MPLS police in spotlight AGAIN after questionable shooting

[MadPick]

"Homicide" just means that someone else caused the death, which isn't in dispute here. It doesn't indicate whether it was justified or not.

[mislabeled]

<snip>
Just because I'm a dick doesn't mean I'm wrong. :p

Saving that one for posterity and stuff.

[Mediumrarechicken]

Still no details of the encounter but the ME has ruled it a homicide:

"Damond's shooting death has been ruled a homicide by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's office."

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/07/17/minnesota-police-officer-who-shot-killed-australian-woman-offers-condolences.html

Officer has offered his condolences.

Homicide doesn't equal murder. If you shoot someone that is trying to stab you it's justifiable homicide

[Alpine]

The Aussie press is now blaming this on.... guns. No joke. Despite their police also being armed, they say this is about America's 'gun culture.'

http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-worl ... -of-woman/

I wonder how the Aussies would feel if we would constantly harp on their "rape culture" given that since the public handgun ban, Aussie women are now raped 3x more than American women.

[snozzberries]

There is so much bias surrounding Police Officers it's insane.

Some people seem to think they can do no wrong. I swear, if Hitler was a police officer, some people would think he did no wrong.
Some people seem to think they are scum of the earth. I swear, if Jesus was a police officer, some people would think he was Satan.

When events like this occur, we should scrub the news article of all reference to Police Officers.

Justine Damond (...) was in her pajamas speaking with a man who was in the driver’s seat of a car when the man in the passenger side allegedly “pulled his gun and shot Damond through the driver’s side door,”

[mislabeled]

Right now I'm leaning towards an ND. Conflicting info is floating around about a single shot to the gut versus multiple shots, though, so confirmation on that could certainly change the picture a bit.

[DGM33]

Right now I'm leaning towards an ND. Conflicting info is floating around about a single shot to the gut versus multiple shots, though, so confirmation on that could certainly change the picture a bit.

That would make a lot of sense. An officer who never paid attention in training starts waving his gun around while they stop to ask questions, booger hook ends up on the bang switch and... "Oh shit!" The cameras off could have just been laziness that turned into a huge shitstorm. It doesn't always have to be a conspiracy or cover up. Just because it sometimes is, doesn't mean it always is.

Whatever the exact circumstances, it sucks for the poor victim and her family.

[glockgirl]

It's an understatement to say that this was an unfortunate incident. For those who are making insinuating comments based on the officer's name and country of birth, please explain to me how the other officer ALSO failed to turn on his body cam. If this officer's name was Jim McWhiteypants, I doubt that his name would be mentioned in this thread at all.

As to media coverage of events like these, I'm all for transparency, but honestly, TW, it's about time to step away from your keyboard and look at LEOs in a different light. Where were the cameras when the BPD detective arrived on my doorstep the day after Roald was struck by a car, just to hand me the investigative report and to give Roald a hug? The detective well knew that the report could've been mailed, but he took time out of his day to check on Roald and make sure that I was okay, too.

That is the kind of little gestures that don't get coverage, and so if your worldview is based entirely on media coverage of purely negative incidents, you're going end up with a negative view of all LEO's.

Lots of openings for the August (I think) WSP cadet class, TW. Just saying.

[Selador]

It's an understatement to say that this was an unfortunate incident. For those who are making insinuating comments based on the officer's name and country of birth, please explain to me how the other officer ALSO failed to turn on his body cam. If this officer's name was Jim McWhiteypants, I doubt that his name would be mentioned in this thread at all.

As to media coverage of events like these, I'm all for transparency, but honestly, TW, it's about time to step away from your keyboard and look at LEOs in a different light. Where were the cameras when the BPD detective arrived on my doorstep the day after Roald was struck by a car, just to hand me the investigative report and to give Roald a hug? The detective well knew that the report could've been mailed, but he took time out of his day to check on Roald and make sure that I was okay, too.

That is the kind of little gestures that don't get coverage, and so if your worldview is based entirely on media coverage of purely negative incidents, you're going end up with a negative view of all LEO's.

Lots of openings for the August (I think) WSP cadet class, TW. Just saying.

That's it!

