Cops kick in wrong door, kill a man in confused rage


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Fuck the police with a fucking chainsaw


#3

Horrible.


#4

“not without a search warrant,”

That makes the Po Po very angry, sadly so.


#5

If the police knock on your door at 3:30 in the morning, you may safely assume someone in the house will be dead by sunrise.


#6

The lesson is very clear: stand up for your legal rights as a law-abiding citizen, and pay the consequences.

My condolences to his family and friends.


#7

One of the deputies received minor injuries

Bruising to the knuckles and trigger finger no doubt.


#8

The longer I work in the Public Service, the more angered I get by poor implementation of policy.


#9

Is it me, or are police forgetting about the whole court-and-judge thing?


#10

in Germany we have “Gefahr im Verzug” rules (~ immanent danger), an umbrella term used for all shenanigans our police performs - does the US have similar laws?


#11

See, you might be one up on the US right there.


#12

this is even for my standards too cynical : P


#13

On a more serious note, though, I don’t think you can really compare wrongdoings by German police to those by US police. In the US, if you are a black man, aged 18-24 you are more likely to be killed by a police officer than the average German is to be killed by anyone. I’m sure every country has problems with police doing bad things, but the US seems unique among western nations in the body count the police rack up.

The equivalent of “Gefahr im Verzug” appears to be “dead unarmed black man.” (No offense to the non-black man who was killed in this instance)


#14

I didn’t try to compare the different levels of police injustice.

But as the US legal system has a much more strict separation between executive branch and judiciary I am curious if “the whole court-and-judge thing” (@NickSay) can be bypassed legally.


#15

The phrase you hear on cop shows from the US is “exigent circumstances”. Basically the same idea, I imagine.


#16

When I first read this I thought, “another crime”? What was the first crime? And for a second I thought, hmm, that’s a minor error there, quite probably the first I’ve ever seen from Rob…

Then I realised the first crime was what the cops were doing - which is so often the case, apparently, nowadays. :cry:

Nicely worded, in other words…


#17

And also, fuck the bloodless language of exculpation used by news agencies to report his murder.

If it was a cop who had died, the language would have been:


#18

Thanks, an exact term makes this much easier :smile:

A search is reasonable, and a search warrant is not required, if all of the circumstances known to the officer at the time, would cause a reasonable person to believe that entry or search was necessary to prevent physical harm to the officer or other persons/the destruction or concealment of evidence/the escape of a suspect, and if there was insufficient time to get a search warrant.
(source)

Something is wrong with the story or the write-up: Both articles write about an assault investigation.

The ABC story says that the officers “were called to a home”. -> imo a valid case for exigent circumstances, a 911 call for an ongoing assault should allow the police to enter.

According to WNCN they asked for a specific person -> not a case for exigent circumstances, when they knew beforehand about a likely suspect imo a warrant is needed and can be organised.

And without trying to victim-blame-trolling:

Witnesses said Livingston was not fighting back and was trying to get the Taser out of the deputy’s hands.
(WNCN)

Uh, it’s kind of perilous and probably stupid to disarm a LEO.


#19

It’s perilous and stupid to try and fail to disarm a LEO.


#20

Yeah, sorry about the initial misunderstanding. The issue is that we know police are going to be allowed to bypass the search warrant thing under some circumstances. They are emergency responders, and emergencies are situations where you don’t wait for paperwork to be done. At the same time, we know that some police officers are going to abuse the exceptions to do things they shouldn’t be doing.

What amazes me is not so much that police officers in America can kill someone and not get charged with murder, but that they can kill people and not even be given minor disciplinary actions by the employers. The attitude that you can just do whatever you want and the rest of the police will back you is pretty obvious. I see these cops were put on administrative leave as part of “standard procedure.” Maybe we’ll see how this turns out a few months from now, but I’d put my money down that their punishment will be a short paid vacation.

I might be reading it wrong, but I think they’d already tackled him, beaten him, pepper sprayed him and tased him. From the description I think that taser he was trying to get out of the officer’s hand was actively being used on him. We can’t even talk about whether it is smart or stupid to try to get someone to stop electrocuting you, I don’t think rational thought enters into the decision. The cops initiated a series of events that were very likely to result in his death, including him trying to make the attack stop.