any one know what protocol is for police and this situation?

[kokotg]

To be clear, I'm definitely not arguing in favor of stand your ground laws. 

[SKL]

11 minutes ago, kokotg said:

I really don't know what to think of this case (and as I've gotten older I've tried to be less quick to have an opinion on everything and to spend more time listening and thinking and keeping my mouth shut), but someone on twitter pointed out that Ohio is a stand your ground state (and just this month expanded the law), so if the girl who was killed did believe she was acting in self defense and that the other people were the aggressors, then she was in the clear legally if she HAD stabbed anyone, right? The burden would be on the prosecution to prove that she WASN'T defending herself. 

Self defense is a defense, regardless of Stand Your Ground.  But I doubt the cops are trained to just watch people kill each other just because it might be self-defense.

[kokotg]

But if things went down as the girl's family have related (as I understand it)--these other people came to the house and threatened her and she felt she was defending herself from them--then she was killed while acting within her rights according to Ohio law. Had the police not intervened and someone was hurt or killed with the knife, the prosecution would have to prove that the girl DIDN'T feel she was in danger. If she did indeed call 911 then that would seem to me to be some evidence that she did feel she was in danger. But, as people have pointed out, we have no idea what happened outside of those few seconds. 

[SKL]

1 minute ago, kokotg said:

But if things went down as the girl's family have related (as I understand it)--these other people came to the house and threatened her and she felt she was defending herself from them--then she was killed while acting within her rights according to Ohio law. Had the police not intervened and someone was hurt or killed with the knife, the prosecution would have to prove that the girl DIDN'T feel she was in danger. If she did indeed call 911 then that would seem to me to be some evidence that she did feel she was in danger. But, as people have pointed out, we have no idea what happened outside of those few seconds. 

Cops don't have time to interview people about self-defense while they are wielding weapons at each other.

I doubt Stand Your Ground would apply here, but even if it did initially, wouldn't it stop being reasonable to continue a knife attack when (a) the other person isn't armed and (b) the cops have arrived?

[mom2scouts]

23 minutes ago, kokotg said:

I really don't know what to think of this case (and as I've gotten older I've tried to be less quick to have an opinion on everything and to spend more time listening and thinking and keeping my mouth shut), but someone on twitter pointed out that Ohio is a stand your ground state (and just this month expanded the law), so if the girl who was killed did believe she was acting in self defense and that the other people were the aggressors, then she was in the clear legally if she HAD stabbed anyone, right? The burden would be on the prosecution to prove that she WASN'T defending herself. 

Nope. She was attacking the other people who were not attacking her at all. In fact, the girl that almost got stabbed was standing at the end of the driveway, holding a small dog, and looking at and waiting for the police officer to walk over. Even the most ardent stand your ground supporter would not consider this a case of stand your ground. 

[kokotg]

I guess I just feel like it adds another layer to things. Again, I'm not a fan of stand your ground laws, and we've certainly seen them abused plenty of times. I'm just sort of musing about the kind of society we have right now: militarized police, heavily armed citizenry, laws that encourage people to take the law into their own hands, poor and/or questionable police training and education. Poorly paid police force. Systemic racism, conscious and unconscious bias. And this is what how we expect our kids to grow up and what we send cops out into every day. 

[SKL]

Just watched the body cam videos.  The way it looks to me, Person 1 (who was shot by the cop) ran up to Person 2, who was standing more than arm's length away and holding a dog.  Person 1 held up a blade and attempted to slice Person 2 in the neck, while the cop repeatedly shouted "get down."

It's sickeningly sad for everyone involved.

In my mind, the biggest question re the cop's immediate action was, why 4 shots instead of 1 or 2?  I am not a cop, so I'll leave that up to experts to analyze.

The bigger question in my mind is, what did we need to do for Person 1 before this kind of thing happened?  From the little I read, it sounds like she was a troubled teen in foster care.  Was she failed?  What can we do better for the next teen in her situation?

[SKL]

4 minutes ago, kokotg said:

I guess I just feel like it adds another layer to things. Again, I'm not a fan of stand your ground laws, and we've certainly seen them abused plenty of times. I'm just sort of musing about the kind of society we have right now: militarized police, heavily armed citizenry, laws that encourage people to take the law into their own hands, poor and/or questionable police training and education. Poorly paid police force. Systemic racism, conscious and unconscious bias. And this is what how we expect our kids to grow up and what we send cops out into every day. 

