Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Police discrimination, misconduct, Ferguson, MO, the Roman Legion, and now math???

Police discrimination, misconduct, Ferguson, MO, the Roman Legion, and now math??? (Page 75)
Thread Tools
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2016, 09:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Why do blacks seem to have such a hard time following a police officers instructions? Why do they struggle when being put in hand cuffs? Seems to me a little education is required for the AA communities.
OMGERD1!! That's racist! Ask why no book was found on the scene, but a handgun was. Apparently he was reading the engraving on it.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2016, 10:40 PM
 
^^^

Already showed screen captures from the video that clearly show NO GUN right after he was killed in the location the police claim they "found a gun". Funny how you skipped right over that part.

OAW
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2016, 09:24 AM
 
And just to put the final nail in the coffin of this "fauxtroversy" about Mr. Scott having a gun ...

Originally Posted by OAW
Notice how there is what appears to be a gun near Mr. Scott's right foot.



Then watch the video for YOURSELF and please take note of 1:10 minutes into it. The moment IMMEDIATELY after Mr. Scott was shot and killed. Filmed by his own wife BEFORE the police had a chance to tamper with the scene. And then ask yourself a simple question. Where is the f*cking gun???!!!



OAW
We now have a video capture of that same cop dropping what is clearly a BLACK GLOVE on the ground in the same location of the original photo that the Charlotte PD claimed to a gun. So in my view this is seriously starting to look like a situation NOT of the Charlotte PD planting evidence ... but of them mischaracterizing evidence after the fact as a CYA move.



OAW
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2016, 09:32 AM
 
Thats clearly one of those new five fingered books. Shaped like your hand for easier holding. In iPhone jet black. Wait, what was the original flimsy justification again?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2016, 09:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
^^^

Already showed screen captures from the video that clearly show NO GUN right after he was killed in the location the police claim they "found a gun". Funny how you skipped right over that part.
Conspiracy in broad daylight (where they know people are filming and taking pics of them), oh lawd!!
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2016, 09:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Conspiracy in broad daylight (where they know people are filming and taking pics of them), oh lawd!!
I'll be "charitable" and presume you haven't yet read my post IMMEDIATELY after the one you quoted which already addressed all that before you even made this latest nonsensical statement.

OAW

PS: Even though we both know you did.
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 24, 2016 at 10:09 AM. )
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2016, 04:48 PM
 
Call the NSA and ask for the satellite footage.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2016, 07:57 PM
 
^^^

Don't need to do all that.

The play on the part of the Charlotte PD was to stall until Oct. 1 when a new NC state law went into effect that would prohibit the release of police dash and body cam footage without a court order. But now that Mr. Scott's widow released her own video the Charlotte PD has relented under pressure and released theirs. And YET AGAIN ... no sign of a gun. All the yelling to "Drop the gun!" was when he was INSIDE his vehicle where they couldn't see shit. Most likely because they were "jump out boys" in plainclothes trying to serve an arrest warrant by SURPRISE. So they could have easily ASSUMED he was armed. But they had the WRONG GUY. Remind anyone else of the Amadou Diallo killing? In any event, it is CLEAR AS DAY that Mr. Scott exited his vehicle ON THEIR COMMAND ... he had his ARMS TO HIS SIDES ... and he was BACKING AWAY. But within 5 SECONDS of exiting his vehicle he was shot.

So where exactly was this "imminent deadly threat"? I'll wait.



OAW

PS: And despite all the EVIDENCE in this thread alone that cops will lie in a heartbeat to cover their ass ... some around here will STILL accept the "official police narrative" at face value. Especially when the victim ain't white.
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 24, 2016 at 08:48 PM. )
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2016, 09:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Call the NSA and ask for the satellite footage.
Yep, an obvious set up is obvious? Right?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2016, 10:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Yep, an obvious set up is obvious? Right?
Go ahead. Keep digging.

OAW
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 08:48 AM
 
So in the pixellated image above posted by OAW with the gun circled, its pointing towards the victim, with the handle pointing away from the camera. In the video above when the cop comes round the corner bringing the victim into view, there is no gun or other object on the ground in the area. The picture released by the cops of the gun on the ground, has it pointing the wrong direction. Its lying on its other side. If you zoom in, you can clearly read some of the stamp on the side of the gun, so the image is not reversed either.

