See my post above. How do we know that he was shot a few seconds after coming out? Maybe I'm watching an edited video? The video I saw doesn't show the man coming out of the house. He's already out at the start.
And what detail would make them believe that this was not one of the hostages and was in fact the shooter? If the officer truly believed the call, then he may be dealing with a victim that may not be in the best state of mind and will find it hard to follow orders. Shooting someone in that situation a few seconds after coming out seems to be a very bad call.
Ok so a man calls the cops on himself and then when they show up he just answers the door? Also I think someone mentioned that the caller described being in a single story house but the house was 2-story? Also like someone else said, the cops were behind cover and this guy felt the need to shoot without even seeing a weapon? Too much. Too much to believe this was anything other than adrenaline fueled incompetence. I prefer my cops to have level heads, thank you very much.Perhaps, but don't you think it's at all mitigating here that the cops went into this believing that the man was definitely armed? Bear in mind that the swatter didn't pretend to be a neighbor overhearing something which sounded alarming. He pretended to be the man himself, confessing that he was armed and had already killed someone. He literally could not possibly have created a more volatile and dangerous situation.
Okay so the cops say he was outside for a while and raised/lowered his hands several times but then release a video "edited" to remove the part showing him raising and lowering his hands several times?See my post above. How do we know that he was shot a few seconds after coming out? Maybe I'm watching an edited video? The video I saw doesn't show the man coming out of the house. He's already out at the start.
Okay so the cops say he was outside for a while and raised/lowered his hands several times but then release a video "edited" to remove the part showing him raising and lowering his hands several times?
Possibly. So where are all the other videos? Why did only one cop have a body cam? Why didn't they have video rolling before attempting to make contact? Of course they have video from well before they attempted to make contact. They just conveniently are not releasing that video, most likely because it contradicts their official statement.No, that's not what I was suggesting. First of all, I can't tell whether he raised or lowered his hands from the clip. Like I said, it's too blurry and far away to tell one way or the other.
So far as "editing," what I'm referring to is that the cop whose body cam took this video may not have been situated properly until the moment the video we're seeing starts. We don't know if there is any relevant prior video which has been edited out or not. What we do know is that the man was already on his porch at the time the video starts. That's all we know.
Possibly. So where are all the other videos? Why did only one cop have a body cam? Why didn't they have video rolling before attempting to make contact? Of course they have video from well before they attempted to make contact. They just conveniently are not releasing that video, most likely because it contradicts their official statement.
What is the theory here? One body cam for the department? One per raid and it isn't important to have it rolling before the raid starts?I don't know the answer to any of those questions. I don't know what police policy is regarding body cams in Witchita Kansas. You're free to make whatever assumptions you like.
But again, how do you know its not a victim that is dazed and confused from apparently being witness to an execution?
What is the theory here? One body cam for the department? One per raid and it isn't important to have it rolling before the raid starts?
Regardless of the possibility that a given adult male could have been a hostage, the standard protocol would be to tell him to raise his hands, right? And if does reach for his waist, they may assume he is the shooter and proceed accordingly.
The real issue here is whether the man actually did lower his hands. The video we've seen so far is inconclusive.
"I have no idea. Everything is a mystery to me. What I do know, is that it's not the cop's fault" - woolfe9998, Police Defender At Law
The protocol I would imagine is to first figure out what the situation is. The reason they did not run into the house shooting is because behind that door is an unknown. They have not identified who this man was and had no reason to believe he was the shooter over a victim. Victims do weird shit when they are afraid. It could be that his hands went down to grab a rubber chicken, or it could not. You simply need to use reason to try and figure out what is going on.
You are right. The only facts we have are that a cop shot an unarmed man and the cop who shot him admitted he did not see a weapon.I have no idea. That is the only honest answer I can give here. We don't know their protocols, and we don't know if they were followed or not. We don't even know if we've seen all the relevant video at this point.
We don't know all the proper protocols. But what we can be certain of is when the police approach a house where they have been told there is an armed shooter, anyone who emerges from the front door is going to be told to put his hands up. Whether in the heat of the moment they can decide to shoot when the man moves his hands (IF he moved his hands) is up to a prosecutor and potentially, a jury. None of this changes my position that the swatter created a very dangerous and potentially volitatile situation here, and did so quite intentionally.
In this case we have a guy that came out but no way of knowing if this was the shooter. Putting your hands down and up with lights shining into your eyes and people yelling is not unreasonable because its likely confusing. Shooting in that instance seems reckless.
So had the story been real, you'd be completely fine with the police acting as judge, jury, and executioner? The only thing the cop did wrong was believe the BS story?I don't think there is equal guilt here. The swatter did what he did out of pure malevolent intent. He sent police into this man's house believing that the man had a gun and had already killed someone. If this was a bad shoot on the part of the police, it was a crime of negligence.
Remember those videos of kids running out of Columbine with their hands up? Not all of them left them up the whole time, or up at all. I guess the cops should've shot them too, just to make sure? Putting your hands down should not be a reason to be executed. I doubt that would've even got you executed in the middle ages.Regardless of the possibility that a given adult male could have been a hostage, the standard protocol would be to tell him to raise his hands, right? And if does reach for his waist, they may assume he is the shooter and proceed accordingly.
The real issue here is whether the man actually did lower his hands. The video we've seen so far is inconclusive.
If you believe what the cops report you are the biggest fool on Earth. Just name one instance of a LEO charged and convicted for falsifying a report or false testimony in court. Misspoke and misstated gets them off every time.
So had the story been real, you'd be completely fine with the police acting as judge, jury, and executioner? The only thing the cop did wrong was believe the BS story?
If this was a bad shoot on the part of the police, it was a crime of negligence.