I'm changing my name to McWhiteypants!!!

[L_O_G]

Lots of openings for the August (I think) WSP cadet class, TW. Just saying.

[MadPick]

McWhiteypants. I like that.

[Selador]

McWhiteypants. I like that.

Too late. I stole it first.

[leadcounsel]

Well, this incident tells me a lot of things.

* Liberals end game is to destroy and gut law enforcement as part of the overall destruction of the nation, and infiltration of all ranks.

* The anti-cop agenda has gained ground. The promoted violence against cops has got them on edge. The high quality candidates are no longer interested in applying and I'm guessing this officer was a poor candidate, as a result.

* Looks like this was an ND or AD, probably from a jumpy cop or a poorly trained one or a poor candidate for law enforcement.

* I'll withhold real criticisms until more information is released, but on the surface it looks like a very bad shooting. Has nothing to do with race. But shooting across your partner through a car door in a enclosed car is a poor decision and would only be done in an urgent - as in, I see a gun pointed at us - situation. Certainly seems not to be that way based on reporting.

[leadcounsel]

For every one of these incidents there are 1000's of good deeds done by PD's all over the Nation that happen with zero news coverage. This is sad and extremely tragic no doubt. But when all we hear is how bad the police are on a daily basis, it paints an unfair picture of those who are doing fantastic jobs on the daily.

Shouldn't you be asking why there are so many incidents?

That's a finger you don't want to start pointing.

To paraphrase... And clarify...

So we should ignore suicide bombers because most Muslims are peaceful?

Your analogy is precisely why you don't get it. There's a distinction.

We Americans diligently TRY to ensure cops are up to standard, held accountable, and even in questionable shootings/killings they are investigated and/or prosecuted and/or families paid millions of dollars (Freddie Gray, Michael Brown, Philandro Castile...).

Conversely, Muslims seem to condone or even thrive in a violent suicide bombing environment, Sharia law, oppression, murders, etc. They seem to do little to end it or show any interest as a Muslim national or local community of stopping it.

[leadcounsel]

We should examine the source of the criticism to see if that source is biased. I don't get my news from abcnnmsnbc because they're biased. Why wouldn't anyone take a thread on police violence posted by YOU with the same grain of salt.

You're biased. It's not a big secret. But I don't think you can step back and consider how your bias may be skewing your presentation of the situation.

Police violence is often unjustified, but an article posted by you will always be met with instant criticism because... well... you.

1. I'm not biased. Or at least no more so than any other person coming across a news article saying a woman in her pajamas that called police was shot and killed.

2. So... If I said something wrong, correct it. I post sources and links to my statements and assertions.

3.You're attacking me, not my argument. That does no one any good. I state my position, and you're free to disagree with it, but I expect logic and discourse, not 'your point is invalid because;technoweenie'..

I agree with Steve that we need more info, but the cameras (3 of them) weren't running, which I think is a coverup, but is a HUGE policy violation at the very least, and the agency itself isn't saying shit.

So, as stated.... What we have so far is what was posted....leaks to the media... With lots of unanswered questions and ZERO reasonable explanation of how this could have happened.

Shit, at least give an alternate suggestion as to how you think this might be justified...

Instead I'm being told I'm anti-cop because I want transparency in gov't and people's rights to be observed... And will comment on those situations...

Am I anti judge for calling out judges that sign bad warrants or anti prosecutor for calling out a prosecutor for charging someone with a BS crime?

Just silly that you acknowledge there are problems but ignore the argument surrounding those problems because I'm the one thag started the discussion.

Data is data. Just because I'm a dick doesn't mean I'm wrong. :p

I'm not defending the cop at all here, and suspect it was a bad shoot. However, you jump to conclusions that are not supported - like the allegation of a coverup with the cameras. As I understand it, they were in their patrol vehicle and it wouldn't be policy for them to be running at that point. I've read that they are activated when the officer exits the vehicle, or the overhead lights are engaged, or similar. You automatically jump to "cover up" whereas a reasonable interpretation is that they just weren't activated.

There are finite reasons for the shooting. Probably a jump cop or an ND/AD. I doubt it could have been justified.