Police release bodycam footage of Keith Scott shooting - BBC News
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 09:55 AM
 
^^^

As I mentioned earlier ... it's not a gun at all. It's a GLOVE they tried to claim was a gun after the fact. In any event, I'm just waiting for the "Officer Friendly Never Lies" crowd to respond to the police footage and point out where Mr. Scott was an " imminent deadly threat".

OAW
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 10:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Go ahead. Keep digging.

OAW
You're so lame. In the past you've castigated me for providing better pics than the ones you posted above. Keep "digging" indeed.

Oh well, it's not like we can expect consistency out of you (except for yelling "RACISM!" at any given opportunity), I guess.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 11:15 AM
 
How is that any different from you claiming theres no such thing all the time?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 12:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
You're so lame. In the past you've castigated me for providing better pics than the ones you posted above. Keep "digging" indeed.
It's a LOT better and more clear than the picture the Charlotte PD put out claiming it was a gun. The one that YOU BELIEVED. Like always you just REFUSE to acknowledge the obvious when it conflicts with your preferred narrative. And that is the EPITOME of "lame".

And just to demonstrate how unlike you I ain't just around here yakking here it is again for all to compare for themselves.


What Charlotte PD claimed was a GUN


What the video clearly shows is a GLOVE


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants"
Oh well, it's not like we can expect consistency out of you (except for yelling "RACISM!" at any given opportunity), I guess.
What's "consistent" about me is that I actually BACK UP what I say. With these little things we call "facts" and "references". See the photos above. See the police video you keep ducking! You could have answered the challenge of identifying in that video where Mr. Scott posed an "imminent deadly threat" as the Charlotte PD claimed but you went with this intellectual bitchassness instead. You see quite unlike you I don't go around here spewing a routinely uninformed OPINION as FACT. 95+% of my posts are sourced. With references that actually support my argument. Something you often seem to have a great deal of difficulty with. But the main thing that's "consistent" about me is that I don't give a f*ck if YOU or anyone else doesn't want to hear it! I'm going to SPEAK my truth. I'm going to defend my LIVED EXPERIENCE. And I damned sure am going to honor the HISTORY of my people especially when this kind of BS is ongoing to this day. Do you actually think the things being discussed in this thread are NEW? For some of us who've lost FAMILY members from police brutality there isn't anything "new" about it. The only thing "new" is smartphones everywhere capturing the BS on video. Even when willfully blind assholes individuals like yourself pretend you don't see what's right there staring you in the face!

So here are your choices ...

A. PROVE me wrong.

or

B. Make use of the fully-functional IGNORE button.

or

C. DEAL with it.

Because regardless ... I'm not here to coddle your FRAGILE EGO by only taking "CTP approved" positions on the topics of the day.

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 25, 2016 at 12:31 PM. )
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 02:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
How is that any different from you claiming theres no such thing all the time?
I've never said "there's no such thing" as racism, anyone could be racist, but it isn't common, either.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 02:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
I've never said "there's no such thing" as racism, anyone could be racist, but it isn't common, either.
And if there was ever a doubt as to this dude's sheer idiocy ... there you have unmistakable evidence of it in black and white.

OAW
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 02:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
*raving like a nut*
Yeah, keep doing that.

They only pic they have (the one you're drooling over) is where the police had marked the place where the gun had been after taking it into custody, hours after the shooting. You think they're going to leave a key piece of evidence lying on the ground all day, really? The Charlotte PD has pictures but they haven't been publically released yet, they're just now getting to showing it all to the family. All this shit has unhinged you to the point you can't even think clearly anymore, and it gets worse with every incident. Maybe you should get a new hobby?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 02:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
And if there was ever a doubt as to this dude's sheer idiocy ... there you have unmistakable evidence of it in black and white.
And if there was ever a doubt as to this dude's sheer insanity ... there you have unmistakable evidence of it in black and white.

You just want to believe it's more common, so that it validates your own feelings and agenda.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 02:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Yeah, keep doing that.

They only pic they have (the one you're drooling over) is where the police had marked the place where the gun had been after taking it into custody, hours after the shooting.
The video footage clearly shows the cop dropping the GLOVE in that spot. It also shows NO GUN in that same spot beforehand. I've already posted the video PROVING this to be true. I've actually watched it in SLOW MOTION. Now you are sitting here claiming the cop was marking the spot where a gun "had been" after the fact! FOH!!!

