New video emerges of black cosplayer running for his life from cops who then shot and killed him

[ghostly1]

@Farinthehole

longname:
Black man runs by Panda door with arms at his sides. Three seconds later officer walks into view. Given the gait and stance of the officer presumably, at that point, the black man was face down, on the ground, dying or dead from gunshot wounds.
Farinthehole:
I did not see any person die in the video. Are you sure that you are not filling in the blanks for yourself?

Wait. So, you’re saying… you believe… the scenario played out, or could be reasonably believed to have played out like this (and please watch the video from 1:28 on again before deciding if this is actually what you’re claiming):

Hunt runs past Panda Express doorway at high speed. Seconds later, cops enter view of the doorway at a brisk walk that is SLOWING down, and apparently stops just out of view of the window. Second cop appears and DOES stop in view of window (and you can see the very edge of the pants of cop 1, indicating he didn’t move very far). They stand there, apparently unconcerned about Hunt.

And you believe that they did not shoot him at this point, they just… decided to let him get away, and then he came back and lunged at them with a fake sword, and THAT’S when they shot him? Or maybe that, despite the fact that he was moving at quite a pace past the door, he immediately whipped around and charged the officers before they stopped running, forcing them to shoot him?

Keeping in mind the autopsy proved he was killed by a shot in the BACK.

Also keeping in mind the initial statement (before there was pesky video):
Utah County Chief Deputy Attorney Tim Taylor said Hunt attacked the officers.
“When the officers made contact with Mr. Hunt, he brandished the sword and lunged toward the officers with the sword, at which time Mr. Hunt was shot,” Taylor said in a statement.

WHEN the officers made contact (there was apparently a photo of him interacting peacefully with the officers, I’d count that as ‘making contact’, not the chase afterwards), he brandished the sword and lunged towards them, AT WHICH TIME he was shot (in the back, apparently). Not after a footchase.

I suppose you could claim that Taylor was misinformed. Except, they’re the ones doing the informing, aren’t they? Why are you willing to take ANYTHING they say about the situation at face value, whereas you’re questioning every other possibility about what video evidence might imply?

[euansmith]

It does seem odd that they didn’t tazer him or spray him or maybe just speak to him; unless the local state law doesn’t allow for the use of non-lethal force.

[ChuckV]

@longname

Make certain you only carry your 2.5 foot fake sword when you are properly escorted by a white person and you will never have to worry about the police confronting you. I suspect a white little old lady will work best.

No, then the police will just assume it’s a hostage situation.

[scratcheee]

[quote=“xzzy, post:5, topic:47018”]
the proper response would be to call for backup…[/quote]

I’ve seen this argument made in another recent case involving a police shooting, and this logic seems a little off to me. Police call for backup to protect themselves from assault or to help overpower a person. I don’t think you can argue that police should call for backup while simultaneously arguing that they had no reason to anticipate being assaulted.

And “search for him with old fashioned detective work?” Old fashioned detective work would be to give chase and apprehend him!

[anon50609448]

@Brainspore

It proves that for at least part of the encounter he was running away from the police rather than charging them with a sword. That seriously undermines any “he attacked US” claims and flat out contradicts their previously stated version of events.

Exactly, it proves that the police lied to cover up the fact that they shot him in the back.

But each piece of new evidence seems to be thought of as a completely independent fact. We could have five videos from different cameras come out one after another, telling a story, and each one would get “Well that video alone doesn’t prove anything.”

@brian_carnell

Both his and the cop’s actions seem reasonable from their respective POV. He’s thinking “why are these crazy MFers pointing guns at me” and they’re thinking “why is this crazy MFer running from us with a samurai sword.”

“Why is this happening?” is a pretty reasonable justification for running away, and a pretty poor justification for six bullets in someone’s back. Whenever a situation like this occurs people basically equate the actions of a black man who was not harming anyone with the actions of police who literally killed someone. You need a greater justification to kill someone than you do to run away, even if you are a cop (one could say especially if you are a cop - you know, someone who is employed and trained to deal with dangerous situations professionally).

@marilove

Also, almost all of the victims are now dead and cannot tell their side of the story or defend themselves, while the officers are alive and well. How convenient.

I wonder how many of these situations involved a cop going out of their way to kill. In Toronto Sammy Yatim was killed by a cop who shot him three times while he was standing, then the cop put six more bullets into him while the was on the ground. I think that having realized they’ve shot someone, some cops think “I better make sure he’s dead.”

(Yatim’s case is extremely different in that he was actually brandishing a knife and threatening people [although, and apologists for these cops take note, the fact that he had a knife out was not a justification for shooting him]. He also wasn’t black - though he was Syrian and I don’t know what the cop who shot him thought of his race - and Canada doesn’t have the same dynamics. But the “no one left to tell their side of the story” thing is there. If someone hadn’t been videotaping it then the cop probably would have gotten away with it.)

@longname

“May become a danger”? Based on that logic every single person on this planet will have to be gunned down.

To be clear, they don’t have to be, it’s just that the police are justified in doing so. Remember that police have a license to kill. It’s the, uh, 45th Amendment or something.

@Farinthehole

Missing from the debate: Young black men are MUCH ( orders of magnitude )more likely to be killed by another young black man than a police officer( of any color ).

