A place for sharing news stories related to armed citizens, law enforcement & 2A/CCW topics.
Please note that when linking to an article you must cite the source URL and provide no more than a brief preview of the article to ensure fair-use standards are met.
NO DOCUMENT DUMPING.
Posts in violation of these rules are subject to immediate deletion without warning.
On Tuesday investigators claimed they found the drug PCP in Crutcher's vehicle, but attorneys for the slain man's family say a discussion of drugs distracts from questions about the use of deadly force.
Tulsa Sgt. Dave Walker told the Tulsa World that investigators recovered one vial of PCP in Crutcher's SUV, but he declined to say where in the vehicle it was found or whether officers determined if Crutcher used it Friday night.
A spokeswoman for the state medical examiner's office said autopsy and toxicology results for Crutcher are pending, and police said Tuesday the toxicology report could take several weeks.
Attorneys for Crutcher's family said the man's relatives did not know whether drugs were found in his vehicle and, even if they were, that wouldn't justify his fatal shooting.
Two 911 calls described an SUV that had been abandoned in the middle of the road.
One unidentified caller said the driver was acting strangely, adding, 'I think he's smoking something.'
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
- Thomas Paine
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."
but attorneys for the slain man's family say a discussion of drugs distracts from questions about the use of deadly force
I don't think so Tim.
I'm not one to take cops at their word, but PCP makes people do stupid things.
The shooting might have been justified.
The shooting might have been unjustified.
Possible PCP intoxication is a relevant factor.
This is of a kind with the Brown family's attorney complaining about Michael Brown being "smeared" by unedited video of him assaulting somebody on the day he was killed.
Life comes at you fast. Be prepared to shoot it in the head when it does.
FWIW, this gives BLM fuel for their fire.
That, alone, should be reason to scold the officer, if we're going to justify deadly force against someone who was walking to their vehicle with their hands in the air and then stopped with hands on vehicle.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908
Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.
"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
but attorneys for the slain man's family say a discussion of drugs distracts from questions about the use of deadly force
I don't think so Tim.
I'm not one to take cops at their word, but PCP makes people do stupid things.
The shooting might have been justified.
The shooting might have been unjustified.
Possible PCP intoxication is a relevant factor.
This is of a kind with the Brown family's attorney complaining about Michael Brown being "smeared" by unedited video of him assaulting somebody on the day he was killed.
I agree with the attorney here. There's video of the interaction. Drugs might explain why things happened the way they did, but they don't turn an unjustified shooting into a justified one. He can be seen on video with his hands in the air and slowly walking away from police. He can be seen putting his hands on (not in) the car. It's clear from video of the scene that the windows were up. It's clear from video of the scene he didn't open any of the doors.
The presence of PCP in the car doesn't change any of the above. Even if it turns out it was in his system, that doesn't change any of the above either.
Pro 2A groups are building the case for the cops...
At the moment just before Mr. Crutcher simultaneously shot once by Officer Shelby (right) and tased by Officer Tyler Turnbough (left), Mr. Crutcher’s hand is clearly down near his waist near the right front pants pocket area. This is when both officers decided to discharge respective weapons.
Definitively, Terence Crutcher was not shot with his hands raised.
SNIP
All four windows were down on Mr. Crutcher’s vehicle, and his sunroof was open.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908
Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.
"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
They're cherrypicking a couple images where the sunlight is not reflecting off windows (thus allowing you to see inside -- which btw is what a window is designed to do) to say the windows were down. Here's a slightly different view:
DontTreadOnMe wrote:I agree with the attorney here. There's video of the interaction. Drugs might explain why things happened the way they did, but they don't turn an unjustified shooting into a justified one. He can be seen on video with his hands in the air and slowly walking away from police. He can be seen putting his hands on (not in) the car. It's clear from video of the scene that the windows were up. It's clear from video of the scene he didn't open any of the doors.
The presence of PCP in the car doesn't change any of the above. Even if it turns out it was in his system, that doesn't change any of the above either.
PCP use isn't supposed to be punished by summary execution.
On the other hand, somebody's interactions, possibly influenced by drugs may point to justification... or not.
Considering how frequently they've abused it, I'm not willing to give cops the benefit of the doubt. On the other hand, I'm not willing to exclude possibly relevant evidence on the word of plaintiffs' counsel either.
This is why body cameras are important. It greatly lessens the need to take potentially unreliable peoples' word for things.