Your entire thought process here, and that's a "charitable" characterization of it at best, essentially boils down to ...

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Who are you going to believe? ME or your LYING EYES?


OAW
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2016, 11:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
The video footage clearly shows the cop dropping the GLOVE in that spot. It also shows NO GUN in that same spot beforehand. I've already posted the video PROVING this to be true. I've actually watched it in SLOW MOTION. Now you are sitting here claiming the cop was marking the spot where a gun "had been" after the fact! FOH!!!
It's likely it had already been picked up by then and they were marking the spot with a smaller object that the camera didn't pickup well at a distance.

Your entire thought process here, and that's a "charitable" characterization of it at best, essentially boils down to ...
Says the guy who'll convict someone based on grainy video footage. You need help. When this turns out to be yet another sad (yet justified) shooting that you've flipped out over, will you finally go to a therapist?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2016, 12:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
It's likely it had already been picked up by then and they were marking the spot with a smaller object that the camera didn't pickup well at a distance.
Seriously. Did your mother drop you on your head when you were a baby? The video showed NO GUN in that spot IMMEDIATELY after the shooting. Point out the part in the video where you see any cop reach down and remove anything from the ground in the 2-3 seconds between the time the shots were fired and that spot on the ground was recorded showing NO GUN. And you do realize that this "theory" of yours completely flies in the face of the photo the Charlotte PD released that they said was a gun right?

There is only so much foolishness I can deal with in a 24 hour period. And as is so often the case you've used up my recommended daily allowance (RDA). Good night.

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 26, 2016 at 12:27 AM. )
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2016, 12:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Seriously. Did your mother drop you on your head when you were a baby? The video showed NO GUN in that spot IMMEDIATELY after the shooting.
It wasn't right after the shooting, quit making things up. The gun had already been taken into custody by then. What you've seen aren't the official forensic photos.

Point out the part in the video where you see any cop reach down and remove anything from the ground in the 2-3 seconds between the time the shots were fired and that spot on the ground was recorded showing NO GUN. And you do realize that this "theory" of yours completely flies in the face of the photo the Charlotte PD released that they said was a gun right?
See above.

There is only so much foolishness I can deal with in a 24 hour period. And as is so often the case you've used up my recommended daily allowance (RDA). Good night.
Given how much you radiate on a daily basis, I can understand.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2016, 01:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
It wasn't right after the shooting, quit making things up. The gun had already been taken into custody by then. What you've seen aren't the official forensic photos.
Again. I'm talking about the VIDEOS. Have you even watched them? Because if you had you would know that there was NO WAY the gun was "taken into custody" between the mere SECONDS the shots rang out and the time Mr. Scott's body was recorded on the ground with NO GUN by it. And there was NO COP holding a weapon other than their own. No cop BAGGING AND TAGGING it. NOTHING. FOH with that nonsense!

Despite police videos which the Charlotte PD police chief himself says is "insufficient evidence" to show that Mr. Scott had a gun ... but CLEARLY show he did nothing threatening or aggressive when he exited his vehicle in compliance with THEIR COMMAND ... you continue to INSIST upon a narrative that is simply not supported by the facts on the ground.

And now I've EXCEEDED my RDA for foolishness. If you have more dumb sh*t to say I'll have to respond some other time. If I decide it's even worth the effort.

OAW
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2016, 02:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Again. I'm talking about the VIDEOS. Have you even watched them? Because if you had you would know that there was NO WAY the gun was "taken into custody" between the mere SECONDS the shots rang out and the time Mr. Scott's body was recorded on the ground with NO GUN by it. And there was NO COP holding a weapon other than their own. No cop BAGGING AND TAGGING it. NOTHING. FOH with that nonsense!
Again, that wasn't "mere seconds", it had already been taken as evidence. Quit making shit up.

Despite police videos which the Charlotte PD police chief himself says is "insufficient evidence" to show that Mr. Scott had a gun ... but CLEARLY show he did nothing threatening or aggressive when he exited his vehicle in compliance with THEIR COMMAND ... you continue to INSIST upon a narrative that is simply not supported by the facts on the ground.
Not seen the video where he claimed there's "insufficient evidence to show that Mr. Scott had a gun", post it.

