—> ICE / Immigration / Video from ICE shooter POV released, firestorm ensues

[Mundial]

With the caveat that the following does not reflect my views, but how certain jurors would view it:

• Shots 2 and 3 vs shot 1 -- In a fight or flight situation, it is extremely common for officers to fire multiple shots. You can fire three times in a little over a second. In police shootings, there are almost always multiple shots fired (and there will be expert testimony to that effect). An officer is not going to take one shot and see if that did the trick if they truly believe their life is in danger (and that is going to be the million dollar question for certain jurors).

• No other agents drawing a weapon -- No other agent was in an allegedly vulnerable position.

• Not allowing volunteer doctor to approach and not providing any emergency care -- That was a decision by all agents there, not just him. Likely, in a crowd containment situation, the officers are trained to control public access, even in a medical distress situation. Again, this will be a subject of expert testimony as to proper protocol following an officer-involved shooting.

• Officer placing himself in front of a running vehicle -- This one I think is the easiest to counter. The vehicle was parked when he placed himself in front of the vehicle. As you see from the videos, he circled the vehicle with his cell phone filming. He worked his way to the front of the vehicle. At that point, there was no indication that the vehicle would be moving forward. That did not occur until the other agents approached and said get the fuck out of the vehicle. There is certainly no rule that requires officers never to go in front of a parked vehicle. It would be a much different situation if she were moving forward and then he jumped in front of her and shot. That is not what happened.

Most rapid fire situations involving law enforcement that I have seen have involved the same general angle of fire (e.g., head on). Here the officer fires once from the front, side-steps and is clearly out of harms way, and then rapid fires almost like 2-gun, 3-gun competition style from the side even though the vehicle is clearly heading away from him and he is not in physical danger. Add in the cursing and the casual nature of how he approaches the vehicle (he did not appear to think that he was in harms way) and his casual walk back where he is not showing any injury and in my view it would be very hard to convince a jury that he reasonably thought his life was in danger. Rather he appeared to be angry that Good was being defiant.

I would expect DOJ if they do not win the total immunity to argue that he has PST from his prior car dragging incident. I would expect Minn AG to argue that if he has PST, and DOJ knew about this, he should not have been in any situation involving motor vehicles unless he was cleared by a psychiatrist (which in my view would have eliminated this defense for the ICE officer).

Add in Good's calm demeanor and expression (she appears to almost smile at the officer), and it's just a tough job of persuasion.

 

[OahuHiHeel]

Thought I saw this posted, but can't find it. She is blocking the right lane and then moves her car to block both lanes.

Again, not saying she deserved to be shot, but there wasn't a legal lane for anyone to use to go around her.

Interesting how the clip ends just before she attempts to drive off. Would have clearly shown the wheels turning away from the executioner.

 

[WaynetheDrain]

So, looking at a still photo, at the moment the gun is fired, the cops feet appear to be pointing almost directly at the driver side tire when either steam or smoke from the gun shows up. Seems pretty clear that he was not in front of the vehicle at the time the gun was discharged.

No fucking shit, Sherlock.

THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE OUTSIDE OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WITH A PAIR OF WORKING EYEBALLS HAS BEEN SAYING!

And you just finally arrived at this conclusion now, after taking their word for it for the last couple of days?

 

[TangledUpInBlue06]

Most rapid fire situations involving law enforcement that I have seen have involved the same general angle of fire (e.g., head on). Here the officer fires once from the front, side-steps and is clearly out of harms way, and then rapid fires almost like 2-gun, 3-gun competition style from the side even though the vehicle is clearly heading away from him and he is not in physical danger. Add in the cursing and the casual nature of how he approaches the vehicle (he did not appear to think that he was in harms way) and his casual walk back where he is not showing any injury and in my view it would be very hard to convince a jury that he reasonably thought his life was in danger. Rather he appeared to be angry that Good was being defiant.

