If we’re lucky it’s only one.
Funny how a car is always a “weapon” wielded by the driver when (supposedly) aimed at a cop, but somehow drivers tend get a pass whenever they hit a bicyclist.
And speaking of those consequences, let’s not forget that every time a cop shoots someone, that person was denied a jury trial and sentencing. Very few crimes in very few places are actually capital offences, so whatever the person did, this cop has acted as judge, jury, and executioner for a crime that didn’t warrant it. Even if this woman was alleged to have done something horrible, she was still denied due process, which is actually worse for the community than whatever one criminal does.
From the article:
In his interview with the AP on Friday, Walton denied that Young had stolen anything from the grocery store. He said his firm found a witness who saw Young put down bottles of alcohol as she left the store.
“The bottles were left in the store," he said. "So when she’s in her car denying that, that’s accurate. She did not commit any theft, and so these officers were not even within their right to place her under arrest, let alone take her life.”
That was just straight up murder. He shot her before the car started moving. It started moving because he shot her, and her foot came off of the brake. He’s not just a murderer, he’s a stupid murderer. If her foot had shifted from the brake to accelerator, he’d have been squished between the car and that brick pillar.
Indeed. Even if we take the cops’ account at face value, putting an officer in front of the car was what turned a simple shoplifting investigation into a situation where the only possible outcomes were “full compliance” or “deadly force.”
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.