And now I've EXCEEDED my RDA for foolishness. If you have more dumb sh*t to say I'll have to respond some other time. If I decide it's even worth the effort.
Yeah, you keep saying that, but given your own astronomical levels, I'm sure you're immune by now. Here you are claiming that yet another black cop (Brentley Vinson) is prejudiced against blacks.

Again, will you finally go to a therapist when this turns out to be yet another justified shooting?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2016, 11:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Again, that wasn't "mere seconds", it had already been taken as evidence. Quit making shit up.
Yeah ok. So here's a composite video of the widow's footage, the dash cam footage, and the body cam footage synchronized in realtime. The shots were fired at the 45 second mark.



And thereafter starting at the 47 second mark ... a mere 2 SECONDS later ... here is a series of images covering the next 16 SECONDS that all show there is NO GUN on the ground where the Charlotte PD claimed they found one.








And there was no time for any officer to have taken any weapon into custody in that time frame. You can see all the officers handcuffing Mr. Scott or keeping their weapons trained on him in that time. No one bent down to pick up anything. Period. So no ... I'm not "making sh*t up".

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Not seen the video where he claimed there's "insufficient evidence to show that Mr. Scott had a gun", post it.
I didn't say the statement was on video. But it was statement made to the media.

Neither police dashcam nor body-camera footage shows Scott pointing a gun at police officers. At one point in the body-camera video, there is a view of Scott from his right side and he has his arm by his body, but it is unclear if there is a gun.

"You can't clearly identify what, if anything, is in his hand," attorney Justin Bamberg, who represents the Scott family, said at news conference Saturday evening.

[Chief] Putney had said, before the videos were released, that "there is no definitive visual evidence that he had a gun in his hand."
Charlotte shooting: Police release video and photos - CNN.com

On Saturday, police released several minutes of videos showing Scott's shooting in the parking lot of a Charlotte apartment complex.

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Chief Kerr Putney acknowledged that the videos themselves were "insufficient" to prove Scott held a gun but said other evidence completed the picture.
Charlotte protesters march for sixth night despite shooting video release | Reuters

Why did Chief Putney make these statements? Because there is NO GUN visible in Mr. Scott's hand.



OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 26, 2016 at 04:48 PM. )
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 27, 2016, 11:30 AM
 
"the videos themselves are 'insufficient' to prove Scott held a gun" definitely is NOT, " there's insufficient evidence to show that Mr. Scott had a gun".

Can you point to the differences in the two comments? They're quite important. One is what he said, and the other is just another example of you distorting reality to suit your agenda... again.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 27, 2016, 12:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
"the videos themselves are 'insufficient' to prove Scott held a gun" definitely is NOT, " there's insufficient evidence to show that Mr. Scott had a gun".

Can you point to the differences in the two comments? They're quite important. One is what he said, and the other is just another example of you distorting reality to suit your agenda... again.
Really? Is that what you are hanging your hat on now?

Originally Posted by OAW
Despite police videos which the Charlotte PD police chief himself says is "insufficient evidence" to show that Mr. Scott had a gun [in his hand]
Because I didn't include the part in brackets ... which is clearly implied to the level of being brain dead obvious .... since the original contention by the Charlotte PD is that Mr. Scott POINTED A GUN AT THEM!!!!! That he refused to DROP THE GUN on their command!!!!

While you are dodging and weaving simple facts backed up by video evidence does it even occur to you that if Mr. Scott had a gun in his possession but NOT IN HIS HAND it will be even HARDER for the Charlotte PD to justify the use of deadly force against him?



OAW
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 27, 2016, 01:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Really? Is that what you are hanging your hat on now?



Because I didn't include the part in brackets ... which is clearly implied to the level of being brain dead obvious .... since the original contention by the Charlotte PD is that Mr. Scott POINTED A GUN AT THEM!!!!! That he refused to DROP THE GUN on their command!!!!

While you are dodging and weaving simple facts backed up by video evidence does it even occur to you that if Mr. Scott had a gun in his possession but NOT IN HIS HAND it will be even HARDER for the Charlotte PD to justify the use of deadly force against him?



OAW
It looks an awful lot to me like the cop secured the gun immediately (as would be standard protocol). Once the camera points at the cop, he drops the secured gun to the ground and assists his fellow police with securing and rendering aid to the suspect. I highly doubt the officer was carrying a plant gun on him in anticipation of this shooting.