I highly doubt that this 15yo was thinking "stand my ground is the law" when she chose her actions.

But "stand your ground" is really not the point of this thread at all.  Maybe it deserves a separate thread, but you would really have to be blind or severely biased to watch the body cam videos and come out with a "stand your ground" argument.

[WildflowerMom]

The more I read about this, the more use of force seems justified.  I wish I didn't feel that way, though.   It sounds like this girl had a rough life.     I do think four shots was excessive, but just one shot could've easily killed her, too.   I feel sorry for both girls.  

[AbcdeDooDah]

6 minutes ago, SKL said:

 

In my mind, the biggest question re the cop's immediate action was, why 4 shots instead of 1 or 2?  I am not a cop, so I'll leave that up to experts to analyze.

 

They are trained to shoot until the threat is neutralized, most often in bursts of three. 

And for those that wonder "why not shoot them in the leg?" They are trained to aim for center mass. It is much harder to accurately hit a smaller body part like a leg, which could increase the likelihood of innocent people being hurt. 

 

 

 

[SKL]

1 minute ago, AbcdeDooDah said:

They are trained to shoot until the threat is neutralized, most often in bursts of three. 

And for those that wonder "why not shoot them in the leg?" They are trained to aim for center mass. It is much harder to accurately hit a smaller body part like a leg, which could increase the likelihood of innocent people being hurt.

I wonder if the training should be different when the perp is wielding a knife vs. a gun.

Again, this is more a question for cops and policing experts.

[gardenmom5]

48 minutes ago, kokotg said:

But if things went down as the girl's family have related (as I understand it)--these other people came to the house and threatened her and she felt she was defending herself from them--then she was killed while acting within her rights according to Ohio law. Had the police not intervened and someone was hurt or killed with the knife, the prosecution would have to prove that the girl DIDN'T feel she was in danger. If she did indeed call 911 then that would seem to me to be some evidence that she did feel she was in danger. But, as people have pointed out, we have no idea what happened outside of those few seconds. 

the girl wasn't acting in self-defense while she was holding a big knife while chasing the other girl (who was holding a dog.)  she was the aggressor. 

11 minutes ago, SKL said:

Just watched the body cam videos.  The way it looks to me, Person 1 (who was shot by the cop) ran up to Person 2, who was standing more than arm's length away and holding a dog.  Person 1 held up a blade and attempted to slice Person 2 in the neck, while the cop repeatedly shouted "get down."

It's sickeningly sad for everyone involved.

In my mind, the biggest question re the cop's immediate action was, why 4 shots instead of 1 or 2?  I am not a cop, so I'll leave that up to experts to analyze.

The bigger question in my mind is, what did we need to do for Person 1 before this kind of thing happened?  From the little I read, it sounds like she was a troubled teen in foster care.  Was she failed?  What can we do better for the next teen in her situation?

They shoot until the target is neutralized.  re: on the ground and not attempting to get up/moving around.  

1 minute ago, AbcdeDooDah said:

They are trained to shoot until the threat is neutralized, most often in bursts of three. 

And for those that wonder "why not shoot them in the leg?" They are trained to aim for center mass. It is much harder to accurately hit a smaller body part like a leg, which could increase the likelihood of innocent people being hurt. 

Those who wonder that watch too much TV.  it is so unrealistic.

[gardenmom5]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

I wonder if the training should be different when the perp is wielding a knife vs. a gun.

Again, this is more a question for cops and policing experts.

She had the girl in pink pushed against a car and was thrusting the knife at her throat. (and easily within her reach.) there wasn't time to handle this any other way.

[HeartString]

13 minutes ago, SKL said:

The bigger question in my mind is, what did we need to do for Person 1 before this kind of thing happened?  From the little I read, it sounds like she was a troubled teen in foster care.  Was she failed?  What can we do better for the next teen in her situation?

This does seem like the culmination of a lot of different things that went wrong.  The same could probably be asked of the other girls.  If the story about them coming over to “fight” the victim is true (remains to be seen) the something is wrong in their lives too.  

