Dallas officer involved in fatal shooting (Plano, Mesquite: subdivision, dangerous, assess)

[acrackl]

Originally Posted by hbdwihdh378y9

Please. No one's denying that it's possible to make a mistake. The point is it's that's impossible to use such a mistake to justify killing someone. Your experiences simply underscore how totally outrageous and indefensible this woman's actions were. If the resident had shot the cop because of her mistake, that would be a different story.

I'm in agreement with you ... I still cannot understand why a person would shoot to kill in this circumstance.

[hbdwihdh378y9]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

Actually the Stansbury case cited could well be what happened here.

That is absolutely impossible unless she routinely draws her gun before unlocking her door.

Which she presumably doesn't.

[Jaggy001]

Originally Posted by yjc281

Correct....even if the suspect is eventually convicted, regardless of the sentence. The loss of a young and promising life can never be recovered. It is truly sad regardless. If you cherish your life, don't open the door. No gun or any weapon can save you from that.


No point to debate the conviction unless you were chosen to be the jury. And every time I went to jury duty I always hoped it's not a homicide case...that would have been very painful to go through...
But if history is any indication, see a similar case below:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooti...othy_Stansbury

Interesting link.

I do think there are some differences, however.

First, the deceased was in his own home and the officer has admitted she was in the wrong apartment.

Second, the officer was off duty and not on patrol.

Third, a foreign government is involved. Okay, St. Lucia is a very small country but there will be diplomatic pressure that justice is seen to be done.

Fourth, the victim worked for PricewaterhouseCoopers a company that prides itself on being a great place to work. PwC management will want to show its many staff that they will support them in all circumstances by bringing pressure to ensure that justice is done.

Fifth, there will be political pressure. The victim was not some gang member or hood rat. Letting the officer off will send a powerful message that all black men are fair game no matter how law abiding or reputable.

[Jaggy001]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

Actually the Stansbury case cited could well be what happened here.

You mean the officer always has her gun drawn when she enters her own apartment?

[numbersguy100]

Originally Posted by EDS_

We'll see.

We will see how it ends up, but we already know with certainty that DPD was seeking a manslaughter warrant. Chief Hall said so. This was before it was turned over to the Rangers. Why, days later, are we without an arrest? Clearly DPD was unsuccessful in getting that manslaughter warrant. That’s when they kicked the case to the Rangers and we don’t have any additional detail on what has happened since.

[Ralph_Kirk]

Originally Posted by EDS_

A bunch of my friends are cops. You are wrong or at least misconstruing reality. Generally speaking cops are taught to shot in order to stop a threat. If a cop gut-shoots a BG and the BG goes down the cop cannot in any legal sense finish the BG off with a head shot.

And of course real life isn't an episode of Dragnet. Cops are not required to wait until shot at to shot, they are not taught to shoot people in the calf or forearm as you alluded to above.

COM shots a common because they are very effective and COM is the largest target on a human.

What I said, specifically, was "police are not trained to shoot to wound." And then I explained all the problems with trying to "shoot to wound."

Are you saying that you know some police who are trained to "shoot to wound?"

If not, then I'm not wrong. All you did was repeat what I said.

[Ralph_Kirk]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

As I said "worse case". And it is late at night and he may not have identified her as an officer...all of this goes down in a second or two. Unlikely of course. There was purportedly dialog between the officer and the victim. Who knows what the victim was thinking? And for a risk assessment type why would he open the door?

But then again the whole thing is near impossible...so who knows.

You missed my point.

A risk assurance associate at Price-Waterhouse-Coopers is not going to open a door and immediately to try to grab anyone's gun.

That's not a "worst case," that's an absolute fantasy.

[Spookmeister]

I can just imagine a young, educated, black man, opening the door to his apartment, finding a uniformed police officer standing there, suddenly losing his mind, reaching out to assault that officer. And the officer panicking, drawing their weapon, shooting him dead.

WHAT A FREAKING MORONIC "WHAT IF" SCENARIO.

No way, no how.

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk

You missed my point.

A risk assurance associate at Price-Waterhouse-Coopers is not going to open a door and immediately to try to grab anyone's gun.

That's not a "worst case," that's an absolute fantasy.

A risk assurance associate is not going to open the door. So we have impossible squared.

So obviously it never happened.

[Jaggy001]

Just to help all of you understand what Risk Assurance is in PricewaterhouseCoopers.

It is to do with the assessment of audit risk. The risk that the accounts may be materially misstated. Risk assurance tends to focus on IT risks (accounting systems) and control risks (the controls that management operate to ensure that the accounting is correct).

It is not about assessing whether a bad person is at your door.