OAW, IMO you're reaching on this one. Reaching hard to tin foil hat levels. Unsurprisingly, you've made up your mind before we have all the facts and filled in the gaps with your own narrative stated as fact.

I agree the NC police have not handled this well (they should release all available video immediately in the interest of public oversight), but that does not in it of itself constitute evidence of conspiracy.

Unfortunately, there is no direct video as of yet that shows the lead up to the shooting, as the video we have is shaky and not pointed in the correct direction.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 27, 2016, 01:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
It looks an awful lot to me like the cop secured the gun immediately (as would be standard protocol). Once the camera points at the cop, he drops the secured gun to the ground and assists his fellow police with securing and rendering aid to the suspect.
But I already posted a series of screen grabs. We don't see that anywhere on the 3 different videos released.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
I highly doubt the officer was carrying a plant gun on him in anticipation of this shooting.
But I never said that. In fact I explicitly said the opposite earlier in the thread. Perhaps you missed it?

Originally Posted by OAW
So in my view this is seriously starting to look like a situation NOT of the Charlotte PD planting evidence ... but of them mischaracterizing evidence after the fact as a CYA move. :shake;
IOW ... trying to use the power of suggestion to pass of a picture of a glove as a gun after they realized they screwed up.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
OAW, IMO you're reaching on this one. Reaching hard to tin foil hat levels. Unsurprisingly, you've made up your mind before we have all the facts and filled in the gaps with your own narrative stated as fact.
"Reaching" how? Everything I've stated is VISIBLE. What's "reaching" is the Charlotte PD INSISTING that Mr. Scott pointed a gun at the officers when it's clear as day that he did NOT.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
I agree the NC police have not handled this well (they should release all available video immediately in the interest of public oversight) ...
Agreed.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Unfortunately, there is no direct video as of yet that shows the lead up to the shooting, as the video we have is shaky and not pointed in the correct direction.
The widow's video shows the lead up and the aftermath. Just not the shooting itself. I suspect if the remaining police videos corroborated the Charlotte PD's initial claims they would have been released by now.

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 27, 2016 at 02:21 PM. )
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 05:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Really? Is that what you are hanging your hat on now?
You making shit up and manipulating statements? I know it's 2nd nature for you now, but someone needs to call you on it. It might as well be me.

Because I didn't include the part in brackets ... which is clearly implied
No, it wasn't. Or it was, but only in your own distorted view.

While you are dodging and weaving simple facts backed up by video evidence does it even occur to you that if Mr. Scott had a gun in his possession but NOT IN HIS HAND it will be even HARDER for the Charlotte PD to justify the use of deadly force against him?
The shitty video proves nothing, except that you're willing to condemn someone on very shaky (and out of focus) evidence. You've turned into the Left's version of Alex Jones, good job.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 10:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
You making shit up and manipulating statements? I know it's 2nd nature for you now, but someone needs to call you on it. It might as well be me.

No, it wasn't. Or it was, but only in your own distorted view.

The shitty video proves nothing, except that you're willing to condemn someone on very shaky (and out of focus) evidence. You've turned into the Left's version of Alex Jones, good job.
Steady talking loud and saying nothing.

Let's just end this here because it's going nowhere. You will believe anything the cops say. Common sense, logic, and evidence be damned. And when you can't counter the facts I've posted ... you resort to that tired ass "manipulations" and "distortions" crap against me. Yeah ... the picture is "out of focus". But it's still self-f*cking-evident who has a gun in his hand and who does NOT.



As always, your entire "thought" process is ...

"Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?

OAW
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 10:44 AM
 
And in other news, I've said it before and I'll say it again in this thread. Think long and hard before you call the police if a loved one is having any sort of mental breakdown. All too often it does not end well.


Police fatally shoot black man in San Diego suburb, sparking protests | WashingtonPost.com


While this incident sparked protests because cops were too quick to resort to deadly force instead of containment ... especially against somehow they described as "behaving erratically" .... this one most likely won't result in ongoing confrontations with the police. Releasing the photo of the guy with something in his hand pointed at the police will quell all that. Even though the object turned out to NOT be a firearm.

