26 y.o. New Brunswick woman shot and killed by Police

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Report reads

Municipal police in the city of about 16,500 said the shooting was in self-defence, saying the officer was “confronted at the scene by a woman holding a knife who made threats.”


As I understand, the woman was standing on a balcony holding a knife and making some verbal threats. There is no report, let alone evidence, about Moore being close to the officer. There is also no indication of a combat of any kind. As per policeman words, she was allegedly holding knife and shouting off something like "go away or I stab you". That doesn't justify killing.

And there's no evidence that she even hadva knife at the first place. We all post like it's proven and only argue whether shots were justified. For all we know, she may have never had a knife at all.

Yup, this is what we actually know:
- The police were called for a wellness check
- Moore was shot five times and killed

This is the story from the officer, which is not confirmed:
- Moore ran into the balcony holding a knife
- Non-lethal force was not attempted

What we definitely don’t know, and people are making guessing on:
- the proximity to the officer
- if de-escalation was attempted
- why non-lethal force wasn’t used

A lot of the justifications (and outrage, to be fair) are based on the things we don’t know, and the unconfirmed story of the officer. Will we get real answers? Doubtful, certainly not for a while. Would this be the first time that lethal force was unjustified on an Indigenous person in Canada? Absolutely not. Are there scenarios based on what we know that could justify it? Yes, but acting like those scenarios are fact doesn’t make much sense.

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Actually what you do, as I have done it, is you tell the person 'I cant leave you alone because I am worried you will hurt yourself, but I won't come in if you keep talking to me and I know you are ok, but you have to stay calm and talk to me so I know you are ok' while you are saying that if you think the person is at risk of suicide, as at no point is this person a risk to you unless you do something incredibly obtuse, you are desperately calling for help as time and increased numbers are your ally in this situation.

Disregard.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Yup, this is what we actually know:
- The police were called for a wellness check
- Moore was shot five times and killed

This is the story from the officer, which is not confirmed:
- Moore ran into the balcony holding a knife
- Non-lethal force was not attempted

What we definitely don’t know, and people are making guessing on:
- the proximity to the officer
- if de-escalation was attempted
- why non-lethal force wasn’t used

A lot of the justifications (and outrage, to be fair) are based on the things we don’t know, and the unconfirmed story of the officer. Will we get real answers? Doubtful, certainly not for a while. Would this be the first time that lethal force was unjustified on an Indigenous person in Canada? Absolutely not. Are there scenarios based on what we know that could justify it? Yes, but acting like those scenarios are fact doesn’t make much sense.

here's the only thing I take from this, she ran away from the cop, out onto her balcony, unless he was climbing in through the second floor balcony for some bizarre reason. There is no way she can be on her balcony and attacking him if he's at the door, actually I will retract that as the door might lead out onto the balcony if it is a communal balcony

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

It's not as simple as that.

If it's a check on welfare, the totality of the circumstances need to be considered.

I don't think there's a point in explaining it.

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

Theres indeed no point in explaining this, as it is well understood. However, based on what we know this far, it does not seem likely that cops had any reasons to enter. The only reason that seems to ne applicable is "to investigate a 911 phone call". I don't quite grasp whether welllness check is or is not a 911 call.

https://www.cleo.on.ca/en/publicatio...-enter-my-home

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Theres indeed no point in explaining this, as it is well understood. However, based on what we know this far, it does not seem likely that cops had any reasons to enter. The only reason that seems to ne applicable is "to investigate a 911 phone call". I don't quite grasp whether welllness check is or is not a 911 call.

https://www.cleo.on.ca/en/publicatio...-enter-my-home

No they're not, more often than not you call in a missing persons report, with a bit of coaxing from the dispatcher 'so they didn't answer the phone and that is why you are worried sir, isn't it!!'

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Exactly! That's my point. And the reason it rarely happens in Canada.

Although it's rather naive to suggest that no one is ever a threat in such a situation, but I guess if you're wrong, you'll know pretty quick.

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

From your experience, do you think that the officer didn't realize Moore lived there (was not a burglar)?

Disregard.

Originally Posted by Pointman

From your experience, do you think that the officer didn't realize Moore lived there (was not a burglar)?

Disregard.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by Pointman

I don't quite grasp whether welllness check is or is not a 911 call.

In my experience (only), 85% of the wellness check calls should be made to the Non-Emergency line. However, I'd say 95% of them are made to the 911 line.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

I think what is bothering me is the spinning of the narrative to fit whatever conclusions people hvae drawn and stating it as fact.

Pepsi actually made a great post (aside from the scenario comment at the end as the scenarios can go either way) dissecting what we know and what we don't. AFC responded with a comment making it sounds like he knows what happened or simply can't see it as happening any other way.

In fact, he paints the picture as if he was actually there and has quickly drawn the the conclusion she was shot because she was indigenous and wasn't a threat.

On some level you have to acknowledge that maybe I don't know what happened. Maybe something else happened. Maybe I actually have no clue what I'm talking about. Really.

I can concede that. I have no idea what happened. I have no issue waiting until we hear and see everything. Then, I think I'll be in a better position to have an opinion.

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

Actually I think she was shot because she wouldn't drop the knife, I don't think the fact she was indigenous was a factor, my guess is the cop didn't identify himself well enough or consider the situation particularly and she thought he was an intruder, I don't think she 'attacked him' I think she just had a knife and told him to keep away, perhaps the balcony didn't have a light and she couldn't see his uniform, instead of backing away the cop, I suspect, went into cop mode and told her to drop the knife or else, she then shouted leave me alone or I'll kill you or something like that and he shot her.

