Incarnate Word Student Killed During Traffic Stop (safer, campus)

[WilGar]

Originally Posted by Mom2Feebs

well, no offense intended (just an observation) but since you're calling him a victim, I could see why you might think that.

No offense taken. i am still perplexed as to how a simple traffic stop was allowed to escalate in a student's death.

[Neshomamench]

Originally Posted by WilGar

No offense taken. i am still perplexed as to how a simple traffic stop was allowed to escalate in a student's death.

Most everything escalates from something else.

In the particular case of traffic stops...they can only be called "simple" (or any other label) after the fact, not before. In most every case, when an Officer makes a traffic stop, he doesnt have the slightest clue as to what he is going to encounter.

This obviously was NOT a simple traffic stop.

[Mom2Feebs]

Originally Posted by Neshomamench

In most every case, when an Officer makes a traffic stop, he doesnt have the slightest clue as to what he is going to encounter.

That is the absolute truth.

[bspray]

The most troubling part of the autopsy report to me is not that he was shot in the back, although that is troubling, it is that the gunshot wound to the left eye resulted from a downward shot. That means, unless the cop was shooting the gun one handed, or while standing on his patrol car, that the student had to either be already on the ground or at the very least on his knees.

How can any unarmed person, pose a lethal threat when they are laying on the ground or even on their knees?

Please, someone defend this information with some bogus claim like 'during a struggle, it is common for people to get shot in the head at a downward angle while causing a lethal threat to an officer that is more than twice the size of the accused".

Mix in the fact that the student was also shot in the back and this paints a pretty clear picture of the cop's state of mind.

I respect those that wanted to give the cop the benefit of the doubt prior to having all this infomation. Is there ANYONE out there still willing to give this cop the benefit of the doubt now that they have this information?

This was a murder, and not self defense.

[Neshomamench]

Originally Posted by bspray

The most troubling part of the autopsy report to me is not that he was shot in the back, although that is troubling, it is that the gunshot wound to the left eye resulted from a downward shot. That means, unless the cop was shooting the gun one handed, or while standing on his patrol car, that the student had to either be already on the ground or at the very least on his knees.

How can any unarmed person, pose a lethal threat when they are laying on the ground or even on their knees?

Please, someone defend this information with some bogus claim like 'during a struggle, it is common for people to get shot in the head at a downward angle while causing a lethal threat to an officer that is more than twice the size of the accused".

Mix in the fact that the student was also shot in the back and this paints a pretty clear picture of the cop's state of mind.

I respect those that wanted to give the cop the benefit of the doubt prior to having all this infomation. Is there ANYONE out there still willing to give this cop the benefit of the doubt now that they have this information?

This was a murder, and not self defense.

Where did you do your training in forensics?

Actually, a downward shot could very well be a sign of a struggle. You said it yourself, one handed. Start wrestling with someone while trying to keep a weapon in your grasp. The high position is actually a natural instinct position.

Second, a "downward" shot could also be a level shot against a target that changed its orientation. Charge at someone with your head down, as is exactly what people tend to do when they charge someone. (lower their head)

[staunchcharacter]

Originally Posted by *mud*

.
.
.

.
.
.
I see you edited "giggles" out of your posting (#288),

but,

my question still stands (posting #289) -

"just what kind of giggles are you expecting??"

would you care to elaborate??
.
.
.

No

[*mud*]

Originally Posted by *mud*

.
.
.
.
I see you edited "giggles" out of your posting (#288),

but,

my question still stands (posting #289) -

"just what kind of giggles are you expecting??"

would you care to elaborate??
.
.
.

.
.
.

Originally Posted by staunchcharacter

.



No

.
.
.
staunchcharacter, that's out of character for you.
.
.
.

[bspray]

Originally Posted by Neshomamench

Where did you do your training in forensics?

Actually, a downward shot could very well be a sign of a struggle. You said it yourself, one handed. Start wrestling with someone while trying to keep a weapon in your grasp. The high position is actually a natural instinct position.

Second, a "downward" shot could also be a level shot against a target that changed its orientation. Charge at someone with your head down, as is exactly what people tend to do when they charge someone. (lower their head)

How did I know you were going to come in and still try to defend this guy?

Why don't you just change your screen name to Blue Wall?

[Mom2Feebs]

Originally Posted by bspray

How did I know you were going to come in and still try to defend this guy?

Why don't you just change your screen name to Blue Wall?

it's not so much a matter of defending the officer (or any officer), but trying to show both sides.

No need to assume such things (blue wall). I'm more interested in what someone that understands this kind of thing or has experience in has to say than someone that does not.

[bspray]

Originally Posted by Mom2Feebs

it's not so much a matter of defending the officer (or any officer), but trying to show both sides.

No need to assume such things (blue wall). I'm more interested in what someone that understands this kind of thing or has experience in has to say than someone that does not.

So, are you saying that as a cop, Neshomamench has professional experience with murdering unarmed civilians? I could be mistaken about this, but I want to say in a previous thread that Neshomamench had said he had never been involved in a shooting.

What I find genuinely troubling about Neshomamench's defense of this cop is, he makes statements about events that just seem to be so wildly unbelievable as though they are the most common thing in the world.

It's just such an absolutely ridiculous assertion that the course of events Neshomamench describes is a more logical conclusion than a cop, with a reputation for having an aggressive and combative personality, that had worked for 8 different police depts in the last 7 years, killed a kid because he was being a smart ass.

I honestly think it is a more believable story that the morbidly obese cop, that happened to be leaving a Whataburger drive thru, shot the kid because the kid argued so long that the cop's cheeseburger got cold.

A morbidly obese cop, more than double size of this drunk college kid, couldn't handle the scenario that was playing out, so instead of waiting for backup that actually has jurisdiction in the area, he shoots the student 5 times. Once in the back, once in the hip, once in the chest, once in the elbow and once in the eye from a downward angle. That all makes perfect sense and is completely explainable by other cops.

The kicker is, as a rational human being, my opinion of the situation has no weight at all because, apparently having not attended forensic college, my opinion is useless. We only want to listen to the opinions of the cop's colleagues - who also likely have little to no college experience in forensics. Genius.