[Terabith]

So, honestly, it seems like this was a horrid thing to happen, but I am not sure that the use of force wasn't justified.  What DOES bother me are the reports and video from eyewitnesses that the police officers were shouting, "Blue lives matter" immediately after shooting her.  

I have seen it reported several places, but I haven't actually seen video of it myself.  But if they DID, it seems, at the very least, tone deaf.  

[MEmama]

15 minutes ago, kokotg said:

I guess I just feel like it adds another layer to things. Again, I'm not a fan of stand your ground laws, and we've certainly seen them abused plenty of times. I'm just sort of musing about the kind of society we have right now: militarized police, heavily armed citizenry, laws that encourage people to take the law into their own hands, poor and/or questionable police training and education. Poorly paid police force. Systemic racism, conscious and unconscious bias. And this is what how we expect our kids to grow up and what we send cops out into every day. 

Right. And a society where people justify the police killing teenagers instead of using diffusing tactics.

Incredible that the world over kids with knives don’t get killed by the police, but here they shoot first and ask questions (or more typically, don’t) after. 
 

 

[Sneezyone]

45 minutes ago, mom2scouts said:

Nope. She was attacking the other people who were not attacking her at all. In fact, the girl that almost got stabbed was standing at the end of the driveway, holding a small dog, and looking at and waiting for the police officer to walk over. Even the most ardent stand your ground supporter would not consider this a case of stand your ground. 

Except that’s not true. This same scenario where the caller was armed is what allowed Trayvon Martin’s killer to go unpunished.

[SKL]

2 minutes ago, Terabith said:

So, honestly, it seems like this was a horrid thing to happen, but I am not sure that the use of force wasn't justified.  What DOES bother me are the reports and video from eyewitnesses that the police officers were shouting, "Blue lives matter" immediately after shooting her.  

I have seen it reported several places, but I haven't actually seen video of it myself.  But if they DID, it seems, at the very least, tone deaf.  

I didn't hear that in the videos.  I heard "stay with us" being spoken to the girl while CPR was performed.  And "what do you need from me" from one cop to the other re how to attempt to save the girl.  And a fair amount of "get back" and "sit here" spoken to witnesses.

[Sneezyone]

1 hour ago, pinball said:

Most “stand your ground” laws would not be in play if the stand-your-grounder is chasing the person with a weapon.

there can a point where the person stops defending himself, and starts being the aggressor.

disclaimer: I haven’t read the Ohio law so if I’m wrong, let me know

Again, that’s just not the case. The same scenario you just outlined was tested in FL courts and the perp was acquitted. These laws are basically cookie cutter statutes passed to make vigilantes less accountable.

[SKL]

4 minutes ago, MEmama said:

Right. And a society where people justify the police killing teenagers instead of using diffusing tactics.

Incredible that the world over kids with knives don’t get killed by the police, but here they shoot first and ask questions (or more typically, don’t) after.

You saw the video and that's what you got from it?

And how exactly is the cop supposed to know the age of a 15yo girl who is, within seconds of the cops arriving, aiming a blade at another person's throat?

Also, I have news for you but cops do kill knife-wielding attackers in other countries.

[HeartString]

3 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

in, that’s just not the case. The same scenario you just outlined was tested in FL courts and the perp was acquitted. These laws are basically cookie cutter statutes passed to make vigilantes less accountable

The Trayvon case was especially egregious.  The man that killed him left his home with a weapon, after 911 told him not to, followed Trayvon and killed him.  Because he looked suspicious.  Those laws are terrible. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by HeartString

[pinball]

3 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Again, that’s just not the case. The same scenario you just outlined was tested in FL courts and the perp was acquitted. These laws are basically cookie cutter statutes passed to make vigilantes less accountable.

What’s not the case?

[AbcdeDooDah]

10 minutes ago, Terabith said:

So, honestly, it seems like this was a horrid thing to happen, but I am not sure that the use of force wasn't justified.  What DOES bother me are the reports and video from eyewitnesses that the police officers were shouting, "Blue lives matter" immediately after shooting her.  

I have seen it reported several places, but I haven't actually seen video of it myself.  But if they DID, it seems, at the very least, tone deaf.  

I still see reports that she had already dropped the knife before she was shot. Doesn't make it true. I'll wait for the investigations.