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 28, 2016 at 12:26 PM. )
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 01:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post

Let's just end this here because it's going nowhere. You will believe anything the cops say.
and you'll believe anything the media and your BLM leaders tell you: no reports, no proof, no benefit of doubt, the cops are guilty. Just run a rope from the nearest tree and you guys can excitedly celebrate a new crop of strange fruit.



and you ignorantly say I'm lacking common sense? You can tell what's in the perp's hands? Holy shit, when did they come out with real x-ray glasses? I'll have to get a pair of those.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 01:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
And in other news, I've said it before and I'll say it again in this thread. Think long and hard before you call the police if a loved one is having any sort of mental breakdown. All too often it does not end well.


Police fatally shoot black man in San Diego suburb, sparking protests | WashingtonPost.com


While this incident sparked protests because cops were too quick to resort to deadly force instead of containment ... especially against somehow they described as "behaving erratically" .... this one most likely won't result in ongoing confrontations with the police. Releasing the photo of the guy with something in his hand pointed at the police will quell all that. Even though the object turned out to NOT be a firearm.
Okay everyone, look at this:



BLM is claiming the guy was having a seizure when he was shot. How unfortunate that his "seizure" looked like someone pointing a weapon.

How about thinking "long and hard" before acting like you're going to shoot someone (especially the police)? No, I guess that would require too much common sense.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 01:51 PM
 
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 02:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
How about thinking "long and hard" before acting like you're going to shoot someone (especially the police)? No, I guess that would require too much common sense.
Go ahead and skip right over that part where everyone involved has said the man was mentally ill. Jeez man ... you just relish being an ASSHOLE so much that even the fact that the man was not in control of his faculties fails to register with you.

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 28, 2016 at 02:54 PM. )
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 04:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
I've seen commentary that an ankle holster is visible in the video (and the picture in your post). Other screenshots are a little less ambiguous, for example:
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam...super-169.jpeg
I'm no expert on ankle holsters, but it would lend credence to the story that he was armed if he was wearing a holster.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 05:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
But I already posted a series of screen grabs. We don't see that anywhere on the 3 different videos released.
None of which have a clear view of the time in question.


But I never said that. In fact I explicitly said the opposite earlier in the thread. Perhaps you missed it?
So where do you suppose it came from?


IOW ... trying to use the power of suggestion to pass of a picture of a glove as a gun after they realized they screwed up.

"Reaching" how? Everything I've stated is VISIBLE. What's "reaching" is the Charlotte PD INSISTING that Mr. Scott pointed a gun at the officers when it's clear as day that he did NOT.
That's not clear, OAW. Not at all.

Agreed.
I'm not saying the NC police's response has been anything but atrocious. It has. That doesn't change what happened - not one bit. The officer who shot the gentleman has no sway or control over his idiot superiors.

The widow's video shows the lead up and the aftermath. Just not the shooting itself. I suspect if the remaining police videos corroborated the Charlotte PD's initial claims they would have been released by now.
This is your problem, conflating your speculation with fact. We'll see, and you know I'll be right there with you if that video shows malfeasance by the police. For now, the most important things are to stop the rioting & let the investigations come around. I don't think there's any value in releasing the videos before the investigation is complete, especially if the result of that investigation will lead to charges for the officers involved.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 06:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
None of which have a clear view of the time in question.
Sure they do. As in indicated all the videos are synchronized. And the time stamps of the sequence of events are in the bottom left corner of each screen grab.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
So where do you suppose it came from?
You lost me here.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
That's not clear, OAW. Not at all.
Sure it is. The man got out of his vehicle. Both arms are down at this sides. He takes a few steps backwards. And they shot him. He didn't point anything at the officers. He made no aggressive or threatening movements at all. It's right there on the video!

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
I'm not saying the NC police's response has been anything but atrocious. It has. That doesn't change what happened - not one bit. The officer who shot the gentleman has no sway or control over his idiot superiors.
True.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
This is your problem, conflating your speculation with fact. We'll see, and you know I'll be right there with you if that video shows malfeasance by the police. For now, the most important things are to stop the rioting & let the investigations come around. I don't think there's any value in releasing the videos before the investigation is complete, especially if the result of that investigation will lead to charges for the officers involved.
Well the rioting occurred on that first night IIRC. There have been nearly a week of peaceful protests since then.

