Minneapolis Shooting [spelling in title corrected]

[S2N 652]

3 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

no, i'm sure the entire case hinged on the part about shooting continuing after the suspect was down.
not only not in the same ball park, not even the same game.

And we currently don’t have video of how she was when she was inside the car. We don’t know if she was incapacitated.

[Crazy Cat 46,040]

2 minutes ago, S2N said:

And we currently don’t have video of how she was when she was inside the car. We don’t know if she was incapacitated.

After 1 shot, She was still at the wheel of a moving car.....threat was not neutralized after the initial shot.

Edited 22 hours ago by Crazy Cat

[S2N 652]

2 minutes ago, Crazy Cat said:

After 1 shot, She was still at the wheel of a moving car.....not incapacitated.  

You don’t know that. It’s your guess, but you don’t know.

 

Anyway; my point wasn’t that he’s liable. My point was that courts can and do analyze multiple shots over a short period as separate instances of force.

Edited 22 hours ago by S2N

[Ban Hammer 14,873]

4 minutes ago, S2N said:

And we currently don’t have video of how she was when she was inside the car. We don’t know if she was incapacitated.

now you are just grasping at straws.

[Crazy Cat 46,040]

3 minutes ago, S2N said:

You don’t know that.

After the first shot, was she still behind the wheel?  Was the car still moving?  

Edited 22 hours ago by Crazy Cat

[Boiler 48,466]

I am just wondering what happens to the owner of the car she drove into, how will the owner fill in the claim form.

 

And a Honda Pilot, really?, what was wrong with a Subaru?

[S2N 652]

8 minutes ago, Boiler said:

And a Honda Pilot, really?, what was wrong with a Subaru?

The real question.

[S2N 652]

17 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

now you are just grasping at straws.

 

16 minutes ago, Crazy Cat said:

After the first shot, was she still behind the wheel?  Was the car still moving?  

As a reasonable non-law enforcement observer, to me it looked like the car was swerving uncontrollably after the first shot because she’d been knocked out and he kept firing. Whether that counts as incapacitated is a question of fact, not law, and I don’t have all the facts. No one does.

 

Which is what I keep trying to point out. The case law is a lot more complicated than Woman drives car towards LEO, LEO keeps shooting until he thinks he’s safe again, and since this is likely to end up as a civil case against DHS and nothing will come of it for him, the facts and specifics really matter and will determine what happens in the courts.

[Dashinka 26,434]

2 hours ago, S2N said:

The theory is that the priorities of local cops are different than the federal government: local cops care a lot more about victims from local crime being willing to be witnesses in court, and Stephen Miller doesn’t, to be blunt.

 

There’s probably a better middle way beyond deputizing local LE to enforce immigration, which I think would likely lead to unintended negative consequences, and having local cops more or less do nothing.

That doesn’t explain the locals ignoring an ICE request for an illegal alien that is in jail or prison.  Heck, it might help with local criminal control if that type of person is turned over to ICE in a regulated fashion rather than making ICE search for them and possibly getting others in their net.

 

The entire “sanctuary” city/state playbook is purely political and causes more harm than good.

[Boiler 48,466]

Apparently first shot missed, and she backed up then accelerated and hit the guy, of course quite how long it took to get the second and thoird shots off but car would have travelled some way.

[S2N 652]

3 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Apparently first shot missed, and she backed up then accelerated and hit the guy, of course quite how long it took to get the second and thoird shots off but car would have travelled some way.

Yeah, these are the details that matter. Will be following how it plays out.

[speedster 60]

I'll cite case law yet again. Kirby v. Duva. Thomas Kirby was in a pickup truck nearly surrounded by officers. Conflicting evidence showed Kirby may have been slowly maneuvering his truck to get away, not trying to run anyone over. Officers nevertheless opened fire, killing Kirby. The Sixth Circuit held a jury could find this shooting unconstitutional: under Kirby’s version, no officer was in the truck’s path or in danger, and the truck had even come to a complete stop before officers fired. The court noted it was clearly established (by Garner) that shooting a fleeing felon who poses no serious threat is unlawful. In other words, “a fleeing car is not automatically a deadly threat” – there must be an immediate risk of harm. Because Kirby was unarmed and driving at low speed with officers out of harm’s way, deadly force was excessive.

"He states that he heard the Ranger’s engine revving, observed the truck’s backup lights come on, and saw gravel flying from its tires. There was a distance of less than two feet between himself and the Ranger, Buckley estimates, as it came at him in reverse, traveling seven to eight miles per hour. Buckley testified that he tried to get to the Ranger’s side by stepping backwards and sideways, but could not avoid the vehicle, which up approximately twelve feet. Buckley claims that as he was pushed backward by the Ranger, he was forced to hang on to its tailgate. Buckley states that he then began to lose his balance and slipped down a muddy embankment towards the ditch. Fearing for his life, Buckley fired his gun into the Ranger four to five times. Buckley aimed at Kirby’s head with each shot, “shooting to kill him.”"

Huh, look at that. A car turned away from you, EVEN IF you feared for your life, doesn't mean you can kill someone else. And the supreme court has stated this case before too.

[Ban Hammer 14,873]

thread locked pending review

[Ban Hammer 14,873]

one post removed for tos violation.
one post removed for quoting that post.
admin action has been taken.

[Crazy Cat 46,040]

13 hours ago, Dashinka said:

The entire “sanctuary” city/state playbook is purely political and causes more harm than good.

It is rebellion against federal law. One could argue it is insurrection.

Edited 8 hours ago by Crazy Cat