Crime What did the cops do wrong today Megathread Vol. 6 ? (who knows, lots of cop threads)

[nhbbear]

He's living in fantasy land where you can run with a pistol in your hand and the police don't bug you for it. "lol sorry bro, didn't realize you were doing cardio tonight, did you see the guy who got shot down the road? Craazzzyyy. Have a good night!"

yeah, completely normal behavior

 

[nhbbear]

so you'd do even if he turned out not to be the shooter? that's why a large portion of the populace think cops have a general mistrust and hatred for cops. if it turns out to be a case of mistaken identity then so what? fuck 'em. That's not the attitude you're supposed to have considering the historical mistreatment and grown mistrust between cops and black people. But what do i know? i am Asian and i only hear this BS when i am drinking with my buddies.

The “fuck em” is directed towards the public that think cops are trigger happy lunatics that don’t understand the law

 

[LMP]

I think in this case they were able to clearly identify that he had a firearm on him at the time of the shooting, so im not going to lose sleep over this shooting and think the cops should be cleared. The position that he fell in makes the shooting look bad, but in this case he was a clear threat.

 

[Confucamus]

Police were called by multiple people stating that a suspect was shooting a gun and shot a person. Description given, Anthony Marquis Franklin was encountered and had a gun in hand. He then ran and was shot in the back by police. Family has lawyers that are demanding charges be brought against the officers involved.

Case law that covers this shooting.

TN v Garner and Graham v Connor

TN v Garner is the case that deals with a fleeing felon and when police can shooting a fleeing subject. Basically, it says that police can only shoot a fleeing suspect when there is an immediate threat to the officers or the public.

Graham v Connor is the case that deals with officer use of force. The force has to be proportional to the crime and risk posed by the suspect without the benefit of 20/20 hindsight based upon information officers possessed at the time of the use of force. I have listed the graham factors in the past. If anyone wants me to list those again, I will.

Bottom line: absolutely justified according to both cases. This suspect had already shot one person, is encountered carrying a gun, and flees-posing a risk to the general public that outweighs the suspect’s fourth amendment rights to unreasonable search and seizure (all use of force is a 4th amendment seizure).

https://www.fox7austin.com/news/ant...olice-officers-attorneys-call-for-justice.amp

You see a tweet like that and it's safe to assume it's bullshit. "Another. Another." is what keeps getting repeated and perpetuates a lie about law enforcement. She also uses a pig emoji to call the cops pigs, which is usually reserved for entitled babies who feel above accountability. She's got Kaepernick fan written all over her.

 

[nhbbear]

You see a tweet like that and it's safe to assume it's bullshit. "Another. Another." is what keeps getting repeated and perpetuates a lie about law enforcement. She also uses a pig emoji to call the cops pigs, which is usually reserved for entitled babies who feel above accountability. She's got Kaepernick fan written all over her.

I would agree completely, which is why I blasted her with a response

 

[SaiWa]

The “fuck em” is directed towards the public that think cops are trigger happy lunatics that don’t understand the law

The trigger happy thinking stems from all the videos of police firing in situations when the threat isn't there. We may disagree on this particular instance but you know it happens and it has happened plenty of times.

Mistrust of cops is real and there are plenty of reasons to mistrust them.

Let me tell you a personal story. A cop (who was also SWAT) used to live in my building (rented the basement). Nice guy and I never had any problems with him.

One evening this kid crashed his car into the corner next to my house (hitting the fire hydrant - surprisingly no water spewed out). So the cop (dressed in normal clothes) and I walk out to see what happened and we find this skinny bloodied up kid (5'3" at most cause he was shorter than me) dazed and confused outside his car and he didn't know what was going on. We are slowly approaching him and we are both telling to calm down and sit down and rest. He was saying stuff like "where am i and what's going on?". He then starts patting his body and then ask "where's my wallet?"... I wasn't sure why he was looking for his wallet but once the cop got close to the kid, he grabbed him and violently threw/slammed him on the pavement, then cuffed him before calling 911/backup. It shocked the shit out of me because there was no need to put him down in this manner. He was not even close to being a threat and yet he was brutally put down. The cop hurt him even more and of course he had to goto the hospital. Next day or so I bumped into two girls who were hanging around that corner asking questions and they wanted more info cause they wanted to sue the cop. The kid had broken a bunch of stuff and it appeared to be because of the cop (who knows if that's true or not but i certainly wouldn't be surprised considering how brutal that takedown was).

What is the point of the story? There is little to no compassion from cops at times when it comes to dealing with criminals - the degree of crime does not matter. That's the impression one gets at times. I saw it with my own eyes. Instead of compassion and care for the victim a kid was treated like a violent criminal. There was absolutely no need for it. If this is how one cop can treat a person that accidentally crashed his car then its not hard to imagine how much worse cops can treat others.