[Mrs Tiggywinkle]

Just now, SKL said:

I didn't hear that in the videos.  I heard "stay with us" being spoken to the girl while CPR was performed.  And "what do you need from me" from one cop to the other re how to attempt to save the girl.  And a fair amount of "get back" and "sit here" spoken to witnesses.

I haven’t heard that in any of the videos either. They immediately began resuscitative efforts.

I teach de-escalation techniques for first responders, especially fire and EMS.  The first rule of de-escalation is safety for yourself, then safety for any bystanders, and finally safety for the person in crisis. There was immediate danger to a bystander in this situation.  I truly don’t know what else the police officer would have done.  A taser is likely to wind up with stabbing and pepper spray almost certainly is.  The danger was real and imminent.  He had no idea who was calling 911 and if he was told it was a 15-year-old that was calling, he would not have seen the girl in question and thought she was 15.  He likely thought she was a full grown woman and not the caller. All of this risk/benefit scenario and scene details noticed happen in seconds.  Stand your ground is not going to apply to someone outside their home chasing someone with a knife. And people are arrested for shooting someone in the residence; it’s a defense strategy or reason for a DA not to press charges. 
 

Just because some police shootings are justified doesn’t mean we still don’t have problems, need better LEO training, and massive overhauls of the mental health system.  I think this was a justified shooting and will be ruled that way; but that doesn’t mean that the system didn’t fail My’Kyah on every level throughout her life.

[HeartString]

3 minutes ago, pinball said:

What’s not the case?

The precedent set by the Trayvon Martin case does say that you can be protected by a stand your ground law even if the person you shoot( or knife) is running away.   That man left his home with a weapon and chased Trayvon down and murderd him.  He was prosecuted and got off using the stand your ground law. 

[Sneezyone]

 

 

7 minutes ago, pinball said:

What’s not the case?

You said at some point the victim became the aggressor. That same logic was rejected by jurors in FL. I think the LEO here did what he was trained to do. I also think the training is generally sus and the laws WRT stand your ground send a very different message to civilians. You can defend yourself, at your home or if someone comes for you, with a gun or a knife. That’s legal. You don’t magically become the aggressor because you’re armed and the original aggressor is not. We’ve already seen that logic tested (tables turning) and jurors rejected it. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[WildflowerMom]

1 minute ago, HeartString said:

The precedent set by the Trayvon Martin case does say that you can be protected by a stand your ground law even if the person you shoot( or knife) is running away.   That man left his home with a weapon and chased Trayvon down and murderd him.  He was prosecuted and got off using the stand your ground law. 

That was an absolutely disgusting case and a disgusting man.  🤬🤬🤬

[SKL]

Just now, HeartString said:

The precedent set by the Trayvon Martin case does say that you can be protected by a stand your ground law even if the person you shoot( or knife) is running away.   That man left his home with a weapon and chased Trayvon down and murderd him.  He was prosecuted and got off using the stand your ground law. 

His argument was not that he was defending his home though.  His "ground" was wherever he was when the altercation with the deceased occurred.  Also, there was no "running away" by the deceased in that case.

[Sneezyone]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

His argument was not that he was defending his home though.  His "ground" was wherever he was when the altercation with the deceased occurred.  Also, there was no "running away" by the deceased in that case.

She was allowed to defend herself on that sidewalk too. It was the same type of personal scuffle that we see in this footage. Indeed, this was probably even more egregious because these potential assailants came to Ma’khia’s house.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Murphy101]

2 hours ago, pinball said:

Batons are not standard procedure in many many many jurisdictions anyone.

One of the big reasons why is due to the Rodney King beating. Baton use was part of LAPDs escalating use of force at the time. To the point that when one officer heard there was video thought it could be used as a training video bc it followed protocol, in that officer’s opinion.

someone also mentioned using water hose in this thread...uh, no. Maybe do some research on that one.

Which is just another problem. The solution is not get rid of guns or get rid of batons or gee have a handy hose near by (um that’s just weird to me) - 

The solution is better training and better selection for who qualifies to be a cop. 

2 hours ago, JumpyTheFrog said:

Regardless of what was happening before the cops showed up, once they were there, within ten seconds the girl was trying to stab the woman in pink instead of running to the cops for safety. (ETA: Okay, maybe running to them could be seen as a threat. In any case, she didn't do anything to indicate that she wasn't the violent one.)

