Cop Shoots Apparently Helpless Man In The Back (Update: Officer quits to avoid IA questions)

Originally posted by The Savage Khan
His colleagues are just as surprised. Whatever his foolish reasons, this cop did not shoot Grant in cold blood.

No... his colleagues are immediately surprised, whereas the offending officer takes at least two seconds to react.

That is, he drew his weapon, aimed it at a defenceless man and shot him in the back..... only a few seconds later did he react.

Why did he pull the gun out? Surely an officer worth his salt knows only to draw a weapon as a last resort. There was NO threat, he had his colleagues with him, the situation looked very much under control.... the suspects were prone or passive and then he drew his gun and shot a man in the back.

I don't usually like to repost,but sometimes you have to.

(from page 18)

News video shows damning evidence against the BART copper.

1)Grant was clearly handcuffed.(and for those who say the copper put his hands to his head in shock,go back a few pages to a link I posted that shows the copper struggling to get the cuffs off of Grant.That is not the actions of a man in shock)

2)At one point the cop had his taser out (hence Grants pleads not to be tasered) and had then put it back in his holster to handcuff Grant.

3)His taser was on his left hip,his gun was on his right.Video footage clearly shows him reaching for his gun,not his taser.

Note that the taser has yellow colouring on it,which is not seen in the weapon used to shoot Grant.

www.ktvu.com...

reply to post by ALLis0NE

most cops use tazers on people resisting arrest these days

How on earth did the american public allow this situation to develop?

Ever been tasered? I have (I volunteered for testing in the UK as they pay a lot for doing it). It HURTS.

Did you notice the guy begging not to be tasered? He was terrified.

I can see cops using a tazer on a guy brandishing a knife, or maybe a club or something - a situation where they can immobilise someone and reduce significant danger for themselves - but come on - 'resisting arrest' can constitute something like the situation in this vid?

So a guy is abusive, writhes around, kicks, punches - so he has to be subject to an incredibly painful (and dangerous) process?

I thought cops got paid to be in a dangerous situation and to take some risk? Since when did it all become about 'making sure the cop is 100% safe and doesn't face any risk at all' - at the expense of civil rights.

Remember - someone being arrested has not yet being proven/decided guilty by a jury of his peers - so why are we subjecting them to tazings/beatings etc.

Regardless of whether the guy above is 'technically' resisting arrest or not, the cops are clearly in control of the situation. I don't see any need to even use a baton - which in any case, should be their first response before using a tazer - let alone a gun.

heres an update..

OAKLAND, Calif. - Protests over the fatal shooting of an unarmed man by a Bay Area Rapid Transit police officer turned violent Wednesday night as demonstrators smashed windows, set fire to several cars and blocked streets.

A few hundred protesters took the streets of downtown Oakland to condemn the shooting and call for criminal charges against 27-year-old officer Johannes Mehserle. Oakland police reported at least 14 arrests.

Mehserle resigned from the transit agency shortly before he was supposed to be interviewed by investigators Wednesday

www.msnbc.msn.com...


how many riots is that now, just this year over cops shooting kids???!!

[edit on 8-1-2009 by turbokid]

reply to post by igor_ats


Yeah I know they use "evidence" as the excuse for taking everyone's video. But if you're on public land, that privacy thing is out the window. If that was true, don't you think paparazzi would be thrown in jail regularly? Point of fact you can record whatever is there if you're public land. As the spokes person said "we have no video of the event" meaning they where just stalling and lying hoping they got everyone's cell cams.

reply to post by turbokid


The riots have finally started... I wonder what took so long?

What is more probable;

A) A group of cops detain a group of black kids and one of them flat out executes an unarmed kid in front of dozens of witnesses for no apparent reason.

B) A bunch of transit cops detain rowdy kids and while trying to cuff one suspect one stupid cop takes out his gun, presumably to scare the kid into sitting still. It goes off and accidentally kills the suspect.

I'm not taking a side I'm just judging based on the video. I don't believe his reaction time (1-2 seconds) implicates his intent to kill, he looks to me dumbfounded by what happened.

In fact he barely has enough time to aim the gun before it goes off. He hasn't got sure footing and both hands are barely on the gun.

Forget the whole tazer thing, he may have used that as an excuse to cover his idiocy. I'm gonna predict this will turn out to be a case of "Involuntary Manslaughter"

Yes I do believe there are crooked cops in this world and downright evil people. But is that what we are seeing here?. There has been rioting, people went out destroying the property of people who weren't involved. This is an obvious result of the pent up tension and past injustices.

But are we witnessing cold blooded murder and continuing conspiracy or an extremely careless blunder by a person who shouldn't have made the cut. The man looks to me like a fool, not a cold blooded murder.

