Philando Castile: Footage of fatal police shooting in US released

[gambit]

Very, very, very, disturbing. And yes, the driver was probably doing the right thing, he told the officer he had a gun, (but I cannot see into the car if he pulled out a gun or not), but that policeman didn't even wait for the man to show the gun, I assume via limited presumption. And if the man driving was a legal gun owner & telling the cop he had a gun, the driver probably was just trying to do what's legal. . .

Did Yanez asked to see the gun and/or Castile's permit ?

 

[Dai Toruko]

Did Yanez asked to see the gun and/or Castile's permit ?

which one is it???
A: don't reach for the gun
B don't reach for the licence that i just asked you to show me 2 seconds ago.
C: Don't reach for anything.
or
D: Don't reach for "IT" ( me the cop i am gonna ASSUME is the gun and not the license that i requested and shoot your *** dead even if i you said you were not reaching for the gun)
or
C: I am a jumpy trigger happy cop that stereotypes black men and gets scared very very easily.

 

[terranMarine]

US police brutality knows no boundaries, even whoopi feels like being hunted

 

[gambit]

which one is it???
A: don't reach for the gun
B don't reach for the licence that i just asked you to show me 2 seconds ago.
C: Don't reach for anything.
or
D: Don't reach for "IT" ( me the cop i am gonna ASSUME is the gun and not the license that i requested and shoot your *** dead even if i you said you were not reaching for the gun)
or
C: I am a jumpy trigger happy cop that stereotypes black men and gets scared very very easily.

Did Yanez asked Castile to show his gun ? Simple question, no ?

US police brutality knows no boundaries, even whoopi feels like being hunted

You do not know how contradictory that was, do you ?

 

[jhungary]

which one is it???
A: don't reach for the gun
B don't reach for the licence that i just asked you to show me 2 seconds ago.
C: Don't reach for anything.
or
D: Don't reach for "IT" ( me the cop i am gonna ASSUME is the gun and not the license that i requested and shoot your *** dead even if i you said you were not reaching for the gun)
or
C: I am a jumpy trigger happy cop that stereotypes black men and gets scared very very easily.

Yanez had checked Philando License already before the shooting, according to court record, witness testimony suggested that Philando is reaching for his Carry Permit, which Yanez were never asked to produce, he (Yanez) did not ask Philando to produce the firearms nor the permits, that's quite clear on the video.

The problem for Yanez is that he does not know (nor did Philando told him) that Philando is reaching for the permit, as the witness suggested, there is a reasonable doubt that Yanez thought Philando is reaching for the firearms he said he had, or another firearms he may have owned.

 

[Dai Toruko]

Yanez had checked Philando License already before the shooting, according to court record, witness testimony suggested that Philando is reaching for his Carry Permit, which Yanez were never asked to produce, he (Yanez) did not ask Philando to produce the firearms nor the permits, that's quite clear on the video.

The problem for Yanez is that he does not know (nor did Philando told him) that Philando is reaching for the permit, as the witness suggested, there is a reasonable doubt that Yanez thought Philando is reaching for the firearms he said he had, or another firearms he may have owned.

This appears to be a typical "us vs. them" (officer vs civilian) attitude that is pounded into the minds of young police officers the nation over. They are taught that guns are their ultimate protection and at the same time the ultimate threat if in the hands of anyone other than a police officer. The fact that the driver stated that he had a gun (required in many states for CCW holders) would tend to suggest that he intended no harm. How many "bad guys" say, "Hey officer, I have a gun and I'm going to shoot you". Truth is, the officer, although correct to be cautious, should have CALMLY issued instructions such as "OK, I understand, place your hands on the steering wheel now". Fact is, many police officers do not like and treat CCW holders as criminals and wanna be's. The mere notion that a "civilian" has the right and is qualified and licensed to carry a weapon is still viewed as a threat. This guy panicked, and shot someone who was NOT displaying any aggressive moves as far as the video shows.

 

[jhungary]

This appears to be a typical "us vs. them" (officer vs civilian) attitude that is pounded into the minds of young police officers the nation over. They are taught that guns are their ultimate protection and at the same time the ultimate threat if in the hands of anyone other than a police officer. The fact that the driver stated that he had a gun (required in many states for CCW holders) would tend to suggest that he intended no harm. How many "bad guys" say, "Hey officer, I have a gun and I'm going to shoot you". Truth is, the officer, although correct to be cautious, should have CALMLY issued instructions such as "OK, I understand, place your hands on the steering wheel now". Fact is, many police officers do not like and treat CCW holders as criminals and wanna be's. The mere notion that a "civilian" has the right and is qualified and licensed to carry a weapon is still viewed as a threat. This guy panicked, and shot someone who was NOT displaying any aggressive moves as far as the video shows.

