[Beren]

Yes, you are right, Beren. He deserved to die because he had a rifle, with a scope, tucked into the crack of his ass and was reaching for it.

Who says he deserved to die? The whole chain of events shouldn't have happened, and if I had to summarise the story, I'd title it as Grand Lethal American Idiocy.

[Ranb]

It's clear that the current prosecutor system is failing in these cases. They have far too close a relationship with the police and there's a lot of organizational and cultural overlap.

Other than fail to get a conviction, what did the prosecutor do wrong at trial?

[mikema63]

They often fail to get anything even at a grand jury, and prosecutors have a saying that they can indict a ham sandwich at a grand jury.

Given the straightforwardness of the evidence a failure to convict in this case suggests either serious ineptitude of the prosecutor or a serious lack of effort.

[Pants-of-dog]

It shows collusion between the police and the prosecution. This makes sense considering they work together every day apprehending criminals. The trouble is that when the police do something obviously criminal, the people who are supposed to prosecute them (i.e. the prosecution) are going to let them off.

Which is what happened here.

[colliric]

Dear people saying it wouldn't have happened in the 1980s.

Yes it would have. Police Corruption was even worse back then.

Some Police have always been corrupt pigs at times who shoot on sight. They earned the nickname "pigs" a long long time ago.

[Crantag]

Wow. The US Justice system is far more corrupt than any other I have ever seen. They don't even operate for the people. When people talk about foreign corrupt cops, they really shouldn't bother, as the USA has the worst of the bunch. They might as well be running death squads.

Heck, the guy shot wasn't even black!! They're not even trying to conceal it, anymore. You can have 1000 witnesses and they still get off.

I am supremely happy that I am not American and that I don't live in Police State USA.

I facepalm hard whenever I hear foreign representatives of America, with it's 750 prisoners per 100,000 citizens, and which routinely murders foreigners around the world on an industrial scale, try to lecture other countries about human rights. I also have no delusions about the rest of the world having any delusions about the treacherousness of the United States, when it comes to issues of human rights.

[Deutschmania]

The father of two (kid?) being confused was also part of it.

It would seem to me , from watching the body cam video footage , that Daniel Shaver did not understand what was being commanded of him . The police had ordered him to move towards them without raising his arms . So in other words they demanded that he inch towards them in like manner to that of a worm . It would be like if I were to tell you all to give me a hand clap , but only use one hand to do it . At first it might seem to be self contradictory , until I show you how .

Such situations of misunderstanding are especially anow area of concern for those on the autistic spectrum , due to the unusual mannerisms and literal way of thinking which characterizes the condition. For example , https://www.cbsnews.com/news/autistic-teen-who-was-roughed-up-by-police-speaks-out/ , https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/19/opinion/police-autism-understanding.html . Failure to understand one another can and has lead to detrimental , and even deadly consequences , as we have seen .

[Ranb]

It shows collusion between the police and the prosecution.

What exactly did the prosecution do to convince you that they colluded with the police? The defendant was fired by the police department after the shooting.

The trouble is that when the police do something obviously criminal, the people who are supposed to prosecute them (i.e. the prosecution) are going to let them off.

Which is what happened here.

You talk like you have inside info on the case. What do you know that the rest of us don't? Exactly what should the prosecuting attorney done differently to obtain a conviction?

[Thunderhawk]

This seems to me to be a case of conflicting expectations in a life-or-death situation. The cop expected his commands to be obeyed and for the officer to be able to act in safety at all times. That his commands might seem confusing or contradictory didnt seem to be an issue for him, and that operating from a position of safety at all times might require unreasonable demands also doesn't seem to be an issue for him. The victim (yes, victim) expected that he could act emotional/uncontrolled/drunk with a rifle and not get in shit for it at some point, and that in a life-or-death situation he expected some of his actions to be perceived in a non life-or-death fashion.


I suspect the guy's hand went down as a reaction - his pants were falling or his balance was off. I suspect that in a life-or-death situation the cop viewed the hand-moving-towards-waist action as a reach for a weapon and thus he shot first. A good example of how different expectations can have horrible outcomes, and what a life-or-death situations is.

It is unusual for people to have training (or even experience) keeping calm during tense situations; to swallow one's ego completely and obey; to be mindful of all their actions when in unusual emotional, physical and environmental circumstances. As such, expectations from the average person should be low. Police are held to a higher standard as they get training, and constantly assessing situations are expected. Furthermore, (civilian) police are not executioners nor military, they are expected to protect the people, their life on the line is part of the expectation. Not walking up to the victim and cuffing/padding/etc him when he was laying on the ground and not waiting a second when his hand went down were acts of safety for the officer, not bravery. Understandable for the average person, but more is expected from the police. Maybe the cop was a coward or lazy, or maybe his training and ability were horrible, but his actions and inaction make him a bad cop in my opinion. Not criminal nor corrupt kind of bad, just bad at this part of the job.

