Dallas LEO shooting video raises question's

[jmra]

Unfortunately perception is everything. No matter what other evidence is presented this is going to be a PR nightmare for the department. Right or wrong, anything short of charges being filed against the officers is going to be perceived by the public as a coverup.

Let me ask you this. Now a leo and chl are different in that the leos responded to this call. However, consider if you had to use your handgun in self defense. Would you want the powers that be to cave to public perception (GZ is a good example), or do a complete investigation and go by the facts of the case, whatever they may be even if that went against the public perception? The only thing we the public know is what the media has told us and a silent video. Nobody knows what the officers "really" said expect for the people involved in the investigation. If the grand jury clears the officers and the dept finds this was within their policy, they need to back their officers and not cave to public perception. Time will tell and if they did wrong we will read all about it, and if they didn't we won't hear anything from the media.

What I want is irrelevant. My post is about public perception. Regardless of what the investigation reveals, public opinion will be based on the video which suggests to the average joe that the shooting was not justified. if the investigation shows the shooting was justified, the public will scream coverup. This is a no win situation for both the officers involved and the department.
As to what I want - I want justice to be served. If the officers were somehow legally justified in their actions then no action should be taken against them. If they weren't then they should be punished accordingly.
I do question whether or not an unbiased investigation can be conducted by the department. I would suggest bringing in investigators from the state level (if that is even an option).

[E.Marquez]

The officers statement said that the mentally ill man lunged at him and took four steps towards him, causing the officer to fear for his life and open fire. .

With all due respect.... we do not know that.
We know a media reporter, said that is what the officer said..

And knowing the historical accuracy of media sources, the bias they often have, and the very real fact that, they exist to entertain, and get your attention.. Not inform...

I have a hard time making statements on "fact" when the only facts we have are regurgitated and media fed ones.

[jmra]

The officers statement said that the mentally ill man lunged at him and took four steps towards him, causing the officer to fear for his life and open fire. .

With all due respect.... we do not know that.
We know a media reporter, said that is what the officer said..

And knowing the historical accuracy of media sources, the bias they often have, and the very real fact that, they exist to entertain, and get your attention.. Not inform...

I have a hard time making statements on "fact" when the only facts we have are regurgitated and media fed ones.

For the sake of the officers, I hope they didn't make that statement because if they did their goose is cooked along with any credibility other "evidence" might have carried.
That being said, the jury (criminal and/or civil) will see this video. Assuming the officers haven't made statements contrary to what is shown on the video, they are going to have to dish up some very compelling evidence to counteract the perception the video leaves with viewers. Hopefully (for all involved) there is other video and/or audio that tells more of the story.

[baldeagle]

I wonder what the impact of Tueller drills has on officers. Does knowing the distance that can be closed before you can draw and fire make them more likely to fire at the slightest indication of movement? It's a quandry, because hesitation can cost you your life, but not hesitating means you're more likely to fire before fully understanding the threat.

[texanjoker]

I wonder what the impact of Tueller drills has on officers. Does knowing the distance that can be closed before you can draw and fire make them more likely to fire at the slightest indication of movement? It's a quandry, because hesitation can cost you your life, but not hesitating means you're more likely to fire before fully understanding the threat.

Drawing a gun is different then firing it. If I was approaching a call with an armed person my gun is out when I exit my patrol vehicle. When I feel the threat to my life is when I am going to fire. For everybody that is a different distance and any drill is just a guideline. Hesitation has cost a lot of leo's their life and I repeatedly post that nobody knows IF they can truly fire until they are put into that position. Being that leo's are human this includes them in this topic.

[texanjoker]

The officers statement said that the mentally ill man lunged at him and took four steps towards him, causing the officer to fear for his life and open fire. .

With all due respect.... we do not know that.
We know a media reporter, said that is what the officer said..

And knowing the historical accuracy of media sources, the bias they often have, and the very real fact that, they exist to entertain, and get your attention.. Not inform...

I have a hard time making statements on "fact" when the only facts we have are regurgitated and media fed ones.

For the sake of the officers, I hope they didn't make that statement because if they did their goose is cooked along with any credibility other "evidence" might have carried.
That being said, the jury (criminal and/or civil) will see this video. Assuming the officers haven't made statements contrary to what is shown on the video, they are going to have to dish up some very compelling evidence to counteract the perception the video leaves with viewers. Hopefully (for all involved) there is other video and/or audio that tells more of the story.

The video is only one tool and it is one view but not necessarily what the officer remembers. Like all shootings, the shooters state of mind is crucial to show what they believed to be happening. For anybody that has been in this leo's shoes your memory is VERY distorted of what happened and it is hard to give a statement because you are not sure and usually remember certain portions of the critical incident. That is not lying, but a known reality.

If it is an issue where they indict this leo, we will see expert witnesses just like the GZ trial. One side will argue that the officer was in fear of his life, had normal psychological reactions to that threat like tunnel vision, time perception issues, loss of memory, ect, the suspect was making threatening statements while armed with a knife, stood up and that is when the officer saw the movement and thought the armed suspect was going to lunge (media word) at him, so he correctly fired to protect his life and the life of his partner. Then the other side will say the opposite of that, and that the officer lied, ect and it will be up to the jury to decide reasonable doubt.

As in all shootings I await the results of the factual investigation which takes time. Then I will form my opinion as to the shooting being a good or bad shoot.

[VMI77]

ugg so many questions so little info.

Hard to see the threat from the officers side....but was not there.
For sure it's going to be a hard sell on there part to explain and articulate the perceived threat.

Wild guess will go anything from raciest murder to ND leading to follow on fire...

time and investigation will find the truth.