And I hear similar stories from my friends. Hell very recently one of my tenants (who's now a close friend) just got taunted/abused by cops because they're friends with the boyfriend of his ex. The reason is his ex and the bf got into an argument (alcohol was involved of course), then involved his son who lived with them, the son called the cops and my tenant (friend) just went over there to try and pick up his kid to get away from the shitstorm and the cops there harassed and pushed him around for no reason. He's done this song and dance before so he had to backout, not even pick up his son and walk away cause he didn't want to get arrested for some BS. This shit is real and cops abuse their powers. btw - the kid now lives with the father and i had to notarize paper proving he lives there so he can change schools.

 

[I Am Legion]

People are amazing. How can this be looked at any other way. He shot someone and was still armed and around other people. He was asked dozens of times to drop the gun. By him not complying, he is showing he is either intent on using it more, or he is mentally ill and dangerous. Either way there was 1 option. Shoot him. This is justified and it isn't even a debate.

 

[jamel]

Hey what about the waterboarding down in Mississippi?

all cause they wanted to know if they date white women

 

[Rob Battisti]

You obviously didn't read any of my previous post. The problem is he could be another black guy dressed in dark with a gun that just happens to be in the area. Unlikely (again) as I said many times but he was fleeing and he got shot doing it. If he turns out to be the wrong guy then all hell is going to break loose again.

He wasn’t the wrong guy though and they ID’d the gun, asked him to drop it multiple times and he continued to flee.

 

[SaiWa]

He wasn’t the wrong guy though and they ID’d the gun, asked him to drop it multiple times and he continued to flee.

LIke I said in my previous post, I hope so and hopefully the proof (gun residue in his hands, ballistic match of the weapon firing) will conclusively validate the shooting. I voiced the same concern Shock had about the possibility that it could be another black guy dressed in black with a weapon. Weirder shit have happened. But if he is the shooter then great.

ps. if this was in some state like NJ with strict gun laws, then i'd say its a definite match and he's the perp. My impression of Texas is that everyone and their mother is walking around with a weapon.

 

[Rob Battisti]

LIke I said in my previous post, I hope so and hopefully the proof (gun residue in his hands, ballistic match of the weapon firing) will conclusively validate the shooting. I voiced the same concern Shock had about the possibility that it could be another black guy dressed in black with a weapon. Weirder shit have happened. But if he is the shooter then great.

ps. if this was in some state like NJ with strict gun laws, then i'd say its a definite match and he's the perp. My impression of Texas is that everyone and their mother is walking around with a weapon.

It’s not that way in Austin tbh. Nearly every store downtown doesn’t allow guns inside and very rarely is there open carry.

May I ask what your preferred response and actions by the officers should have been?

 

[nhbbear]

The trigger happy thinking stems from all the videos of police firing in situations when the threat isn't there. We may disagree on this particular instance but you know it happens and it has happened plenty of times.

Mistrust of cops is real and there are plenty of reasons to mistrust them.

Let me tell you a personal story. A cop (who was also SWAT) used to live in my building (rented the basement). Nice guy and I never had any problems with him.

One evening this kid crashed his car into the corner next to my house (hitting the fire hydrant - surprisingly no water spewed out). So the cop (dressed in normal clothes) and I walk out to see what happened and we find this skinny bloodied up kid (5'3" at most cause he was shorter than me) dazed and confused outside his car and he didn't know what was going on. We are slowly approaching him and we are both telling to calm down and sit down and rest. He was saying stuff like "where am i and what's going on?". He then starts patting his body and then ask "where's my wallet?"... I wasn't sure why he was looking for his wallet but once the cop got close to the kid, he grabbed him and violently threw/slammed him on the pavement, then cuffed him before calling 911/backup. It shocked the shit out of me because there was no need to put him down in this manner. He was not even close to being a threat and yet he was brutally put down. The cop hurt him even more and of course he had to goto the hospital. Next day or so I bumped into two girls who were hanging around that corner asking questions and they wanted more info cause they wanted to sue the cop. The kid had broken a bunch of stuff and it appeared to be because of the cop (who knows if that's true or not but i certainly wouldn't be surprised considering how brutal that takedown was).

What is the point of the story? There is little to no compassion from cops at times when it comes to dealing with criminals - the degree of crime does not matter. That's the impression one gets at times. I saw it with my own eyes. Instead of compassion and care for the victim a kid was treated like a violent criminal. There was absolutely no need for it. If this is how one cop can treat a person that accidentally crashed his car then its not hard to imagine how much worse cops can treat others.

And I hear similar stories from my friends. Hell very recently one of my tenants (who's now a close friend) just got taunted/abused by cops because they're friends with the boyfriend of his ex. The reason is his ex and the bf got into an argument (alcohol was involved of course), then involved his son who lived with them, the son called the cops and my tenant (friend) just went over there to try and pick up his kid to get away from the shitstorm and the cops there harassed and pushed him around for no reason. He's done this song and dance before so he had to backout, not even pick up his son and walk away cause he didn't want to get arrested for some BS. This shit is real and cops abuse their powers. btw - the kid now lives with the father and i had to notarize paper proving he lives there so he can change schools.