[Godstud]

Reaching for what, though? You could clearly see his underwear and his pants. There was nothing for him to reach for. Sorry, but this is a clear-cut homicide promoted by the most corrupt US Justice System.

Americans have some nerve calling other countries corrupt. At least in Thailand the corrupt cops won't fucking shoot me to death.

[Beren]

but more is expected from the police. Maybe the cop was a coward or lazy, or maybe his training and ability were horrible, but his actions and inaction make him a bad cop in my opinion. Not criminal nor corrupt kind of bad, just bad at this part of the job.

It's Mesa Police Department in Arizona, neither NYPD nor LAPD who would have been more professional and competent due to more experience, better training, and better cops perhaps.

[Godstud]

USA seems to mostly have untrained thugs(They do not deserve the title of police officers) who are given assault rifles and free reign to kill who they want, at the slightest provocation.

[Beren]

If you're a police officer in the USA, in a big city especially, you never really know what or whom you're actually dealing with, so they're trigger happy all the time and that's how they're trained most likely.

[Crantag]

USA seems to mostly have untrained thugs(They do not deserve the title of police officers) who are given assault rifles and free reign to kill who they want, at the slightest provocation.

Oh, they're trained. Here you go, take this training video for example.

(Warning, a little bit graphic.)
[youtube]z2WCxDYupeU[/youtube]

[Thunderhawk]

It's Mesa Police Department in Arizona, neither NYPD nor LAPD who would have been more professional and competent due to more experience, better training, and better cops perhaps.

Their ability to hit the target and avoid bystanders seems pretty good, that isn't my criticism. That they went in expecting him to be armed and it being a dangerous situation makes sense to me as from what I read they got a call about a man with a gun and that raises the stakes.

Why did the cop ask him to get up when he was laying down? laying down with his arms out seems like a position that allows the officer to see more and makes any movement obvious and difficult. The disadvantage to the cop is location - not knowing what else is near by while the suspect does. With him laying down, the possibility of uncoordinated (or foolish) movement is lesser than having him get partly up. Was there a time pressure such that waiting to read more of the situation and getting more eyes on scene was not viable? Was there a rush for him to move? Or a rush to get to where he was?


If the guy didn't have a rifle but was just a drunk dude who was the victim of swatting, or was carrying construction equipment mistaken by others as weapons, and acted the same otherwise, would there not be the same outcome?

[Pants-of-dog]

What exactly did the prosecution do to convince you that they colluded with the police? The defendant was fired by the police department after the shooting.

They did a poor job of prosecution, such that the cop got off despite the video evidence showing clear wrongdoing.

You talk like you have inside info on the case. What do you know that the rest of us don't? Exactly what should the prosecuting attorney done differently to obtain a conviction?

Their job.

[Ranb]

They did a poor job of prosecution, such that the cop got off despite the video evidence showing clear wrongdoing.

I asked for specifics, you're replying with generalities. Ever consider that the jury might side with the police no matter what?

Was the jury allowed to view the entire video? The judge blocked some evidence such as the "you're fucked" engraving on the cop's rifle. I wonder what else the jury was not allowed to see.

You talk like you have inside info; let's hear it then.

[Pants-of-dog]

I asked for specifics, you're replying with generalities. Ever consider that the jury might side with the police no matter what?

Was the jury allowed to view the entire video? The judge blocked some evidence such as the "you're fucked" engraving on the cop's rifle. I wonder what else the jury was not allowed to see.

You talk like you have inside info; let's hear it then.

Do you have an argument or a rebuttal?

You seem to have some vague criticisms and questions, and not much else.

[Ranb]

Do you have an argument or a rebuttal?

You seem to have some vague criticisms and questions, and not much else.

You're trying to place the burden of proof on me when it was you who made a claim that you should be supporting with evidence.
You said in part;

It shows collusion between the police and the prosecution. This makes sense considering they work together every day apprehending criminals. The trouble is that when the police do something obviously criminal, the people who are supposed to prosecute them (i.e. the prosecution) are going to let them off.

Admit you're wrong or at least give us something to support your claim.

[Rancid]

I guess I don't understand why people like to give the Police so much benefit of the doubt in these cases. Basically, people say that it's a hard job, they're always in danger, and thus, these kinds of slip ups are ok. Purely because it's tough to make quick judgments about a potential threat.

My argument is this. Yes, the job is dangerous, and it should be dangerous precisely because they shouldn't be taking out their guns and shooting people up on the slightest feeling of danger. The job is dangerous, and yes, you should be thinking twice before taking out your gun. Yes, requiring better judgement makes the job more dangerous, but the job is dangerous. Don't be a cop if that's an issue to you.