You cannot say because I come clean about my firearms, then you suggest that Philando is not a threat. In fact according to Police Guideline (at lease in Kansas) the moment you said that, that is an escalation, because now, your status is changed from Possibly Armed to Likely Armed. ANd don't forget Philando match the description of a Armed Robber, that is a part of a reason why Yanez stopped him to begin with.

Just because I said "Hey I have a Gun in my car" does not mean "I am not going to use it on you"

Also, Conceal Carry Permit does not generally used in car, because you are allowed to carry your firearms in your car in Minnesota, given if your firearms are secure and unloaded. Concealed Carry only required when you are concealing the weapon in person or an unsecured weapon in car, or he had it on him. The fact that if Philando actually say he had a conceal weapon permit is confusing, which give point in Yanez Defence. Why you have to say that, when A.) You are allow to put your weapon in your car without a permit, B.) Yanez did not ask for it (Because it's legal to have it in your car without a permit)

And that is not a fact Police does not like or treat Conceal Carry Permit holder as Criminal or Wannabe.

And again, you weren't there, you cannot possible know whether or not Philando Display Aggressive, suggesting you comment on something you actually know. Which is, I am guessing, not really much.

 

[Dai Toruko]

You cannot say because I come clean about my firearms, then you suggest that Philando is not a threat. In fact according to Police Guideline (at lease in Kansas) the moment you said that, that is an escalation, because now, your status is changed from Possibly Armed to Likely Armed. ANd don't forget Philando match the description of a Armed Robber, that is a part of a reason why Yanez stopped him to begin with.

Just because I said "Hey I have a Gun in my car" does not mean "I am not going to use it on you"

Also, Conceal Carry Permit does not generally used in car, because you are allowed to carry your firearms in your car in Minnesota, given if your firearms are secure and unloaded. Concealed Carry only required when you are concealing the weapon in person or an unsecured weapon in car, or he had it on him. The fact that if Philando actually say he had a conceal weapon permit is confusing, which give point in Yanez Defence. Why you have to say that, when A.) You are allow to put your weapon in your car without a permit, B.) Yanez did not ask for it (Because it's legal to have it in your car without a permit)

And that is not a fact Police does not like or treat Conceal Carry Permit holder as Criminal or Wannabe.

And again, you weren't there, you cannot possible know whether or not Philando Display Aggressive, suggesting you comment on something you actually know. Which is, I am guessing, not really much.

Cops have forgot this is American where its legal to carry . He was letting him know he had a firearm . Why would even try something with a kid in the car .

He said he feared for his life and bla bla bla. But he is only saying that to cover himself to avoid prison. The truth is that he panicked and over reacted. The police department is also to blame to have let this man pass their screening in becoming a cop.

The other police officer seems so passive and was more interested in helping his college than the victim.If the victim had intention of harming the officers he couldn’t have stated he had firearm. Common sense indicates that if someone wants to harm you they will just do it. If the officer noted his life was in danger he could have surely backed to the rear side of the car and plus he had the other officer covering for him. What really set up the shooting office up? Here is a motorist with a woman and a child! What it is fear of color? How would he have reacted if all the occupants were white?

 

[jhungary]

Cops have forgot this is American where its legal to carry . He was letting him know he had a firearm . Why would even try something with a kid in the car .

Again, nobody can answer that question but Yanez and Philando, you are talking about how they feel. I don't know how Yanez feel, how would I know, I am not him.

For me? When I was in Afghanistan, I was asked to look out for people travelling with family, because it make you let your guard down, thinking exactly what you said " Well, he won't try anything with a wife on his side and his kid at the back" But time and again, it has been proven wrong. People trying to kill you would make you think they won't do it first. That's how it goes.

He said he feared for his life and bla bla bla. But he is only saying that to cover himself to avoid prison. The truth is that he panicked and over reacted. The police department is also to blame to have let this man pass their screening in becoming a cop.

This is the law, the law require a reckless clause to be able to convict a 2nd Degree Manslaughter charge, he may be really scare for his life, he may be saying that to beat the rep, but does it matter? Can you or anybody proof one way or another?

This is the law in the US, you don't like it? Don't come, and stay in Turkey, here in the US, Police ask you to do something you do it, if you don't do it, you may get shot, this is how it work, if you are an American, you need to follow American law, if you are not an American, nobody is forcing you to come here. The same reason why I refused to travel to Singapore for vacation, they have death penalty, I am not a Singaporean, so if I don't like death penalty, I can choose not to go to Singapore.

