Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
I don't think punching a cop adds important context, but reaching for a gun does, and I've stated at much.
One we can see, the other is a side of the story which is not yet proven or corroborated. Assuming he was reaching for a gun, the shooting was justified. Assuming he wasn't and was just running away, it wasn't. Punching a cop doesn't change the validity of shooting him, unless you believe punching should carry a death sentence.
It was in the article I read, which I shared for everyone to read, I mentioned it in a response post, and then quoted that post again when someone said I left it out. So I'm not sure how many times I need to mention it or to point to a source that mentions it that will be enough to avoid accusations of "leaving it out" or "avoiding it." As explained (again) in my post above, the alleged gun if he went for it, is the only thing that justifies this. Not his record (if he has one), not running away, not punching a cop, and not even a gun falling out of his jacket. If he went for the gun, that's it, and unfortunately there's no video that supports that statement, one made by police again and again to justify lethal force.
If you're holding out hope for body cam footage to confirm or deny it, good luck, LA County officers are not currently equipped with them.
|
The assaultive bit DOES provide important context to the guys state of mind and would definitely be considered in the investigation. But agreed, does not give rise to lethal force IMO (unless there's circumstances that we are unaware of).
I think what people are drawing issue with is your original post stated merely that he was shot because of a traffic violation.
Quote:
|
He was stopped because of... *checks notes* Ah yes, the dangerous felony of ‘riding a bicycle in violation of vehicle code.’ Better execute him.
|
You did post the link, but if the roles were reversed, you would be all over the poster for being "purposely obtuse" and not pointing out that the while the initial reason for police interaction was a vehicle code violation, the actual reason for the "execution" was him going for a gun (alleged).
If no one would have responded to it giving you an opportunity to bring up those facts, I am sure there would have been no further follow-up regarding a gun.