Balch police officer guilty of murder

[Renegade]

So a successful shooting into a car must result in the driver stepping on the brake?

Unless you know of another way the car suddenly comes to a stop to prevent hitting the person in the path.

If the officer legitimately believed his partner was gonna be run over, than I can fathom shooting into the car to shoot the driver.

And how exactly does that stop the car from continuing forward and hitting the person in the path?

For every shooting you show me where officers miss, I can show you one where they didn't.

Just show us one where a car was driving towards a person in its path, and killing the driver caused the vehicle to stop driving towards the person in the path.

 

[busykngt]

Sentenced to fifteen years.

He’ll be 53 years old IF he serves the entire sentence. (But what are the odds of that happening?). His lawyer formally announced they have begun the appeals process.

 

[sharkey]

Unless you know of another way the car suddenly comes to a stop to prevent hitting the person in the path.

And how exactly does that stop the car from continuing forward and hitting the person in the path?

Just show us one where a car was driving towards a person in its path, and killing the driver caused the vehicle to stop driving towards the person in the path.

Man you are hung up on that car stopping. You avoided answering my question and I still think you are missing the point. Intentionally? IF a driver uses his motor vehicle to assault another that is construed as deadly force. Whether the car stops or not is not a factor. I can what if it to - I shoot the driver and he steers away from the target due to being shot. I shoot the driver and he takes his foot off the gas slowing the car down to allow the target time to move off the X.

But hey, I like a challenge so here you go -
https://www.kansascity.com/news/state/missouri/article210684904.html
Could have found it quicker than 2 min. if I had put in the right key words in order. Fairly recent so if I wanted to argue the point more, I could go back years but really, what's the point. How about you as a LTC never shoot a driver because you are unsure if it will stop the threat.

 

[Frank59]

Sentenced to fifteen years.

He’ll be 53 years old IF he serves the entire sentence. (But what are the odds of that happening?). His lawyer formally announced they have begun the appeals process.

He can be out in 8 years and probably will if the conviction is upheld. With the 15 year sentence he can post a bond and stay out of jail during the appeals process. If the judge had given him 15 years and a day that would have sent him right to prison.

 

[Renegade]

Man you are hung up on that car stopping.

Because that is the issue. He said he fired to protect his partner. So how does firing at a moving car stop it from moving forward into the person you are protecting?

"Oliver testified during the Dallas County trial that he opened fire after seeing the car move toward his partner. He says he thought his partner was in danger. "

 

[Renegade]

But hey, I like a challenge so here you go -
https://www.kansascity.com/news/state/missouri/article210684904.html
.

Car had already hit officers, firing into it did not stop it from hitting them:

Two officers approached the vehicle. That's when the vehicle went into reverse and struck an officer, the Missouri Highway Patrol said. The other officer fired shots, hitting the driver.

 

[busykngt]

He can be out in 8 years and probably will if the conviction is upheld. With the 15 year sentence he can post a bond and stay out of jail during the appeals process. If the judge had given him 15 years and a day that would have sent him right to prison.

Since he’s been fired, he’s got to pay for all this (appeals) himself, right? Did taxpayers pay for his initial defense? If so, does that mean taxpayers paid for both the prosecution AND his defense? Assuming his appeal goes nowhere, he’ll have basically no income for eight years (minimum). Wowzzzer.... what a way to screw up your life!
Bet he never thought his career as a cop would cost him this much.

 

[sharkey]

You are just being obstinate now. I will splain again for you - The driver trying to run someone over constitutes deadly force allowing good guy to shoot driver. Nothing more is needed. Can you understand that? There are no guarantees to what the car does after driver is shot.

You wanted a story I gave you one. Now you are not happy with it. Q for you - Since there Are no guarantees the car will stop, should the officer have shot the woman in Kansas City.

Another Q for you - Do you EVER feel it is justified to shoot a driver operating a MV because this IS the subject, not whether the vehicle stops.

I honestly can't simplify it anymore for you.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[Kar98]

I feel like you're both beating on straw arguments the other side didn't actually make.

 

[Renegade]

You are just being obstinate now.

We are still back at post #11:

I hope every officer hesitates to fire into a moving car. It is incredibly stupid and tactically unsound. Even if you execute a perfect insta-kill head shot, the car is still moving towards the person you thought you were protecting. You have accomplished nothing.

Still waiting four you to explain how shooting into a car solves the problem.

 

[Renegade]

I feel like you're both beating on straw arguments the other side didn't actually make.

I am talking tactics, he is talking justification. Who cares if it is justified if you get run over and die?

Sorry to inform you Mrs Renegade, your husband is dead as a result of being run over by a car. However everyone agrees, he was justified in shooting into the car. If only he had spent his final seconds jumping 3 feet to the side instead of draw/fire, he would be alive. Too bad, so sad. Next!

 

[sharkey]

We are still back at post #11:

I hope every officer hesitates to fire into a moving car. It is incredibly stupid and tactically unsound. Even if you execute a perfect insta-kill head shot, the car is still moving towards the person you thought you were protecting. You have accomplished nothing.

Still waiting four you to explain how shooting into a car solves the problem.

I have, you just don't like the answer. Not my problem.
Noticed how you didn't answer either question too.

 

[LOCKHART]

The kid was getting his life together, his parents will now sue, and will be rich for about 6 months or less. And we all know how deadly those AK-15's are! Sarcasm off!

 

[Kar98]

I have, you just don't like the answer. Not my problem.

You have posted an answer. The mechanics of it seem unsound. It's not like firing a shot is a magic wish fullfiller because no, getting shot doesn't make the driver take his foot off the gas and put the car into park. You now have a car that's out of control.

Were you legally justified to fire at a car? Maybe? Same way you're legally justified to cross an intersection where your light is green. Doesn't magically stop the 18wheeler running the red light from smooshing you.

 

[Kar98]

The kid was getting his life together, his parents will now sue, and will be rich for about 6 months or less. And we all know how deadly those AK-15's are! Sarcasm off!

Kinda uncalled for. Like, actually 100% uncalled for, if you're in fact talking about the murder victim. He was 15 and attending high school. There's nothing at all about him being in need of getting his life together.

 

[LOCKHART]

And you know this for SURE exactly HOW?? I saw his father on TV, looked and talked like just about you would expect him to.

 

[busykngt]

I actually heard he was either an honor student or in the honors program at Mesquite High School and played football. From ALL outwardly indications, he was just being a kid!

I usually get down on those type situations - especially if they happen at 2:30 in the morning. But this was 11 pm and again, from all indications the cops told them they needed to leave and were apparently trying to do just that. I’m guessing they realized it was their “curfew” time anyway (three of them were brothers). It’s unfortunate someone in the damn nursing home apparently shot a gun at that time (I never did see anything more in the news about that investigation!).

 

[busykngt]

Doesn’t really matter about any of this. The jury heard all this stuff already and decided the cop was guilty of murder (negligent or otherwise).

 

[Kar98]

And you know this for SURE exactly HOW?? I saw his father on TV, looked and talked like just about you would expect him to.

Wow.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Innocent until proven guilty. Unless being a black teen is a capital offense in your eyes.

 

[dmancornell]

And you know this for SURE exactly HOW?? I saw his father on TV, looked and talked like just about you would expect him to.

Gee, I'm sorry you think anyone who doesn't speak perfect Midwestern accent deserves the death penalty.

Reminds me of the story of when that SWAT team in Georgia mutilated a baby with a flashbang and the first reaction from the police chief was that his parents were suspects in a drug case, and that wasn't even true because the suspect was some cousin.

Seems to be standard police procedure: preemptively slander and defame everyone they brutalize.