Hello everyone-
As a ten year veteran of law-enforcement - one of the good ones, I think - I just wanted to clarify some things for people.

Most importantly, this is a tragedy no matter how you slice it. A life was lost which can never be replaced, and another man's life is going to be changed forever (not necessarily a bad thing if this was intentional). I will neverargue that point. To address some previous posts:

-Gun out. Not sure why, I wasn't there. Maybe he did mistake it for his Taser (most of our officers carry it in a cross draw holster on their support side to prevent this, but there's no requirement). Maybe he drew it because there was an increasingly hostile crowd shouting things like F--- the police and approaching while they're trying to make arrests (something I would never allow btw...take all the pictures/video of me you want while I do my job, but do keep some distance, if only for your own safety, while I'm trying to deal with a possible arrest situation, which always has a potential to be volatile). Nothing except maybe a department's general orders, define when an officer has the right to draw, not use, their gun. It's up to the officer's judgement, which departments rely on after psych testing, academy training, a field training period, etc.

-Not all guns have safeties. Mine doesn't but compensates by having a heavy trigger pull. Even if mine had a safety I wouldn't go on-duty with it on. Action beats reaction every time, so I'm already at a disadvantage if someone draws down on me first - no need to add an extra step to the process of defending your life.

-Once the gun is out (mistakenly or intentionally), there's a whole process that has to be followed in milliseconds. Gun drawn, you "index," not placing your finger on the trigger until you're ready to shoot. Easy enough, right? Except due to a court case against the City of Chicago, even placing your finger flat against the frame is not good enough anymore; now we have to train, or retrain, officers in a different manner, which is still subject to sympathetic grasp (below) though less so. The case dealt with a officer who drew his gun, fell or was pushed, and while falling squeezed the trigger, striking the arrestee. Remember trigger pull above? Mine takes 13 lbs. of pressure. Studies have shown when falling, or subject to a flinch/startle reflex (where your eyes instinctively blink, your chin tucks and head moves forward to protect your throat and, most important to this discussion, your hands start to clench into fists), you can easily unintentionally generate 25 lbs. of pressure with your index finger...twice what my gun requires to fire that first double-action shot. And plenty of guns have way less trigger pull then mine. This "sympathetic grasp" can also happen if, say, you're trying to grab someone with your support hand with your gun out - your shooting hand reflexively grasps as well.

-Are there bad cops? Yes. But less than 1/2 of 1% of men and women who wear a badge dishonor it. Those that intentionally do shouldbe held to a higher standard and often are (you punch a guy for no reason = misdemeanor; I do, possibly even off-duty = felony).

-My state law says that even if you feel you are being wrongly arrested, you have no legal justification in resisting that arrest. I know it's difficult, emotional etc., but that's what court/civil suits are for (not saying that's what happened here, just pointing that out).

-No amount of training can ever prepare you for everything.

-I enforce laws I think are pointless sometimes. We can write city tickets for weed, battery, etc. But if you work for Wal-Mart, you don't set the return policy, you do your job or quit and I happen to think I do more good than ill so I stay.

There's more but this is already long-winded. Thanks for reading. And remember, I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

The more I look at it, the more it is blatantly obvious that this accident is being turned into a manufactured event to cause chaos in the public.

It's the only way I could describe the constant lies, and misinformation being spread by the News, and various other people, before the case has even been to court.

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
-Gun out. Not sure why, I wasn't there. Maybe he did mistake it for his Taser (most of our officers carry it in a cross draw holster on their support side to prevent this, but there's no requirement).

Exactly my point about bad judgment. As you state later on about action versus reaction, it makes absolutely no sense to train to use a weapon that randomly changes it's nature and lethality on you by one's own design. That adds a completely unnecessary variable in a dynamic job.

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
-I enforce laws I think are pointless sometimes. We can write city tickets for weed, battery, etc. But if you work for Wal-Mart, you don't set the return policy, you do your job or quit and I happen to think I do more good than ill so I stay.

And what such is because of it you are a fellow criminal in this fallacy, only from the opposing non-official perspective of the antagonistic civilian. Thus perpetuating animosity and conflict among our people & the ones who we hire to help protect us, this crap needs to stop. It would be nice if officers such as yourself who recognize this have a powerful channel of communication & change to help regain America's freedoms by being allowed to voice your perspective of our laws without fear of being (insert any type of bad stuff here).

Thank you very much for taking time to share your experience and perspective.

[edit on 8-1-2009 by Shakesbeer]

Originally posted by DantesLost
1)Grant was clearly handcuffed.

This is proof that the channel 2 news, and probably other news channels are spreading lies and misinformation, and the general public is blindly following and believing, including YOU.