OAW
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 07:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
I've seen commentary that an ankle holster is visible in the video (and the picture in your post). Other screenshots are a little less ambiguous, for example:
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam...super-169.jpeg
I'm no expert on ankle holsters, but it would lend credence to the story that he was armed if he was wearing a holster.
It would. But even if that was the case it still doesn't prove any sort of "imminent deadly threat" or that he "pointed a gun at the officers" as they claimed. Say he had a weapon in an ankle holster ... and then he exits his vehicle as instructed with his arms to his sides. WTF would they shoot him in the scenario?

OAW
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 10:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
It would. But even if that was the case it still doesn't prove any sort of "imminent deadly threat" or that he "pointed a gun at the officers" as they claimed. Say he had a weapon in an ankle holster ... and then he exits his vehicle as instructed with his arms to his sides. WTF would they shoot him in the scenario?

OAW
I think the implication is not that the weapon was still in the holster, but rather that it was no longer in the holster and we can't see where it is now. One presumes he wouldn't continue to wear the holster if the weapon were not on the scene somewhere (if in fact that blurry dark blob is a holster).

One imagines two possible extremes. Maybe he never drew his weapon (or never had one), and police shot for absolutely no reason and later covered it up. Or on the other extreme, maybe Scott had his weapon drawn while in the car, and while walking in the tape he raised it on the side farthest from view on the video, so that police saw it but we did not. Or between these two extremes maybe he was holding the gun, wishing he weren't holding it, and police didn't see it at first and then suddenly it became visible to them, and maybe they misinterpreted the sudden appearance of a gun "from nowhere" as it being drawn on them.

Many scenarios would sound preposterous back then there was no gun and only a book.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2016, 11:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
I think the implication is not that the weapon was still in the holster, but rather that it was no longer in the holster and we can't see where it is now. One presumes he wouldn't continue to wear the holster if the weapon were not on the scene somewhere (if in fact that blurry dark blob is a holster).
Fair enough.

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
One imagines two possible extremes. Maybe he never drew his weapon (or never had one), and police shot for absolutely no reason and later covered it up. Or on the other extreme, maybe Scott had his weapon drawn while in the car, and while walking in the tape he raised it on the side farthest from view on the video, so that police saw it but we did not. Or between these two extremes maybe he was holding the gun, wishing he weren't holding it, and police didn't see it at first and then suddenly it became visible to them, and maybe they misinterpreted the sudden appearance of a gun "from nowhere" as it being drawn on them.
So let's roll with the idea highlighted above. It would stand to reason then that Mr. Scott would be LEFT-HANDED if that were the case. Which is not common. And which would be easy enough to verify one way or the other. Moreover, if that were the case the police have no reason to not put that out there. As others have pointed out it is COMMONPLACE for the cops to selectively leak information that is favorable to their narrative. But nothing of the sort has been floated in this regard.

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 28, 2016 at 11:54 PM. )
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 09:12 AM
 
I'm not so sure about that... If he was being approached from the right side (of the car; isn't that what was shown on the tape?), he might move his weapon to the left side to conceal it. Once it's in his left hand and the confrontation has already begun, it's hard for him to move it whether he's complying or not.

Also I seem to remember both sides believing that he had just been smoking pot, right? Maybe he got mixed up about which hand he held it in?
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 10:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
I'm not so sure about that... If he was being approached from the right side (of the car; isn't that what was shown on the tape?), he might move his weapon to the left side to conceal it. Once it's in his left hand and the confrontation has already begun, it's hard for him to move it whether he's complying or not.

Also I seem to remember both sides believing that he had just been smoking pot, right? Maybe he got mixed up about which hand he held it in?
The picture you see above is not the officer who shot him. That officer was on the other side. But when it's all said and done here's why there is still controversy. The video shows no aggressive or threatening behavior on Mr. Scott's part. He had his arms to his sides. He was backing away. That's not a source of speculation because it's clearly visible on the videos. The videos also don't show him holding a weapon. But to your point ... he could have had it on his left side out of view of the camera. But we are still left with the fact that the officers claim they recovered a firearm at the scene. And the location they said they found it was to his right. And more importantly, the videos do NOT capture any such firearm in that location within seconds after the shooting. So people are naturally skeptical about the police narrative.

OAW
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 11:02 AM
 
Regarding the killing of Alfred Olango in the San Diego area ...