You have stories. So do I. 18 years of only very few incidents where I believe the officer was out of line. One such incident I reported. The victim refused to say anything so nothing could be done about it.

 

[nhbbear]

It’s not that way in Austin tbh. Nearly every store downtown doesn’t allow guns inside and very rarely is there open carry.

May I ask what your preferred response and actions by the officers should have been?

A Pat on the back and a handjob

 

[nhbbear]

Hey what about the waterboarding down in Mississippi?

all cause they wanted to know if they date white women

ridiculous and disgusting if true

 

[oldshadow]

You obviously didn't read any of my previous post. The problem is he could be another black guy dressed in dark with a gun that just happens to be in the area. Unlikely (again) as I said many times but he was fleeing and he got shot doing it. If he turns out to be the wrong guy then all hell is going to break loose again.

If he was not the shooter ( and even his own family is not saying that) and if he had the gun legally ( which I don't think is the case) his stupidity got him shot. He had the gun out and in his hand. He didn't drop it when told to then tried to run still holding the gun.

 

[Canned Tuna]

Hey what about the waterboarding down in Mississippi?

all cause they wanted to know if they date white women

That's horrible. I'll be on the lookout for more information. If that version of events is true, this will be the biggest story in a long time.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Police were called by multiple people stating that a suspect was shooting a gun and shot a person. Description given, Anthony Marquis Franklin was encountered and had a gun in hand. He then ran and was shot in the back by police. Family has lawyers that are demanding charges be brought against the officers involved.

Case law that covers this shooting.

TN v Garner and Graham v Connor

TN v Garner is the case that deals with a fleeing felon and when police can shooting a fleeing subject. Basically, it says that police can only shoot a fleeing suspect when there is an immediate threat to the officers or the public.

Graham v Connor is the case that deals with officer use of force. The force has to be proportional to the crime and risk posed by the suspect without the benefit of 20/20 hindsight based upon information officers possessed at the time of the use of force. I have listed the graham factors in the past. If anyone wants me to list those again, I will.

Bottom line: absolutely justified according to both cases. This suspect had already shot one person, is encountered carrying a gun, and flees-posing a risk to the general public that outweighs the suspect’s fourth amendment rights to unreasonable search and seizure (all use of force is a 4th amendment seizure).

https://www.fox7austin.com/news/ant...olice-officers-attorneys-call-for-justice.amp

If you're posting the story it's probably justified or else you wouldn't bring it to our attention.

 

[ringking1982]

Police were called by multiple people stating that a suspect was shooting a gun and shot a person. Description given, Anthony Marquis Franklin was encountered and had a gun in hand. He then ran and was shot in the back by police. Family has lawyers that are demanding charges be brought against the officers involved.

Case law that covers this shooting.

TN v Garner and Graham v Connor

TN v Garner is the case that deals with a fleeing felon and when police can shooting a fleeing subject. Basically, it says that police can only shoot a fleeing suspect when there is an immediate threat to the officers or the public.

Graham v Connor is the case that deals with officer use of force. The force has to be proportional to the crime and risk posed by the suspect without the benefit of 20/20 hindsight based upon information officers possessed at the time of the use of force. I have listed the graham factors in the past. If anyone wants me to list those again, I will.

Bottom line: absolutely justified according to both cases. This suspect had already shot one person, is encountered carrying a gun, and flees-posing a risk to the general public that outweighs the suspect’s fourth amendment rights to unreasonable search and seizure (all use of force is a 4th amendment seizure).

https://www.fox7austin.com/news/ant...olice-officers-attorneys-call-for-justice.amp

100% justified.

 

[Bald1]

I don't know what you were watching but he was shot practically as he landed/fell on the ground. He was still running away. You want to believe he is a confirmed threat at this moment that's you. I see differently and it's not an excuse.

The only insanity I see is that we are a culture that evolved into accepting the shooting of people that are fleeing (regardless of whether they are armed or not).

If an armed and demonstrably violent person is fleeing then they should be given a chance to turn over a new leaf under extremely stressful circumstances? Nope. At that point the guy is a danger to the public. Can't just cross your fingers and hope he doesn't hijack a car and take someone hostage. Desperation makes people do all sorts of crazy things.

 

[nhbbear]

If you're posting the story it's probably justified or else you wouldn't bring it to our attention.

Yes, but I like to take the stories that involve some form of outrage and prove them wrong through case law and other factors.

I was asked to design a college course that I may decide to teach this course and it would be centered on use of force, the amendments it involves, and the case law to make an argument. I would present the students with a video and have them break it down and tell me if a shooting or use of force is justified and why.