Philando is a US Citizen, by law, he have to obey what they officer said, when the officer said NOT TO REACH FOR IT, he continue to reach for whatever he is reaching, and he got shot, that's it. It's not about who's scare of who, it's not about who is in the wrong or who is in the right, it's about the law. It's about whether or not you can proof for or against your case.

Was Yanez actually scare? I don't know, to be honest, I don't care, whether or not he is scare, or whether or not the Police abuse their power, that is not the case here, the case is whether or not Yanez did the right thing shooting Philando, the answer is YES, because he is acquitted, and also because the Prosecution put up a weak case, maybe if they spend more time invest in the case, they may be able to get him or they won't tried him at all, but instead he was tried and acquitted, which is a waste of money.

Again bear in mind, Yanez was ARRESTED, TRIED and ACQUITTED. Not by other policeman, but by 12 of his peer, and that mean the law and the people has spoken, they don't see what you see, so, There are nothing anybody, not me, and especially not you, can do about it.

The other police officer seems so passive and was more interested in helping his college than the victim.If the victim had intention of harming the officers he couldn’t have stated he had firearm. Common sense indicates that if someone wants to harm you they will just do it. If the officer noted his life was in danger he could have surely backed to the rear side of the car and plus he had the other officer covering for him. What really set up the shooting office up? Here is a motorist with a woman and a child! What it is fear of color? How would he have reacted if all the occupants were white?

Ahhh... The race card.

You keep saying he shouldn't have, the problem is, THAT'S WHAT YOU THINK, Reality, as I repeated many time, does not matter, I can say anything and I can still do something stupid at the end, even if I am not at all criminal type to begin with.

What if the occupant is white?? THE SAME THING HAPPENS. As I told you cop does not train with Advance First Aid and Emergency Medicine, what can they do to Philando after he was shot? nothing, The only thing they can do is to perform CPR, but as I told you already, performing CPR on a still breathing and bleeding man would kill him quicker, so do tell me, what should the other officer do? Look at his wife?

Also, it's worth something to notice that Police shot more WHITE PEOPLE than BLACK PEOPLE in the US any given year, last report complied by Amensty international after the last High profile Police Shooting of Michael Brown, 63% of all police shooting target is White, 31 % of them are black, and the rest of the race made up the rest, for every black person shot by the police, whether or not lawful or unlawful, there are 2 White person shot by the police, but you won't hear names like James Boyd, a white homeless American shot dead by the police with a trial hanging on two police officer. Or Daniel Shaver a middle class White American who was killed because he was drunk and have a BB gun, the cop was charged for the case. Those are just in 2016.

You never heard of these case or these people, because when a police accuse of murdering a white man, what's the point and fun in reporting? On the other hand, when a Black man got "Murdered" by the police, it equal to selling paper.

 

[Gomig-21]

If you 'get the point', then my analogy is appropriate.

Veneration of the Constitution have often been described by both Right and Left Americans as religious. For The Right, it is a document that is sacrosanct. For The Left, it is a barrier to progress. For The Left, nothing in the Constitution is more offensive than the 2nd Amendment. But try to make a Constitutional Convention to abolish the 2nd Amendment and see what happens.

I'm sure everyone got it since you made the point prior to the strange analogy. Most intelligent people realize that guns don't kill people, people kill people.

 

[Dai Toruko]

Again, nobody can answer that question but Yanez and Philando, you are talking about how they feel. I don't know how Yanez feel, how would I know, I am not him.

For me? When I was in Afghanistan, I was asked to look out for people travelling with family, because it make you let your guard down, thinking exactly what you said " Well, he won't try anything with a wife on his side and his kid at the back" But time and again, it has been proven wrong. People trying to kill you would make you think they won't do it first. That's how it goes.

Cop is reacting, screaming and cursing so much cause he knows he did the wrong thing... Breathing rapidly and in the midst of a huge adrenaline surge trying to say stuff to himself in order to substantiate his actions but his immediate and instant reaction will tell the truth! He knows almost immediately that what he did was the wrong move.

This is the law, the law require a reckless clause to be able to convict a 2nd Degree Manslaughter charge, he may be really scare for his life, he may be saying that to beat the rep, but does it matter? Can you or anybody proof one way or another?

This is the law in the US, you don't like it? Don't come, and stay in Turkey, here in the US, Police ask you to do something you do it, if you don't do it, you may get shot, this is how it work, if you are an American, you need to follow American law, if you are not an American, nobody is forcing you to come here. The same reason why I refused to travel to Singapore for vacation, they have death penalty, I am not a Singaporean, so if I don't like death penalty, I can choose not to go to Singapore.

