Dallas Cop fired, charged criminally.

[Flat Lander]

So for you guys that feel that the only bad thing the officer did was lie, I sure as hell hope you never come to help in any situation I'm involved in. Video doesn't lie, that guy was just standing there when a trigger happy cop shot him. He should go to jail for a long time, and his partner should also be fired, and possibly charged as well.

 

[itchin]

I'd be surprised if he does even 1 year.

 

[winchster]

Not sure where that Judge came from. Taking cases to a Grand Jury first is SOP for many departments.

No special treatment.

That judge has been a part of Dallas courts since 1982. I'm betting he knows SOP for Dallas better than we do.

 

[Texan2]

That judge has been a part of Dallas courts since 1982. I'm betting he knows SOP for Dallas better than we do.

And he may. But it reads as if he thinks the process being used is unheard of, when in fact it's quite common.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

 

[Vaquero]

They lied because they know it was not a good shoot.
The shooter deserves prison time for assault with a deadly weapon and attempted murder.

The other cop deserves to be fired and charged with accessory to above crimes.

my guess.

 

[Texan2]

Texas doesn't have accessory statutes.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

 

[Vaquero]

So officer #2 is clear?
I bet he ain't looking forward to being a witness for either side.

 

[Texan2]

So officer #2 is clear?
I bet he ain't looking forward to being a witness for either side.

Not necessarily. Several different charges may fit.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

 

[jordanmills]

Agree ... the body cam movement going on in PD's are going to change the game considerably. Not that it's a game.

It is to a lot of them.

 

[Texan2]

It is to a lot of them.

Of course it is

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

 

[TwinGlocks]

Sucks to be him.

 

[Mic]

So, I'm thinking about this logic that says had they not lied, they would be okay.............

A man enters my house and has a knife down at his side. He stands there looking at me from this distance. I tell him to drop the weapon and leave. He doesn't. And since there is no audio, let's say he makes some statement like the one the mentally handicapped fella supposedly makes, like - it's gonna take a lot more than that G19 to end this.

Am I gonna sit there and wait for him to charge at me to shoot him? Hell no.

So, why do we believe the officers have a duty to wait until he lunges at them before they can shoot him.

I'm pretty sure that if I was standing there with a gun at in my hand, but down at my side and some police officers directed me to drop it and I made a similar statement, my ass would be dead soon enough.

And do you guys find it really that unlikely that they would be relatively unscathed? I think that these officers would be relatively unblemished if they hadn't lied about it. I'm not arguing what should be the norm here, I'm arguing that London is probably correct in what would have happened had they not lied.

 

[itchin]

I thought the knife was on the ground?

 

[winchster]

So, I'm thinking about this logic that says had they not lied, they would be okay.............

A man enters my house and has a knife down at his side. He stands there looking at me from this distance. I tell him to drop the weapon and leave. He doesn't. And since there is no audio, let's say he makes some statement like the one the mentally handicapped fella supposedly makes, like - it's gonna take a lot more than that G19 to end this.

Am I gonna sit there and wait for him to charge at me to shoot him? Hell no.

So, why do we believe the officers have a duty to wait until he lunges at them before they can shoot him.

I'm pretty sure that if I was standing there with a gun at in my hand, but down at my side and some police officers directed me to drop it and I made a similar statement, my ass would be dead soon enough.

And do you guys find it really that unlikely that they would be relatively unscathed? I think that these officers would be relatively unblemished if they hadn't lied about it. I'm not arguing what should be the norm here, I'm arguing that London is probably correct in what would have happened had they not lied.

Your scenario is apples and watermelons. Different completely. You're defending your home. These officers rolled up, got out, and within seconds of approaching the guy with weapons drawn, shot him. It doesn't matter what the man said to them. He did not make any threatening movements. I think they were screwed the minute they shot a man that was not threatening them or anyone else. As previously stated, with weapon drawn and ready, unless he's within arms reach gun beats night every time.

 

[Mic]

Your scenario is apples and watermelons. Different completely. You're defending your home. These officers rolled up, got out, and within seconds of approaching the guy with weapons drawn, shot him. It doesn't matter what the man said to them. He did not make any threatening movements. I think they were screwed the minute they shot a man that was not threatening them or anyone else. As previously stated, with weapon drawn and ready, unless he's within arms reach gun beats night every time.

With a knife out, refusing to drop it, I think anything the man says matters a whole lot!

 

[stdreb27]

The special treatment is already starting:

[h=1]Unusual move by judge keeps fired Dallas police officer free[/h]As the Dallas Police Department terminated Spencer Thursday,police were also building a criminal case against him. They planned to arrest him for aggravated assault, but a district judge refused to sign the arrest warrant.

The judge instead directed officers to take the case to a grand jury -- a rare move, according to former State District Judge John Creuzot, who sat on the bench more than two decades.

"I don't know that I've ever really seen it," he said. "It's pretty easy to get an arrest warrant signed. All you're submitting is that there is cause to believe the person probably committed an offense, and that's a very low standard. It doesn't mean the person is guilty."

Cruezot said going before a grand jury doesn't change the case.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/Unusal-move-by-judge-keeps-fired-officer-free-229192131.html

I'm fine with sending it to grand jury. It's politics now, might as well put it in the hands of the people...
It's not like he's going to be a flight risk...

 

[TreyG-20]

What if the cops had used tazers instead? From my little experience it would seem effective in this type of situation. Aren't less than lethal weapons more common these days? Most LEO I see carry them as well.

 

[deemus]

Seems to me that tasers ought to be SOP for every cop in a situation with a mentally ill person without a gun.

 

[itchin]

I thought the an was unarmed? Knife on ground? If so the shoot was horribly wrong.

 

[M. Sage]

So, I'm thinking about this logic that says had they not lied, they would be okay.............

A man enters my house and has a knife down at his side. He stands there looking at me from this distance. I tell him to drop the weapon and leave. He doesn't. And since there is no audio, let's say he makes some statement like the one the mentally handicapped fella supposedly makes, like - it's gonna take a lot more than that G19 to end this.

Am I gonna sit there and wait for him to charge at me to shoot him? Hell no.

So, why do we believe the officers have a duty to wait until he lunges at them before they can shoot him.

I'm pretty sure that if I was standing there with a gun at in my hand, but down at my side and some police officers directed me to drop it and I made a similar statement, my ass would be dead soon enough.

And do you guys find it really that unlikely that they would be relatively unscathed? I think that these officers would be relatively unblemished if they hadn't lied about it. I'm not arguing what should be the norm here, I'm arguing that London is probably correct in what would have happened had they not lied.

This is Texas. A man forcibly enters your home and is visibly (and truly) unarmed. You don't bother warning him and gun him down before he even knows you're there. Under Texas law, you could pop the guy as he's forcing the window or door, etc., before he's even inside the house, but while he's at least attempting to enter unlawfully and forcibly.

No charges to you.

Extremely different scenario.