In the following video, the News channel 2 says that Oscar was already handcuffed, but they are showing the hands of a completely different person!!!!

www.ktvu.com...



The proof: www.youtube.com...

Sorry to tell you that you have been lied to by the News channel, probably to further the chaos and to cause riots.



[edit on 8-1-2009 by ALLis0NE]

reply to post by zerbot565


"Zieg Heil!'

Fellow Traveller-the original one that is

reply to post by ALLis0NE



I really can't understand why you're so passionate about defending the police officer. A 22 year old father was senselessly killed. Regardless of intention, there is absolutely no reason this should have happened.

BUT....

Please watch the other videos. Grant is handcuffed by Mehserle right before being shot. There is also nothing suggesting Grant is resisting arrest. In every video I've seen from every angle, Grant is fully cooperating and even pleading with the police.

I have been in a similar situation my self where I've been forced down by multiple cops at gunpoint. I was fully cooperative and offered no resistance. However, and unfortunately, it is a typical reaction of the cops to shout things such as "stop resisting" and proceed to use force. I know first hand.

It's a power trip.

But yes, Grant was handcuffed by Mehserle before being shot. Please watch the video again. You can see that Grant's hands remain behind him during the shooting and can even make out the cuffs in some videos.

Police officers need to be retrained seriously! Just because they have tasers and can use them doesn't mean they should. I can't say what was running through that police officers mind that made him grab his gun and shoot the boy. Even if he thought it was a taser, he didn't need to use it in that situation. That's so sad to watch knowing that our tax dollars paid this man to take a life for what!? Fighting? I really wonder if a police office knows how to fight? If not they need to learn how. I'm sick and tired of police officers thinking they need to use weapons on an unarmed man or woman.

reply to post by ALLis0NE


They (KTVU) have come out on every Newscast since then and apologized and stated that they made a mistake and Oscar wasn't handcuffed. At least they admit they made a mistake, maybe the ex cop should take thier lead.

reply to post by ALLis0NE


ALLisONE:

For 21 pages now you have done nothing but defend this police officer which is your right to do. However, it really doesn't matter if it was intentional or not.

He killed that kid. Accident or not, the kid is still dead.

Focus on that because this is the real issue here.

reply to post by ALLis0NE


I'm sorry, but you are completely in denial.

I don't care if he was handcuffed or not.
He was on the ground, he wasn't struggling. Even if he was resisting arrest, that is not an excuse to shoot a man.

At the very least this cop should face charges for man slaughter.

Trying to shift blame or responsibility is lame. You are clearly grasping at straws to defend all officers, even the ones who are obviously incompetent or worse.

No matter how you try to change things, the fact is this guy killed another man in cold blood.

How can I be in denial?

I don't deny this kid is dead, I don't deny he got shot, I don't deny that it was the officers fault.

WTH are you guys talking about?

I'm trying to figure out, and prove, if it was an accident or not by examining the video.

YOU people have already judged the officer, and are jumping to conclusions, and saying he purposely meant to shoot the victim with a gun.

I am trying to point to the evidence that shows it was an accident. There is a LOT of it.


Yeah, I know this officer is going to face manslaughter charges. I said that multiple times on this thread.

Yeah, its a horrible tragedy.

No, I am not trying to "defend the officer" I am trying to "defend the truth".

Originally posted by ALLis0NE


I am trying to "defend the truth".

There is only one truth here.

That young man was needlessly shot and killed.

Nothing else is needed....no other truth is needed. The video shows the police officer pulling his gun and shooting the young man in the back. That's it!

I'm not a "cop hater" but this one needs to be punished to the full extent of the law.

Originally posted by ALLis0NE

Yeah, its a horrible tragedy.

No, I am not trying to "defend the officer"

I really think that you need to remember what you said in this thread. You contradict yourself so many times....and yet you still feel that you did no wrong. Please read your following quotes.

Originally posted by ALLis0NE "Somebody teach these punk kids and wanna be gangsters that cops have "the right to use deadly force". It's called a license to kill. And when you threaten a cops life, they are allowed to kill you. ------------ Once again, when a suspect has not been searched, he is treated like he could potentially have a weapon. ------------ point to the reason why he got shot. BECAUSE HE WAS BEING A TYPICAL [SNIP]. Yeah, I said it. Truth hurts."

Now to go on here and you made this comment.

You make me sick, you are defending something that you don't even have all the information about. You are debating something that you were not even involved in. You are debating something that has nothing to do with you.

These are just a few of your comments that you stated. Doesn't seem like you think this is a tragedy. You're stating that he got shot because of his race. The last one is the kicker. Why are you defending something that you don't have all the information on?

People who live in glass houses.....

There really is nothing left for you to comment on.