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Actually I think she was shot because she wouldn't drop the knife, I don't think the fact she was indigenous was a factor, my guess is the cop didn't identify himself well enough or consider the situation particularly and she thought he was an intruder, I don't think she 'attacked him' I think she just had a knife and told him to keep away, perhaps the balcony didn't have a light and she couldn't see his uniform, instead of backing away the cop, I suspect, went into cop mode and told her to drop the knife or else, she then shouted leave me alone or I'll kill you or something like that and he shot her.

Disregard

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Or, it didn't happen like that at all.

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

maybe not, but some variation of that is the way the vast majority of police shooting knife wielding suspects goes down, the suspect is ordered to drop the knife, doesn't and is shot, and if memory serves the cop in this case has already said he shoot her because she wouldn't drop the knife.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

I think what is bothering me is the spinning of the narrative to fit whatever conclusions people hvae drawn and stating it as fact.

Pepsi actually made a great post (aside from the scenario comment at the end as the scenarios can go either way) dissecting what we know and what we don't. AFC responded with a comment making it sounds like he knows what happened or simply can't see it as happening any other way.

In fact, he paints the picture as if he was actually there and has quickly drawn the the conclusion she was shot because she was indigenous and wasn't a threat.

On some level you have to acknowledge that maybe I don't know what happened. Maybe something else happened. Maybe I actually have no clue what I'm talking about. Really.

I can concede that. I have no idea what happened. I have no issue waiting until we hear and see everything. Then, I think I'll be in a better position to have an opinion.

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

I don't pretend to know what happened. However, I would argue that within fixed framework that we know: wellness check, no crime was happening, inhabitant shot in her living room or just outside - I genuinely can't think of any scenario where murder would be justified. Even if buy officer's story, which I don't, I still don't see how it justifies shooting. At first I thought it is common and normal in NA to shoot in those circumstances, but the Texas murder csse shows that it is not.

I am also under impression that she didn't realize he's cop or he didn't realize she lives there, or both.

[afc wimbledon]

I will also say this, I think that the cop was frightened for his life and following his training, in N America we train the police to shoot people with knives if they don't drop the knife, we teach cops someone with a knife who wont drop it is a deadly threat and also that the appropriate response if they wont drop the knife is to shoot them.

What we unfortunately don't teach them is its ok to back off and wait, that if you have the time and space to shout drop the knife in most circumstances you also have the time and space to wait for help, back off if you need to etc.
We pay lip service to de-escalation while not expecting policemen to wait the 5 or 10 minutes it normally takes to deescalate

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I will also say this, I think that the cop was frightened for his life and following his training, in N America we train the police to shoot people with knives if they don't drop the knife, we teach cops someone with a knife who wont drop it is a deadly threat and also that the appropriate response if they wont drop the knife is to shoot them.

What we unfortunately don't teach them is its ok to back off and wait, that if you have the time and space to shout drop the knife in most circumstances you also have the time and space to wait for help, back off if you need to etc.
We pay lip service to de-escalation while not expecting policemen to wait the 5 or 10 minutes it normally takes to deescalate

All COMPLETELY untrue and at best, a rudimentary understanding.

Edit - on second thought, it's no even a rudimentary understanding.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

All COMPLETELY untrue and at best, a rudimentary understanding.

Edit - on second thought, it's no even a rudimentary understanding.

Why then is it that our police kill so many more civilians than in the UK with it's twice the population, massively greater social problems, massively greater urban areas, a greater multicultural population with all of the issues these factors bring?

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Why then is it that our police kill so many more civilians than in the UK with it's twice the population, massively greater social problems, massively greater urban areas, a greater multicultural population with all of the issues these factors bring?

You spouted off about how police are trained in NA. I called you out because it's misinformation.

People need to know that.

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Comments like this, from a federal minister no less, don't add any sort of value. Pretty clear that his mind is made up that this is a case of police violence against an indigenous person and he even admits he doesn't know how any of it happened, but has decided to make a judgement anyways. Curious how his first reaction to being told one of the people he represents was killed is to assume it's a joke.

I guess one of his colleagues didn't want to be outdone and decided that this is an issue of indigenous women being able to be safe wherever they were, with a few other gender identities tossed in. Again, with no knowledge of the situation.



Two federal ministers, both with their minds made up before any sort of investigation, making comments that will do nothing but inflame.

Right.

It’s not like they’re an endless paper trail of systemic abuse of aboriginals by law enforcement on which to base their perspective of the situation.

Do Starlight tours in Saskatoon ring a bell?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

You spouted off about how police are trained in NA. I called you out because it's misinformation.

People need to know that.

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

having done de escalation training with the police I can say that while what they are taught is fine but the way they are taught to use it is abysmal, the police are essentially given conflicting philosophies, they are taught they have to de escalate the situation, but they have to deal with the situation straight way, without losing ground or initiative, and you cannot de escalate jack that way, the whole thrust of de escalation is to give the other person a sense of control, give them time, don't order them to do things, talk quietly, don't shout, don't threaten

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

having done de escalation training with the police I can say that while what they are taught is fine but the way they are taught to use it is abysmal, the police are essentially given conflicting philosophies, they are taught they have to de escalate the situation, but they have to deal with the situation straight way, without losing ground or initiative, and you cannot de escalate jack that way, the whole thrust of de escalation is to give the other person a sense of control, give them time, don't order them to do things, talk quietly, don't shout, don't threaten

Many times the reason why police “cant give ground” is that doing so could allow the person armed with the weapon to then put others in danger.