Life comes at you fast. Be prepared to shoot it in the head when it does.
glocksmith wrote:I read elsewhere that the officer who fired the fatal shot had an attorney speaking on her behalf. Given that this incident is less than a week old, it seems strange that she has an attorney representing her already. I would think IA and others would still be investigating and piecing together the facts.
You've clearly never been a police officer accused of misconduct. I have. I was ultimately completely cleared of alleged civil rights violations (as I should have been), but this particular agency in a state out west did not have a powerful FOP as exists in Ohio. I was pretty much on my own, and had to resort to my attorney speaking for me. Suggest you don't judge until all the facts are out, which is not the case yet.
docachna wrote:You've clearly never been a police officer accused of misconduct. I have. I was ultimately completely cleared of alleged civil rights violations (as I should have been), but this particular agency in a state out west did not have a powerful FOP as exists in Ohio. I was pretty much on my own, and had to resort to my attorney speaking for me. Suggest you don't judge until all the facts are out, which is not the case yet.
While this may indeed be true, it's also very true that police and supporters frequently say to, and about suspects, "If you're not guilty, why do you need a lawyer?"
Life comes at you fast. Be prepared to shoot it in the head when it does.
glocksmith wrote:... methinks he was responding to commands and placing his hands on the vehicles windows...
You're kidding, right? What officer is going to command a suspect to, "Walk away from me and move towards the driver's door of your vehicle!" ??
More likely scenario is a TASER deployment without announcing loudly, "TASER TASER TASER" so the nearby cops don't start shooting when they hear the "pop" from the TASER.
One cop thinks another cop started shooting, so they all start shooting. Whatever happened, there was fault on both sides.
No I wasn't kidding. I think he was trying to comply and was going through the motions...assuming the position so to speak by placing his hands on the vehicle. I do agree with you that everybody involved screwed up...it is just one of those unfortunate situations.
glocksmith wrote:I read elsewhere that the officer who fired the fatal shot had an attorney speaking on her behalf. Given that this incident is less than a week old, it seems strange that she has an attorney representing her already. I would think IA and others would still be investigating and piecing together the facts.
You've clearly never been a police officer accused of misconduct. I have. I was ultimately completely cleared of alleged civil rights violations (as I should have been), but this particular agency in a state out west did not have a powerful FOP as exists in Ohio. I was pretty much on my own, and had to resort to my attorney speaking for me. Suggest you don't judge until all the facts are out, which is not the case yet.
I didn't "judge"...I was merely commenting on the fact that the officer had an attorney speaking on her behalf at such an early stage. Seems to me that if the shooting was indeed justifiable...the officer wouldn't have been so quick to seek counsel...before the investigation was wrapped up.
Way back when we took our CHL class, Slider said that one of the first things we should do after a self-defensive shooting was to call our lawyer. Making sure we were safe, 911 was called and first aid as appropriate were to be done first. We were not to speak to anyone other than I was in fear for my oife without an attorney. It had nothing to do with guilt; it was self-preservation.
Maybe in that department, the officer had been given the same advice.
The fact that a lawyer is already involved does not tell me anything except that she is careful enough to protect herself. It is not relevant evidence in the case.
RIFLEWOMAN, wife of a RIFLEMAN, mom of 9, NRA life member, OFCC Patron member!
Mustang380gal wrote:Way back when we took our CHL class, Slider said that one of the first things we should do after a self-defensive shooting was to call our lawyer. Making sure we were safe, 911 was called and first aid as appropriate were to be done first. We were not to speak to anyone other than I was in fear for my oife without an attorney. It had nothing to do with guilt; it was self-preservation.
Maybe in that department, the officer had been given the same advice.
The fact that a lawyer is already involved does not tell me anything except that she is careful enough to protect herself. It is not relevant evidence in the case.
That is good advice, and not just because of self preservation. People who have been in a high stress self defense shooting are not the best witnesses to specific details right after the moment of the shooting. This has been proven out. The problem with giving statements (other than a few bare facts like I was attacked, I defended myself, etc) before you consult with an attorney is you may say something you believe true at the time, but later find out it's not true. Those details may not actually be relevant to the case, but might possibly still be used against you if people have an agenda. Although you weren't lying, people might accuse you of it.
Mustang380gal wrote:The fact that a lawyer is already involved does not tell me anything except that she is careful enough to protect herself. It is not relevant evidence in the case.
Still...it raises eyebrows when a person immediately skips over the defensive position to assume an offensive position...before fingers are ever pointed. No one has yet said it was an unjustifiable shooting...but the lawyer has come out swinging. This makes me think the officer is suffering from a guilty conscience.