.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Not really, anyway, seeing as how we still don't know exactly what happened it's too early to say what the right outcome of any trial should be, or if a trial is necessary at all. Personally I'm not a big fan of being sued in civil court for public service, no matter what, so I hope that does not happen either.

All we have to do is look at the past to see what the likely outcome will be. It will be a shock to me if anyone sees any prison time for this.