Philando is a US Citizen, by law, he have to obey what they officer said, when the officer said NOT TO REACH FOR IT, he continue to reach for whatever he is reaching, and he got shot, that's it. It's not about who's scare of who, it's not about who is in the wrong or who is in the right, it's about the law. It's about whether or not you can proof for or against your case.

Was Yanez actually scare? I don't know, to be honest, I don't care, whether or not he is scare, or whether or not the Police abuse their power, that is not the case here, the case is whether or not Yanez did the right thing shooting Philando, the answer is YES, because he is acquitted, and also because the Prosecution put up a weak case, maybe if they spend more time invest in the case, they may be able to get him or they won't tried him at all, but instead he was tried and acquitted, which is a waste of money.

Again bear in mind, Yanez was ARRESTED, TRIED and ACQUITTED. Not by other policeman, but by 12 of his peer, and that mean the law and the people has spoken, they don't see what you see, so, There are nothing anybody, not me, and especially not you, can do about it.

This is just proof right here that this is not justified in anyway shape or form. He should've removed Philando from the vehicle. Asks for licensce and registration and as Philando was reaching for it says I am licensed to carry a firearm. The officer immediately opens fire thinking he's reaching for the gun. What should have happened? The officer should've said don't move hands up, and asked him to keep his hands out of the window. The other officer should've already removed the passenger from the vehicle for a search. Had they done this and not immediately g given conflicting directions to get your ID at the same time show me the weapon at the same time shouting don't reach for it don't reach for it, this wouldn't of happened. Shows how inexperienced these officers really are. Train your fucking police better America, this is literally the act of inexperience.

I want to ask you a question: Why did the police officer shoot again, again, again and...again? Was Philando real dangerous? I think that that emotions took over the policeman, he could avoid this situation.

Ahhh... The race card.

You keep saying he shouldn't have, the problem is, THAT'S WHAT YOU THINK, Reality, as I repeated many time, does not matter, I can say anything and I can still do something stupid at the end, even if I am not at all criminal type to begin with.

What if the occupant is white?? THE SAME THING HAPPENS. As I told you cop does not train with Advance First Aid and Emergency Medicine, what can they do to Philando after he was shot? nothing, The only thing they can do is to perform CPR, but as I told you already, performing CPR on a still breathing and bleeding man would kill him quicker, so do tell me, what should the other officer do? Look at his wife?

Also, it's worth something to notice that Police shot more WHITE PEOPLE than BLACK PEOPLE in the US any given year, last report complied by Amensty international after the last High profile Police Shooting of Michael Brown, 63% of all police shooting target is White, 31 % of them are black, and the rest of the race made up the rest, for every black person shot by the police, whether or not lawful or unlawful, there are 2 White person shot by the police, but you won't hear names like James Boyd, a white homeless American shot dead by the police with a trial hanging on two police officer. Or Daniel Shaver a middle class White American who was killed because he was drunk and have a BB gun, the cop was charged for the case. Those are just in 2016.

You never heard of these case or these people, because when a police accuse of murdering a white man, what's the point and fun in reporting? On the other hand, when a Black man got "Murdered" by the police, it equal to selling paper.

It's not just the race. There are murdering units in all police departments without any sense of morality or of right or wrong. This is protected and ordered at higher levels. Protected by higher people in power. They will torture and murder us at will. All this aside from terrorizing us, breaking into our homes, killing our pets, robbing us, etc. They are not just some random predators. This is protected institutionally and order at high levels of power. If they haven't targeted you, you are one lucky person in my eyes.

Statistics aren't the problem, the fact that "cops" like this one are allowed to carry a gun in the first place is the problem. The second problem is that as proved by this murder any nutjob can call himself "police officer". The third problem is that this mentally retarded "cop" may have also been racist. Just because we've only seen white "cops" killing innocent black people so far doesn't mean a nutjob who will just shoot anybody can't become a "police officer" too. If these retards can get a gun and a badge, an ISIS terrorist can too. That's the real problem.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

This appears to be a typical "us vs. them" (officer vs civilian) attitude that is pounded into the minds of young police officers the nation over. They are taught that guns are their ultimate protection and at the same time the ultimate threat if in the hands of anyone other than a police officer. The fact that the driver stated that he had a gun (required in many states for CCW holders) would tend to suggest that he intended no harm. How many "bad guys" say, "Hey officer, I have a gun and I'm going to shoot you". Truth is, the officer, although correct to be cautious, should have CALMLY issued instructions such as "OK, I understand, place your hands on the steering wheel now". Fact is, many police officers do not like and treat CCW holders as criminals and wanna be's. The mere notion that a "civilian" has the right and is qualified and licensed to carry a weapon is still viewed as a threat. This guy panicked, and shot someone who was NOT displaying any aggressive moves as far as the video shows.

