And it’s all the more surprising to see someone ex-military cheering on cops who kill without being trained to hold back and with no consequences.
It would be hard for me to believe that persons in the service routinely murder civilians as often as we kill our own, and certainly not also failing to be disciplined to avoid these scenarios and well after the fact when murders come to light. The US military succeeds at discipline, but these people seem to think that discipline is unnecessary, and so are consequences.
You’re implying that Crutcher was guilty of something even if it was just “obstructing an officer”. Your calls that people not rush to judgment would sound a lot less hollow if you’d do the same.
Oh FFS. This is from a report telling “officer Shelby’s side of the story”:
Crutcher did not respond, Wood said, so Shelby ordered him again to get his hand out of his pocket. He then pulled his hand away and put his hands up in the air, even though he was not instructed to do so, which Shelby found strange, Wood said.
“He’s putting up his hands even before being asked! He must be SUPER-dangerous!”
DUI - Reprehensible, but not worthy of a death sentence
Resisting - often a “contempt of cop” offense without merit. There’s no charge of “assaulting a police officer” (AP), so the resistance was probably nonviolent.
TOC - Transporting alcohol in an Open Container - not surprising, given the DUI.
NO SB (Seatbelt) - Who cares?
Warrant 2.
FTP - Failure to Pay
TOC - Transporting alcohol in an Open Container (again)
Warrant 3.
FTP - Failure to Pay
PI - Public Intoxication
Obstructing an officer - Again, no charge of “assaulting a police officer” (AP), so this could just be due to backtalk or passive resistance.
Warrant 4
FTP - Failure to Pay
DUS - Driving under suspension (not surprising, given all the fines he hasn’t paid)
Warrant 5
FTP - Failure to Pay
Obstructing an officer
Resisting an officer
DUS - Driving under suspension
I don’t see any suggestion of violence there. He’s a drunk driver (which I think he should be punished for), who doesn’t like to cooperate with the police. But even though he’s been charged with two counts of resisting and two counts of obstructing, he’s got zero charges for “assaulting a police officer,” which I’m sure, if the officers were ever in danger, they wouldn’t have hesitated to charge him with.
Also, given the [often spurious nature] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_cop) of “resisting” and “obstruction” charges, I don’t see anything that would even remotely justify raising this guy to the level of “threat,” let alone “threat requiring lethal force.”
Regardless of his previous interactions with police you’ve still judged him to be guilty of something in this case without any evidence. You’re making assumptions at the same time you’re telling others not to do the same.
Or are you implying that because Crutcher had a criminal past the police were justified in their use of force? If that’s what you’re trying to say I hope you have some evidence that they recognized him.
Does Tulsa only issue warrants on the last day of the month? How do you get 5 with repeat charges issued on one day? I note the marked lack of ‘date of incident’ column in the screen grab.
I am glad that you understand the acronyms from the sheet. I was unsure of several of them. I will post the second page, and it would be nice if you could decode it. But I am definitely not saying that I or anyone else thinks that someone should be executed for any of this stuff. Or that I think this particular shooting is justified. I am listing these to answer the question of whether he was “guilty of something”. Part of the narrative I am hearing about this case is that some people believe that Mr. Crutcher was shot for having car trouble or obstructing traffic, as if the officers involved saw his car in the road and agreed to execute the driver as soon as he could be located. Instead, it was the result of an interaction gone terribly wrong, probably on several levels. In my work, when there is an incident or near miss, we look carefully at the sequence of events to find exactly where things started to go wrong, and what could have been done differently to have a better outcome. But that cannot be done without looking closely at what actually happened.
So here is page two. I am not posting this to try to excuse the shooting, or to confuse the issue. I would like to know what the initials mean.
I did as well. It might have to do with failure to pay fines based on his date of release from prison. But I do not really know. I do think that if it is the case, expecting people to pay a bunch of fines right after spending time in prison does not give them any chance to start over. It is a question worth asking.
But, to be fair, the one new, unclear acronym that you post here is the first that might actually support the point that the officers should have been more cautious if they saw it:
Warrant #6, Count #2 (A&B ON PO) is “Assault and Battery on a Police Officer.”
