This is what you said:rotor wrote:What facts do you want? I think the "has me thinking perhaps" sentence is enough. If there were no video on this case I would be arguing that the LEO should have the benefit of the doubt, after all he is a LEO trained in this kind of stuff. But then we look at the video. Perhaps if we had a video in the Missouri case I would not have been so sure the LEO was a correct shoot. Have we seen any direct evidence yet that the Missouri case was a legitimate shoot? I sure hope they can show something fast. In the meantime as long as these kinds of videos pop up (including the one in California with the LEO beating that woman), my personal faith and belief that the LEO is correct is being eroded. The three LEO in south Texas with the phony traffic citations, charges against LEO of sexual misconduct, choking case in NY killing a guy selling illegal cigarettes, all break the trust that we have in LEO. I am not bashing LEO because 99.99% would never do these things but without a video or some prooof, maybe there is a .001% chance the Ferguson shoot was bad.Jim Beaux wrote:Please cite the facts that support your contention.rotor wrote:I pretty much am going to give the LEO the benefit of the doubt- except in this case. Watching this video has me thinking that perhaps the Ferguson, Missouri case was also a bad shoot. The value of video.
Watching this video has me thinking that perhaps the Ferguson, Missouri case was also a bad shoot.
Not wanting to dog you, but your "thinking" is biased by the actions of another. Per witness statements there are no similarities between this and the Ferguson shooting.