Come on there are about 55,000 traffic stops a day. Many people in the US have permits to carry weapons. These people with weapons get pulled over thousands of times a day too and announce their weapon. They don't get shot. One incident that day out of tens of thousands suddenly allows you to generalize the entire situation?

 

[jhungary]

Cop is reacting, screaming and cursing so much cause he knows he did the wrong thing... Breathing rapidly and in the midst of a huge adrenaline surge trying to say stuff to himself in order to substantiate his actions but his immediate and instant reaction will tell the truth! He knows almost immediately that what he did was the wrong move.

EVERYONE REACT LIKE THAT AFTER THEY KILLED SOMEONE, legal, illegal (not unless you have planned ie Murder)

Had you shot anyone close enough you can see his face turn, his stomach churn the moment you shot him? I did. I react exactly the same. You don't believe what you just did, what you just do does not make sense. Because killing a person is not normal. You get all kind of feeling running through your mind.

If there are no reaction if you shot someone, then you are a legit psychopath. And that is the only time you should NEVER hold a weapon.

This is not "Guilt" you are talking about, this is an expression of disbelief of what just happened.

But I guess that you probably don't know about it.

This is just proof right here that this is not justified in anyway shape or form. He should've removed Philando from the vehicle. Asks for licensce and registration and as Philando was reaching for it says I am licensed to carry a firearm. The officer immediately opens fire thinking he's reaching for the gun. What should have happened? The officer should've said don't move hands up, and asked him to keep his hands out of the window. The other officer should've already removed the passenger from the vehicle for a search. Had they done this and not immediately g given conflicting directions to get your ID at the same time show me the weapon at the same time shouting don't reach for it don't reach for it, this wouldn't of happened. Shows how inexperienced these officers really are. Train your fucking police better America, this is literally the act of inexperience.

I am not going to say this again, what Yanez said does not matter, the instruction is clear, he can say "GET OUT" for all we care, as long as Philando did not follow his instruction, he have the right to self defence.

Or you are arguing that Philando should told Yanez what he said does not make sense? To tell him not to reach for it but not keep his hand out of the window.

And no, looks like you do not know any standard police procedure, when you pull over a vehicle, you CONSTRAIN the driver and passenger inside the car to keep them in your sight, you don't pull people out of the car once you pull them over, you got 2 police officer, you got 3 person in the car, if you let them outside the vehicle, you will lose track of at least 1 person.

And no, He did not fire immediately, 3 warning in 10 second over a 1 minutes 20 second traffic stop is not immediately.

And according to America and American Citizen, he is not inexperience and made a mistake, he is in the right to shoot Philando, as he, Yanez, was ACCQUITTED of the charge. This is how we train out police, this is how our law are, if you have a problem with that, DON'T COME TO AMERICA.

I want to ask you a question: Why did the police officer shoot again, again, again and...again? Was Philando real dangerous? I think that that emotions took over the policeman, he could avoid this situation.

Have you been on front line, ANY FRONT LINE, and face real danger? Have you ever actually shoot another human being? If not, WHAT YOU THINK DOES NOT MATTER

When you have to fire your weapon, you empty the clip if you have to, seeing that firing your weapon is your last resort, that mean for you, AT THAT TIME, there are no other option left, either you fire and cease him, or you die (That's because it was the final resort) How do you know if you fire once or twice, the threat will be gone, in police force, you are taught to fire 3 rounds on the centre mass, in the Military, you are taught to fire 5 rounds 3 in the chest, a double tap on the head. In war, you click the trigger until nothing comes out.

That's why people don't just fire once or twice. Was the discharge legit is another question altogether, but you have to at least stay alive to stand trial.

It's not just the race. There are murdering units in all police departments without any sense of morality or of right or wrong. This is protected and ordered at higher levels. Protected by higher people in power. They will torture and murder us at will. All this aside from terrorizing us, breaking into our homes, killing our pets, robbing us, etc. They are not just some random predators. This is protected institutionally and order at high levels of power. If they haven't targeted you, you are one lucky person in my eyes.

Statistics aren't the problem, the fact that "cops" like this one are allowed to carry a gun in the first place is the problem. The second problem is that as proved by this murder any nutjob can call himself "police officer". The third problem is that this mentally retarded "cop" may have also been racist. Just because we've only seen white "cops" killing innocent black people so far doesn't mean a nutjob who will just shoot anybody can't become a "police officer" too. If these retards can get a gun and a badge, an ISIS terrorist can too. That's the real problem.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, american police is a killer unit blah, blah, blah.