According to activists on the ground in El Cajon, Calif., the Police Department informed media that it was aware its officers were responding to a “5150” call when Olango was killed. The name of the police officer who killed Olango has not been released.

A 5150 call is defined as:
When a person, as a result of a mental disorder, is a danger to himself/herself or others or is gravely disabled, a peace officer, a member of the attending staff, or another professional person designated by the county may with probable cause take the person into custody and place him or her in a facility for a 72-hour treatment and evaluation.
This information appears to be confirmed by police-scanner audio shared by United Against Police Terror—San Diego Copwatch and Campaign for Justice. Calls to the El Cajon Police Department to confirm the authenticity of the audio have not been returned.

According to Kim Moore, who is on the ground in El Cajon, police confirmed that the Psychiatric Emergency Response Team was not brought in to assist on the call. A description of PERT’s responsibilities are as follows:

Provides emergency assessment and referral for individuals with mental illness who come to the attention of law enforcement through phone calls from community members or in-field law enforcement request for emergency assistance. PERT pairs licensed mental health clinicians with uniformed law enforcement officers/deputies. Clinicians work out of individual law enforcement divisions and respond in the field with their law enforcement partners.
Earlier eyewitness accounts indicated that Olango was having a seizure or some other sort of medical or mental-health emergency. The exact nature of Olango’s mental state at the time he was shot has not been confirmed.

What we know:

Olango’s sister says she called 911 for assistance because her brother was in mental and/or physical distress.

“I called three times for them to come help me,” Olango’s sister cried. “Nobody came; they said it’s not priority.”

Police indicated that they knew they were responding to someone in mental and/or physical distress, based on what police told media and information gleaned from the police-scanner audio.

The mental-health emergency response team in place for these situations was not on the scene to assist.

Olango was unarmed.

Olango is dead.

The El Cajon Police Department released a still image to “prove” Olango was a threat:

#AlfredOlango: El Cajon, Calif., Police Aware Unarmed Black Man Was in Mental Distress Before They Fatally Shot Him | TheRoot.com

It took more than an hour for police to arrive at the shopping center in a San Diego suburb where a distressed black man had been wandering into traffic. It took about a minute for him to be shot and killed.

Alfred Olango pulled a large electronic cigarette, known as a vape pen, from his pocket and pointed at the police officer who fired, while a second officer stood nearby trying to subdue him with a stun gun, El Cajon police said.

The details emerged Wednesday in the shooting of Olango, who was having an emotional breakdown over the recent death of his best friend, an attorney said.


The investigation centered on a video of Tuesday’s shooting taken by a bystander. Police have produced a single frame from the cellphone video to support their account, saying it shows Olango in a “shooting stance.”
Police shot and killed Alfred Olango in one minute over an e-cigarette | TheGrio.com

When I first posted about this incident the reports indicated that the police were responding to a man "behaving erratically". Which can be anything. Drugs. Emotional Distress. Whatever. Come to find out they knew BEFOREHAND that they were dealing with someone with a MENTAL DISORDER. That makes the police response even more reprehensible.

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 29, 2016 at 11:56 AM. )
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 11:40 AM
 
I think this type of activities by "Protesters" need to be replied to by gunning a few dozen of them down. ALL were out for no good. They are most likely SOROS EMPLOYEES.

Charlotte motorists trapped in standstill pleaded for rescue from protests | The Charlotte Observer
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 12:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Go ahead and skip right over that part where everyone involved has said the man was mentally ill. Jeez man ... you just relish being an ASSHOLE so much that even the fact that the man was not in control of his faculties fails to register with you.
We're both assholes, or we wouldn't be arguing in public. Geez.

What was reported was that he was having a seizure, does that look like a seizure? I feel more pity for the cops, both black and white, who have to live with this the rest of their lives because some idiot didn't think it was a necessary to have this guy committed. They'll be in therapy for years.

(I don't care too much if you call me an asshole, but you need to chill out. If a discussion gets you this heated then you need a break.)
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 12:09 PM
 
You seem the think being out of his mind makes a difference. While they may have known he was mentally ill, they didn't know he was unarmed. Let me guess, you think nuts can't be dangerous. Right? That a crazy person can't shoot someone?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2016, 12:17 PM
 
Bullshit: "The guy was killed over an ecig!!"

Fact: Cops show up and the perp is holding one of these like a gun:



"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:28 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,