To add the video doesn't show if the suspect had the weapon was in his hand when he stood up; what he said when he stood up, his demeanor, if he was off his medication, what the officer believed he was doing, ect.

Like all OIS they will do an investigation which will take time. The grand jury will then decide if they had a right to defend themselves. Regardless if the grand jury clears them the PD also has an internal investigation as to whether they followed policy.

The mom was referring to mental health officers. However all leo's are trained to deal with mental health subjects and when there is a 911 call the closest go with a mental health officer responding if needed.

Yada yada yada. They LIED in their report, the guy they shot did not advance towards them, and if we had an honest system they'd be fired just for their perjury, and charged with a crime. If anyone not a cop did what the cop that shot this guy did, got caught on video lying about our supposed justification, we'd be in jail right now. And we'd be convicted of murder and sentenced to prison.

[nightmare69]

Sit in a chair in the street and not follow cops orders. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[E.Marquez]

They LIED in their report, the guy they shot did not advance towards them

Outstanding .. I was not aware the report had been released for us to read..

Can you post a link to it?

Thanks

[MechAg94]

A couple questions:

1. Were these officers no equipped with any less than lethal devices? The guy looks like he would not stand well getting hit by a taser or a 12 gauge bean bag.
2. Why little or no time delay between standing and getting shot? Why no apparent effort to talk him down, etc? He didn't appear to me to be an immediate threat to the officer's lives.

[rbwhatever1]

Update: (Disclaimer - This could be WFAA Media lies) Those pesky affidavits & video cameras.

A police affidavit detailing the incident says Bennett “took several steps toward them with the knife raised in an aggressive manner.”

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/C ... 91301.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Footage from a surveillance camera pointed at the street where officers shot a mentally ill man in the abdomen earlier this week shows the man never walked toward police nor raised a knife to them, disputing a police officer’s narrative provided in a sworn affidavit.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/s ... 52551.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[jmra]

Update: (Disclaimer - This could be WFAA Media lies) Those pesky affidavits & video cameras.

A police affidavit detailing the incident says Bennett “took several steps toward them with the knife raised in an aggressive manner.”

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/C ... 91301.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Footage from a surveillance camera pointed at the street where officers shot a mentally ill man in the abdomen earlier this week shows the man never walked toward police nor raised a knife to them, disputing a police officer’s narrative provided in a sworn affidavit.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/s ... 52551.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Based on an eye witness account, detailed in the link above, the victim was not violent nor was he threatening the officers in any way. Perhaps our eyes are not betraying us after all.

[E.Marquez]

Update: (Disclaimer - This could be WFAA Media lies) Those pesky affidavits & video cameras.

A police affidavit detailing the incident says Bennett “took several steps toward them with the knife raised in an aggressive manner.”

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/C ... 91301.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Footage from a surveillance camera pointed at the street where officers shot a mentally ill man in the abdomen earlier this week shows the man never walked toward police nor raised a knife to them, disputing a police officer’s narrative provided in a sworn affidavit.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/s ... 52551.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I must have missed it.. Where are the affidavits ? or links to them? Im not seeing them at either of those two link you provided.

Thanks

[Excaliber]

The officers statement said that the mentally ill man lunged at him and took four steps towards him, causing the officer to fear for his life and open fire. .

With all due respect.... we do not know that.
We know a media reporter, said that is what the officer said..

And knowing the historical accuracy of media sources, the bias they often have, and the very real fact that, they exist to entertain, and get your attention.. Not inform...

I have a hard time making statements on "fact" when the only facts we have are regurgitated and media fed ones.

For the sake of the officers, I hope they didn't make that statement because if they did their goose is cooked along with any credibility other "evidence" might have carried.
That being said, the jury (criminal and/or civil) will see this video. Assuming the officers haven't made statements contrary to what is shown on the video, they are going to have to dish up some very compelling evidence to counteract the perception the video leaves with viewers. Hopefully (for all involved) there is other video and/or audio that tells more of the story.

The video is only one tool and it is one view but not necessarily what the officer remembers. Like all shootings, the shooters state of mind is crucial to show what they believed to be happening. For anybody that has been in this leo's shoes your memory is VERY distorted of what happened and it is hard to give a statement because you are not sure and usually remember certain portions of the critical incident. That is not lying, but a known reality.

If it is an issue where they indict this leo, we will see expert witnesses just like the GZ trial. One side will argue that the officer was in fear of his life, had normal psychological reactions to that threat like tunnel vision, time perception issues, loss of memory, ect, the suspect was making threatening statements while armed with a knife, stood up and that is when the officer saw the movement and thought the armed suspect was going to lunge (media word) at him, so he correctly fired to protect his life and the life of his partner. Then the other side will say the opposite of that, and that the officer lied, ect and it will be up to the jury to decide reasonable doubt.

As in all shootings I await the results of the factual investigation which takes time. Then I will form my opinion as to the shooting being a good or bad shoot.

You are correct that being under life threatening stress can and usually does alter perceptions such as how quickly time passes, distance, speed of motion, presence and loudness of sounds, size and nature of objects, and other things. However, I am not aware of any such effect that causes a person to see a person perform gross motor movements such as taking several steps and raising a knife that would not also be visible to a camera. If that were the case, there is no shooting that could not be justified by this line of defense.

Apparently the Dallas police chief isn't buying that explanation either since he immediately ordered the charges against the man who was shot dropped.

[VMI77]

A couple questions:

1. Were these officers no equipped with any less than lethal devices? The guy looks like he would not stand well getting hit by a taser or a 12 gauge bean bag.
2. Why little or no time delay between standing and getting shot? Why no apparent effort to talk him down, etc? He didn't appear to me to be an immediate threat to the officer's lives.

Tasers are only for pain compliance.