You can think whatever the hack you want, does not change the fact one bit, and again, we are not talking about whether or not American Police is a killing machine, the COURT FOUND HIM NOT GUILTY, does that mean state sanction killing? Let me ask you a question, if you committed a crime, would you rather be tried in America or in Turkey?

Anyway, I am not going to indulge you on this. Have anything to say about the court case, I will reply, have anything to say about MERICA, you can find someone who cares.

 

[Dai Toruko]

EVERYONE REACT LIKE THAT AFTER THEY KILLED SOMEONE, legal, illegal (not unless you have planned ie Murder)

Had you shot anyone close enough you can see his face turn, his stomach churn the moment you shot him? I did. I react exactly the same. You don't believe what you just did, what you just do does not make sense. Because killing a person is not normal. You get all kind of feeling running through your mind.

If there are no reaction if you shot someone, then you are a legit psychopath. And that is the only time you should NEVER hold a weapon.

This is not "Guilt" you are talking about, this is an expression of disbelief of what just happened.

But I guess that you probably don't know about it.

Don't take it personally. Everybody reacts differently to different things. My opinion is his reaction was not warranted. I've never felt the need to feel threatened by a person that tells me he has a firearm and permit. I can say that it as important to give complete and clear instructions to the individual that you're dealing with. This means you have to be in control. I'm not sure he was but i can say it didn't make him look any better when he stood there screaming and cursing. I think he was a still in shock from the event.

So he panicked when he reached for his wallet, shot and played victim like his life was at risk. He's not fit for a police officer, on top of that, the officer shot the driver four times, which none were necessary and even if they were he would have only had to have shot once. How is he not guilty, he should be in jail or a mental hospital.

I am not going to say this again, what Yanez said does not matter, the instruction is clear, he can say "GET OUT" for all we care, as long as Philando did not follow his instruction, he have the right to self defence.

Or you are arguing that Philando should told Yanez what he said does not make sense? To tell him not to reach for it but not keep his hand out of the window.

And no, looks like you do not know any standard police procedure, when you pull over a vehicle, you CONSTRAIN the driver and passenger inside the car to keep them in your sight, you don't pull people out of the car once you pull them over, you got 2 police officer, you got 3 person in the car, if you let them outside the vehicle, you will lose track of at least 1 person.

And no, He did not fire immediately, 3 warning in 10 second over a 1 minutes 20 second traffic stop is not immediately.

And according to America and American Citizen, he is not inexperience and made a mistake, he is in the right to shoot Philando, as he, Yanez, was ACCQUITTED of the charge. This is how we train out police, this is how our law are, if you have a problem with that, DON'T COME TO AMERICA.

What I honestly think happened was ,like a dumbass, he put his finger on the trigger instead of on the side. He twitched and shot him instead of the twitch response to put his finger on the trigger since it was clearly already there he pulled it. From there he fired more rounds to prevent a retaliatory fire or what we could see as firing in self-defense. He immediately after the shooting entered a state of trauma. His stupid tired cop brain just caused him to kill a man. Something I bet he never wanted to do. Futhermore, he knew that beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was busted. Totaly. This cop ended a civilian's life and changed the lives of the victim, his family, his own family, his partner and everyone who knew him. I think that there's plenty of evidence to support that this was not a malicious shooting. He shows immense remorse after the shooting and panics. Deliberate shootings don't follow that pattern. Does that mean he should remain on the force? Absolutely not. Maybe he still has good intentions, but after this incident, it would only jeopardize himself, his partner and more civilians. He should be brought up on criminal charges. As much as I wish, that people who make poor decisions like this might not have to if there's not a chance of them repeating it in the future, it's a tragic aspect of the law.

Have you been on front line, ANY FRONT LINE, and face real danger? Have you ever actually shoot another human being? If not, WHAT YOU THINK DOES NOT MATTER

When you have to fire your weapon, you empty the clip if you have to, seeing that firing your weapon is your last resort, that mean for you, AT THAT TIME, there are no other option left, either you fire and cease him, or you die (That's because it was the final resort) How do you know if you fire once or twice, the threat will be gone, in police force, you are taught to fire 3 rounds on the centre mass, in the Military, you are taught to fire 5 rounds 3 in the chest, a double tap on the head. In war, you click the trigger until nothing comes out.

That's why people don't just fire once or twice. Was the discharge legit is another question altogether, but you have to at least stay alive to stand trial.