I would expect DOJ if they do not win the total immunity to argue that he has PST from his prior car dragging incident. I would expect Minn AG to argue that if he has PST, and DOJ knew about this, he should not have been in any situation involving motor vehicles unless he was cleared by a psychiatrist (which in my view would have eliminated this defense for the ICE officer).

Add in Good's calm demeanor and expression (she appears to almost smile at the officer), and it's just a tough job of persuasion.

Another question for you and @Calheel. To what degree, if any, does the reasonableness of the method of self-defense matter vis a vis the threat to life? The officer fired his gun from a very short distance away from the car. Is it reasonable to believe shooting the driver at that close a distance would save his life? Is it reasonable to believe it would have meaningfully slowed or changed the car's direction at that point? Or does it not much matter once an immediate threat presents itself?

 

[donbosco]

Interesting how the clip ends just before she attempts to drive off. Would have clearly shown the wheels turning away from the executioner.

I've seen this video...I see what zen finally saw.

 

[Calheel]

Another question for you and @Calheel. To what degree, if any, does the reasonableness of the method of self-defense matter vis a vis the threat to life? The officer fired his gun from a very short distance away from the car. Is it reasonable to believe shooting the driver at that close a distance would save his life? Is it reasonable to believe it would have meaningfully slowed or changed the car's direction at that point? Or does it not much matter once an immediate threat presents itself?

I don’t see how shooting a slow moving (even if rapidly accelerating) vehicle from close distance in any way protects the shooter. The foot is going to remain on the accelerator even if the brains are blown out. The only way shooting a driver protects the shooter is if there is significant distance between the car and the shooter.

That said, it is much easier to make that calculation in the calm of time. When you are in a life threatening situation (and I absolutely don’t believe he was) then you have a pretty wide berth as to what is the “reasonable” amount of force to protect yourself.

Some jurors - again not me but some people - are going to be reluctant to second guess the split second decision making of an officer.

 

[nycfan]

Trump decides to enter this fray after mostly laying low.

 

[CarolinaFever]

Trump decides to enter this fray after mostly laying low.

What the hell is he talking about with the crunch?

 

[nycfan]

 

[Calheel]

What the hell is he talking about with the crunch?

You can hear her car hitting him on audio on the cell phone video the shooter took. That is the “crunch”. I think crunch significantly oversells the sound. But she did make contact with him.

 

[ZenMode]

No fucking shit, Sherlock.

THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE OUTSIDE OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WITH A PAIR OF WORKING EYEBALLS HAS BEEN SAYING!

And you just finally arrived at this conclusion now, after taking their word for it for the last couple of days?

I haven't seen anyone definitively say that.

You should try decaf.

 

[ZenMode]

You can hear her car hitting him on audio on the cell phone video the shooter took. That is the “crunch”. I think crunch significantly oversells the sound. But she did make contact with him.

I thought that too, but I think that's just rattling of him quickly lowering his phone.

 

[CarolinaFever]

You can hear her car hitting him on audio on the cell phone video the shooter took. That is the “crunch”. I think crunch significantly oversells the sound. But she did make contact with him.

No she didn't.

 

[nycfan]

 

[JCTarheel82]

He's such a POS.

 

[CarolinaFever]

Total bullshit, but even so that doesn't mean it's okay to murder her.

 

[Calheel]

No she didn't.

How do you know? The video from the front and the audio from the above cell phone video (where the officer groans) both suggests he was hit. I don't think he was hit very forcibly, but he was in front and she was accelerating. If she didn't hit him she grazed him. Obviously, he was not actually injured by the contact, but I don't think there is a very good argument that she didn't make contact with him.

 

[Calheel]

I thought that too, but I think that's just rattling of him quickly lowering his phone.

I guess we can add audio experts to the (hopeful) trial. It sounds like a groan to me.

 

[ZenMode]

I guess we can add audio experts to the (hopeful) trial. It sounds like a groan to me.

I agree there was a grunt or groan. Could have been a reaction to a variety of things. What seems pretty clear is that, at the time he fired, his life was not in danger.

 

[nycfan]