Although sad that the individual was shot and killed, he was advancing towards officers with knifes and refusing orders to drop the weapons. I sure am glad that I am not a law enforcement officer in todays world.
On top of that how do these juries come up with these outrageous awards.
The ballistics evidence, which the jury that actually sat through the case and heard before they unanimously agreed the police acted incorrectly and should be punished, showed that he was not coming at them, and had turned away.
They come up with these decisions by hearing the evidence, and by not deciding every shooting by a police officer is right before hearing the case.
So you don’t think government should be held accountable financially for violations or liability.
So you would also agree then that a government that confiscated and destroyed guns as a preventative meaaure, and then was found to have acted outside their authority should not have to pay the owners of the guns.
The only witnesses mentioned in the MORE DETAILED story elsewhere online were family members.
So much for your claim about how the deceased man was moving away from the police.
Further, when two officers are involved with a violent suspect, it is common practice to separate and approach the suspect from different angles, perhaps even 180 degrees apart. So, the deceased man could have been moving toward the officer who shot the taser while the other fire to protect the now vulnerable officer.
I read the AP account and another account written by an unnamed source, perhaps the LA PD reporter. There are different levels and types of details and statements in each of the two stories. I’m sure that there are other details we won’t know unless we read more stories and the trial transcripts.
It’s sad that UW chooses to judge based on what was written rather than learning more about the situation.
It’s also sad that I wasted so much time on something that will never be fully brought to light before public eyes. The news cycle will let the important details fade away and we will judge the police based upon a jury of 12 people and their interpretation of the facts.
Maybe you would prefer they torture him? What other crimes – without an actual victim – so you think should result in death, and denial of medical care?
If you read other stories written about this situation, you’d learn that the deceased had a record of MULTIPLE VIOLENT with the police. Further, he had mental health issues, which made his behavior unpredictable, and thus much more dangerous than a sane person.
The police were there at the request of family members who felt they couldn’t deal with the dangerous behavior alone. NO ONE suggested that the police torture him, and THAT is a Straw Man Argument intended only to besmirch the police.
Further, the police were there to PROTECT THE PUBLIC, including the family members who may have felt threatened by the knives that the deceased was scraping together. When the police felt threatened after the taser didn’t stop his advance toward them, they were right in protecting themselves by taking him down.
“Eaddy’s family contended that the bullet struck Eaddy in a way that showed he had turned away from officers.” The “family contended”??? I don’t see any mention of ballistics evidence. What did the evidence show? If the guy was coming at the officers with knives, they were well within their rights to put him down. If he turned away from the officers to go after his family or someone else, they were also within their rights. Unless there was evidence that he turned away from everyone, this seems like a case of the jury being poisoned by the media against police. If there was evidence that he had ceased to be a threat, and they shot anyway, then I want to know where this evidence was when the DA decided not to prosecute.
Although sad that the individual was shot and killed, he was advancing towards officers with knifes and refusing orders to drop the weapons. I sure am glad that I am not a law enforcement officer in todays world.
On top of that how do these juries come up with these outrageous awards.
Agreed. Suicide by cop should not be rewarded.
The ballistics evidence, which the jury that actually sat through the case and heard before they unanimously agreed the police acted incorrectly and should be punished, showed that he was not coming at them, and had turned away.
They come up with these decisions by hearing the evidence, and by not deciding every shooting by a police officer is right before hearing the case.
The verdict is not punishing the police, it’s punishing the taxpayer
So you don’t think government should be held accountable financially for violations or liability.
So you would also agree then that a government that confiscated and destroyed guns as a preventative meaaure, and then was found to have acted outside their authority should not have to pay the owners of the guns.
The only witnesses mentioned in the MORE DETAILED story elsewhere online were family members.
So much for your claim about how the deceased man was moving away from the police.
Further, when two officers are involved with a violent suspect, it is common practice to separate and approach the suspect from different angles, perhaps even 180 degrees apart. So, the deceased man could have been moving toward the officer who shot the taser while the other fire to protect the now vulnerable officer.
I read the AP account and another account written by an unnamed source, perhaps the LA PD reporter. There are different levels and types of details and statements in each of the two stories. I’m sure that there are other details we won’t know unless we read more stories and the trial transcripts.
It’s sad that UW chooses to judge based on what was written rather than learning more about the situation.
It’s also sad that I wasted so much time on something that will never be fully brought to light before public eyes. The news cycle will let the important details fade away and we will judge the police based upon a jury of 12 people and their interpretation of the facts.
Should have just let the bastard alone, and watch him bleed out.
Maybe you would prefer they torture him? What other crimes – without an actual victim – so you think should result in death, and denial of medical care?
If you read other stories written about this situation, you’d learn that the deceased had a record of MULTIPLE VIOLENT with the police. Further, he had mental health issues, which made his behavior unpredictable, and thus much more dangerous than a sane person.
The police were there at the request of family members who felt they couldn’t deal with the dangerous behavior alone. NO ONE suggested that the police torture him, and THAT is a Straw Man Argument intended only to besmirch the police.
Further, the police were there to PROTECT THE PUBLIC, including the family members who may have felt threatened by the knives that the deceased was scraping together. When the police felt threatened after the taser didn’t stop his advance toward them, they were right in protecting themselves by taking him down.
first sentence above is missing the word ‘INTERACTIONS’ after MULTIPLE VIOLENT.
Just another theft at the expense of honest hard working tax payers
“Eaddy’s family contended that the bullet struck Eaddy in a way that showed he had turned away from officers.” The “family contended”??? I don’t see any mention of ballistics evidence. What did the evidence show? If the guy was coming at the officers with knives, they were well within their rights to put him down. If he turned away from the officers to go after his family or someone else, they were also within their rights. Unless there was evidence that he turned away from everyone, this seems like a case of the jury being poisoned by the media against police. If there was evidence that he had ceased to be a threat, and they shot anyway, then I want to know where this evidence was when the DA decided not to prosecute.