So the Cop got blind sided when he heard the word gun, he was already processing in his mind worst case. How sad that some cops can't think under pressure. I get it. It's scary but they were different ways to handle the situation knowing that the driver told him abt his fire arm. Cops are suppose to be train on judgement calls and quick thinking. To serve and protect not Survival of the fist.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, american police is a killer unit blah, blah, blah.

You can think whatever the hack you want, does not change the fact one bit, and again, we are not talking about whether or not American Police is a killing machine, the COURT FOUND HIM NOT GUILTY, does that mean state sanction killing? Let me ask you a question, if you committed a crime, would you rather be tried in America or in Turkey?

Anyway, I am not going to indulge you on this. Have anything to say about the court case, I will reply, have anything to say about MERICA, you can find someone who cares.

OK, reverse roles. Black guy asks officer for his I.D. Officer reaches for his pocket, black guy gets scared and shoots the officer 7 times. Does the black guy go to jail? Of course he does. If the officer was nervous, he should have backed away from the car and asked the guy to get out of the car with his hands behind his head. He did none of that, he just shot an innocent person 7 times because he couldn't handle the situation. He should be doing time.

 

[jhungary]

Don't take it personally. Everybody reacts differently to different things. My opinion is his reaction was not warranted. I've never felt the need to feel threatened by a person that tells me he has a firearm and permit. I can say that it as important to give complete and clear instructions to the individual that you're dealing with. This means you have to be in control. I'm not sure he was but i can say it didn't make him look any better when he stood there screaming and cursing. I think he was a still in shock from the event.

As I said, the reaction did not tell much, like you said, everyone have their own way react to traumatic stuff, I once have a soldier under my command shot a young Iraqi Adult and he went there and sit next to his body keep saying he is sorry and apologising to the bodies on the floor, the man that my guy shot have been shooting at us for the whole morning, there are nothing to be sorry for, does that mean my guy is wrong to shoot and kill him

I shot 7 people I know of, Probably more before and after I counted it. The first one I shot him when I was running toward cover and trying to turn a corner in Iraq, He come out from the corner holding an AK, and when I turn we are face to face, I shot him without I even realise, then I froze and just stand there, only the guy come next push me down to the alley, and yet I was still looking at him

The last guy I shot I did not froze, instead, it was full of rage, I felt out of a chopper and he was kicking my guts, I think he thought I was dead, and then I sloth him with my helmet and pull out my 9 mil and empty all 15 round on him, and when I click the trigger and nothing come up because the slide was pulled all the way back, I chuck my pistol at him.

For me, I was a soldier, I train for war, even I have 7 different feeling the 7 times I know I shot and maybe killed somebody, I was told and train to use deadly force without hesitation, have been told a thousand time how to react under fire. He is a police officer, he was not trained nor would he be expect to deal with a firefight type situation, he breakdown after one, I don't see anything about it, the jury does not see anything about it, well, if you think it is whatever you say, then maybe you are the one that's wrong about it?

So he panicked when he reached for his wallet, shot and played victim like his life was at risk. He's not fit for a police officer, on top of that, the officer shot the driver four times, which none were necessary and even if they were he would have only had to have shot once. How is he not guilty, he should be in jail or a mental hospital.

Where is the proof of what you say?

Fact, as we know of, is as follow

He acted within the guideline, he stopped the motorist (Philando) with a reasonable clause (Broken Tail light), the driver resemble a suspect of an armed robbery. He (Yanez) lean over, politely ask the driver his driver license and his insurance paper. The Driver give it to him, the driver then tell him I have a firearm in my car. He acknowledged what the driver said by saying "Ok, Ok, don't reach for it then" with a calm voice. The driver ignore this and reach for something, He once again say to the driver, "Don't Pull it out" The driver continue reaching for something, The officer say again in a urgent voice "Don't Pull It Out" and lean over put his left hand over the driver body, and right hand reach for his service pistol, he shot the driver 6 times.

Those are the FACT, the only FACT in this case that there are without doubt happened.

What you said, is conjecture and circumstantial, how do you know, AT THAT POINT, that Philando is not reaching for his weapon? Because that would construct a probable clause for Yanez to shoot, and are you qualify to testify on what both Yanez and Philando is thinking at that moment at that time? If not, then how do you know what they think.

What you did, was to piece together something to judge a case "AFTER THE FACT' after you have been given all the available information to you, and you say "Geez, why did this cop shoot him He wasn't going for his gun." However, in the court of law, we have something called "Reasonable Doubt" Let me tell you this, the case would have the SAME OUTCOME AND END IN NOT GUILTY EVEN IF PHILANDO DID NOT HAVE A WEAPON IN THE CAR. The circumstance is one thing, fact is Philando, whether or not if he is reaching for a gun, his license or even a tissue if he is going to sneeze, is immaterial, because he was told explicitly NOT TO PULL IT OUT. The it is for WHATEVER "IT" IS, be it a gun, a paper, a tissue or a handkerchief. That is the reason he was shot, not because he have a gun in the car.

