hokiewolf said:
Civilized said:
Jessica Tarlov with another great refutation of the epic ICE homicide gaslighting.
Civ, I get what you're saying here but it doesn't matter with respect to if a crime was committed by the officer. There wasn't a crime committed, there's a great podcast episode of Advisory Opinions that tells you why, and I encourage everyone to listen to it.
Now, the morality of everything, that's ok to question and that's much less black and white. I think there's too much focus on the exact moment shots are fired and not the other circumstances, including Good and her wife's actions as well as the ICE agents actions. And all of you, this isn't me putting the full blame at ICE, but I do want to know the following:
1. If this woman was a perceived danger why did they not box her car in with their vehicles before approaching her so the car couldn't move?
2. We see roughly 5 mins of video here. If it was 10 mins or 30 mins or an hour of her blocking the street, is it worth shooting a lady and basically getting the protesters what they want, which is a negative interaction with ICE,
3. Why did the officer who shot move from the rear of the vehicle to directly in front of it? Is that part of their training to do so? Goes back to question 1.
4. Why didn't the officer have a body camera so he wasn't distracted by his own camera when he put himself in harms way by moving to the front of the vehicle?
Again, there isn't a crime here, but there's an awful lot of what ifs that probably would have not escalated the situation l. I question the training of the officers with respect to vehicle stops. Were they properly trained? If they were, what did they not do correctly, and if the didn't, why the hell not, and especially prior to starting this national exercise where it should have been known or at least expected these types of interactions with the public were going to happen?
Listened to the AO episode, and you're right, it was the most detailed legal analysis I've heard yet of the situation. Fantastic breakdown.
There are two issues here - is the officer responsible for her death, and will he be found criminally liable?
Agree that based on precedent, sadly it's likely this never sees a courtroom much less a conviction.
Case law so heavily tips towards law enforcement, even often those that are clearly responsible for a death, and more obviously, because who's bringing charges? This Justice Department? LOL. There is less than zero chance that would happen with this crowd no matter the facts of the case. Pam, Kash, and Kristi ain't interested in a true accounting of the facts of the situation and letting the facts determine next steps. Kristi started claiming this was domestic terrorism 5 seconds after it happened, before any investigation had even taken place.
One of the cases highlighted by the AO crew illustrates the challenge of bringing charges against police. Most deaths at the hands of police don't go to trial. And of those that do, acquittals are far more common than convictions, even when law enforcement is clearly responsible, including when they give clearly conflicting commands that get inadvertently violated because they can't both be followed, like the "crawl towards me with your hands in the air" and "reach for your license but not your gun" examples that were discussed. Those officers were acquitted, even though their actions clearly and directly led to a death.
So yeah I'm not holding my breath that there will ever actually be a trial because I don't think there's even going to be an investigation, much less a sober reckoning with the facts, and precedent makes it really hard to bring charges against law enforcement acting in the line of duty.
But that doesn't absolve the agent of responsibility for her death. He's the masked and deputized alleged pro with a gun. It's his responsibility to think and act like a pro, and that means taking steps to avoid situations that can clearly put him in jeopardy, and to not take someone's life when other reasonable alternatives exist.