Missing from the debate: any possible explanation as to why this matters other than the suggest that black people are violent. White people are more likely to be killed by other white people than they are by non-cop white people too. That’s because most people are killed by their spouses,families or ‘friends’ and because people are kind of racist - or at least subject to systemic racist factors - when choosing their spouses and ‘friends’. That’s wholly unrelated to how often police kill black men unless black men are significantly more likely to be married to cops.

@Farinthehole

OK, look, what is a justification for police to shoot a person?

This is a crucial question for me. I will not respond to you until you answer this question.

Hooray! Would you consider never responding to anyone again unless they answer your question?

[zathras]

@Icky

He was a scared child and he was probably going to show the officer that it was fake, but he made a very bad decision. If someone who thinks you have a weapon points their weapon at you and tells you not to move, you do not reach for your toy gun. So yes, it was irresponsible.

I want my police officers to be trained to be ready to risk their own lives in order to save the life of an irresponsible twelve-year-old.

If the cops are responding to a call about someone brandishing a gun, I expect them to be extra careful not to put themselves into a “shoot-or-be-shot” situation.

Hiding behind the cop car or some other suitable cover until the allegedly mad 12-year-old actually fires a shot is a risk that I would expect a cop to take.

[Daneyul]

But Chief Andrew Burton told FOX 13 News the camera was an early test model they were trying, and the officer was unaccustomed to it.

“[Officer Judson] said ‘I became so focused on what I was doing there I didn’t even think about it,'” Burton said.

Having cops wear cameras, but relying on the cops to turn them on sounds like a SWELL idea. What could possibly go wrong?

How hard would it be to rig the cameras to ALWAYS turn on when a gun is unholstered I wonder.

[shaddack]

@anon50609448

We could have five videos from different cameras come out one after another, telling a story, and each one would get “Well that video alone doesn’t prove anything.”

We can even have direct witnesses, each telling a different story of the same event. It’s normal.

Rashomon effect

@anon50609448

That’s because most people are killed by their spouses,families or ‘friends’ and because people are kind of racist - or at least subject to systemic racist factors - when choosing their spouses and ‘friends’.

Indices are that this may actually go quite beyond mere race.

Do We Choose Our Friends Because They Share Our Genes?

or,

Study finds friends are genetically similar

[Ereiamjh]

Because it has no bearing on the ‘debate’…

[anon61221983]

Uh… except in Utah, where this shooting actually happened.

The kid is dead… have some compassion. [edited to add] Aren’t you in another thread, yelling about how Jesus is the light and the way? Do you honestly think that Jesus would be so devoid of compassion for this young man? Or in your faith does Jesus only love white children? You’re having a real compassion fail here. I doubt your god would be on the side of the oppressors here. If he is, then he’s deader than Nietzsche said and he’s right that we killed him, because that’s not the kind of god we need.

[marilove]

He was TWELVE. A CHILD. So a *child *, a black child, doesn’t respond perfectly to officers, and his punishment is death?

[marilove]

You didn’t watch the video, did you?

[shaddack]

@marilove

So a *child *, a black child, doesn’t respond perfectly to officers, and his punishment is death?

Pretty much yes.
The just-world hypothesis F. apparently believes has to be considered invalid.

[anon29631895]

@ChuckV

You’ve got a suspect walking about brandishing a lethal weapon.

But was it illegal to publicly carry a sword?

No it was not illegal. Utah’s open carry law covers real swords as well as firearms.
He was shot for being black while doing something perfectly legal.

This case was a total clusterfuck – they didn’t even take the cops statements until a week after the shooting. I assume the reason was that they were waiting for all the witness stories/videos/etc to come in so that they could concoct a story that didn’t contradict them.

[Brainspore]

Meanwhile, here’s a recent story about a white guy who actually pointed a real gun at innocent men, women, children and police officers and managed to survive the encounter. After a full 45-minute standoff the police fired a single shot, then raced to get him to the hospital. Compare that to the six shots used to take down a black kid with a fake sword who almost certainly wasn’t threatening anyone.

[andy_hilmer]

@Farinthehole

If a white( how does that matter? ) person, upon encountering the police, flees, and then when trapped brandishes his open carry weapon… yes, police should use force to stop this person.

What actually happens is the cops walk up to the armed white person to gauge whether the person is a threat. Even when the person in question is brandishing and yelling at passing traffic, that’s what they do. The situation is resolved non-violently.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/rifle-toting-mi-man-wont-be-charged-after-frightening-cops-with-revolution-talk/

It’s pretty hard for a white guy to suicide-by-cop. We actually have to shoot at the cops for them to reluctantly put us down.

[andy_hilmer]

@Farinthehole

Mildly irrelevant.

Anything that doesn’t fit your bullshit narrative is “irrelevant.” You encompass relevance, take it into yourself, and then release it in a form that has no value except as fertilizer.

[Marjoram]

@Marilove: I don’t really feel like wading into this fray, but thank you so much for articulating exactly how I feel.

[bbfreak]

Comply with the cops, or they may kill you seems to be the lesson to be learned.

Or we can re-examine our use of force in this country, but nope. Not going to happen.

Of course, if you’re too mentally ill to comply. They’ll still kill you, and you’re just out of luck.

[MarjaE]

Or if they don’t give you time to comply.

They can drive up and immediately shoot and kill a twelve-year-old kid, and the copologists come out in force to defend the police, blame the victim, blame the victim’s mother, and say they would do the same thing themselves… of course if they are willing to kill children, it’s a fair bet they would be willing to lie to defend the department.

Video of Tamir Rice shooting shows moment police kill 'peace-loving' boy