That is why the case end in not guilty. If you have new proof, then yeah, forward it to the Prosecutor Officer and maybe you can get a retrial, but if you are just saying, then don't. Because what you say, or what you think does not matter, what matter is, can you proof it.

What I honestly think happened was ,like a dumbass, he put his finger on the trigger instead of on the side. He twitched and shot him instead of the twitch response to put his finger on the trigger since it was clearly already there he pulled it. From there he fired more rounds to prevent a retaliatory fire or what we could see as firing in self-defense. He immediately after the shooting entered a state of trauma. His stupid tired cop brain just caused him to kill a man. Something I bet he never wanted to do. Futhermore, he knew that beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was busted. Totaly. This cop ended a civilian's life and changed the lives of the victim, his family, his own family, his partner and everyone who knew him. I think that there's plenty of evidence to support that this was not a malicious shooting. He shows immense remorse after the shooting and panics. Deliberate shootings don't follow that pattern. Does that mean he should remain on the force? Absolutely not. Maybe he still has good intentions, but after this incident, it would only jeopardize himself, his partner and more civilians. He should be brought up on criminal charges. As much as I wish, that people who make poor decisions like this might not have to if there's not a chance of them repeating it in the future, it's a tragic aspect of the law.

So, you are saying Philando willingly go along on ignoring the Police officer instruction? If it sounded like a dumbass, chances are because you are one to think of it to begin with.

What Yanez did is not part of the process, it is the end result, which is he shot and killed Philando the process leading to the end result is focusing on what Philando do. He does not comply with the instruction, that is independent on whether or not Yanez shot him for fun, by mistake or have the need to.

Not really interest on what you think. Again, this is a court tried case, returning a verdict of not guilty, what you think is one thing, what the 12 men and women jury thing is certainly not in the same way you think, hence what you think at this point, is a moot point.

So the Cop got blind sided when he heard the word gun, he was already processing in his mind worst case. How sad that some cops can't think under pressure. I get it. It's scary but they were different ways to handle the situation knowing that the driver told him abt his fire arm. Cops are suppose to be train on judgement calls and quick thinking. To serve and protect not Survival of the fist.

Do tell me how do you train for a "Judgement Call"?

They were called "Judgement Call" for a reason, those are not called "Textbook Case", which mean you need to use your own judgement, different people would do differently and resolve the same situation differently, and that judgement is individual, that is because a judgement is for you to either do it or don't do it based on the situation arise, that's why it's a judgement. And while we can audit what people do form their judgement but exactly how you train people on Judgement call??

Cop is trained to perform their job, every decision they made is up to them, every result they made would be gone under the microscope for a complete Judiciary system. Do you think Yanez don't know on the job killing is still homicide? And can be subject to investigation and may end with Jail Term?

You and I were not in the best position to judge whether or not Yanez is a good cop, for you, you are not in the position to judge whether or not American Police Training system is adequate, because you don't know anything about Policing and Law Enforcement Concept, and you don't know the American Law Enforcement System.

OK, reverse roles. Black guy asks officer for his I.D. Officer reaches for his pocket, black guy gets scared and shoots the officer 7 times. Does the black guy go to jail? Of course he does. If the officer was nervous, he should have backed away from the car and asked the guy to get out of the car with his hands behind his head. He did none of that, he just shot an innocent person 7 times because he couldn't handle the situation. He should be doing time.

No, by the way, a lot of Black Officer on the job shooting. How many black officer you see them go to jail?

You don't need to believe it, but the American Judiciary System is not based on race, in a jury case, a pure race jury can be call for mistrial as US judiciary system call for a racial and ethic distribution of a Jury to be similar of the Racial and Ethnic distribution to the city the case is hearing, unless a city is made up of all white male or female, you have to had a race of color to represent the jury. And most state require unanimous verdict (other require 2/3 conviction, so, unless you are telling me the jury with the same race of the defendant also discriminate against their own race, otherwise it would not be racial biased in a US Court Room.

So, to answer your question, NO, this would not happen, if a case is of merit, then a conviction would have been registered, and in this case, the prosecution raise a really bad case against Yanez, even if Yanez is black (again, he is half black half Hispanic, and not white, Yanez [wrote Yáñez] in Spanish being a very popular Mexican American Surname, and his first name is Jeronimo ) he would still be acquitted.