I saw a number somewhere today that said 10% of US murder victims die from stabbings. 

I watched the video 5-6 times, mostly at half-speed. The entire incident took ten seconds. I'd estimate the cop was about 15-20 feet away when the girl was about to stab the woman in pink. There was no time for him to get to her before she plunged that knife into the woman. I think many people are underestimating how deadly knives are and how quickly someone can be stabbed repeatedly with them.

Bottom line is most people are more likely to survive a knife than a gun. My opinion is not based on how deadly knives are but how obviously cops need more training for doing something, anything, other than having their only response be to shoot first.

1 hour ago, Katy said:

I wonder what she was thinking. If the family is right & she’s the one who called police, why leave the safety of your house and go try to murder someone in front of a cop? There are zero ways for that to end well. 15 year olds are really stupid. 

People of any age in crisis and panic mode are stupid. 

12 minutes ago, AbcdeDooDah said:

They are trained to shoot until the threat is neutralized, most often in bursts of three. 

And for those that wonder "why not shoot them in the leg?" They are trained to aim for center mass. It is much harder to accurately hit a smaller body part like a leg, which could increase the likelihood of innocent people being hurt. 

As it should be. The point of shooting is to stop that threat from being a threat. People need to stop watching stupid tv where they think someone really good with a gun has a choice in where the bullet lands. The vast majority only have a general location accuracy for that person’s center of location. And that’s when the object is not moving and they have time to set up the shot. 
 

And I don’t care if they are a professional sharp shooter and hunter. Seriously the odds of a spur of the moment shooter purposely aiming and actually hitting the leg or arm/hand of a moving target is low enough to not even be a reasonable expectation. And that’s true of someone way way way more trained than the average cop. 

[pinball]

5 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

 

You said at some point the victim became the aggressor. That same logic was rejected by jurors in FL. I think the LEO here did what he was trained to do. I also think the training is generally sus and the laws WRT stand your ground send a very different message to civilians. You can defend yourself, at your home or if someone comes for you, with a gun or a knife. That’s legal. You don’t magically become the aggressor because you’re armed and the original aggressor is not. We’ve already seen that logic tested (tables turning) and jurors rejected it. 

Yeah, that’s not what I said. 

[Sneezyone]

 

1 hour ago, pinball said:

Most “stand your ground” laws would not be in play if the stand-your-grounder is chasing the person with a weapon.

there can a point where the person stops defending himself, and starts being the aggressor.

disclaimer: I haven’t read the Ohio law so if I’m wrong, let me know

THIS PART.

[SKL]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

She was allowed to defend herself on that sidewalk too. It was the same type of personal scuffle that we see in this footage. Indeed, this was probably even more egregious because these potential assailants came to Ma’khia’s house.

Did you watch the video?  She ran up to the other girl with a knife while the cops were standing right there.  The other girl was not a threat to her in any imaginable way, in that moment.  It's not "stand your ground" if you're retaliating for something that happened at some time in the past.

I haven't read the Ohio law, but a summary of it suggests you have to believe you have no other way out besides violent force.  The change is a shift in the burden of proof.  Instead of having to prove "I did x in self-defense," it's the prosecutor's burden to prove "you didn't do x in self-defense."  The behavior of the girl here is in no way an example of that.

[kokotg]

14 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

Except that all over the world kids with knives DO get killed by police. 

 

 

We can't pretend the situation is the same everywhere. According to this chart, there were 3 people killed by law enforcement in the UK in 2019 (since the UK has been singled out a couple of times here as a place where a lot of killings with knives happen). 1146 for the same year in the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_by_country

[Sneezyone]

3 minutes ago, SKL said:

Did you watch the video?  She ran up to the other girl with a knife while the cops were standing right there.  The other girl was not a threat to her in any imaginable way, in that moment.  It's not "stand your ground" if you're retaliating for something that happened at some time in the past.

I haven't read the Ohio law, but a summary of it suggests you have to believe you have no other way out besides violent force.  The change is a shift in the burden of proof.  Instead of having to prove "I did x in self-defense," it's the prosecutor's burden to prove "you didn't do x in self-defense."  The behavior of the girl here is in no way an example of that.

She probably didn’t even realize the popo had arrived it all happened within moments of him showing up. Ma’Khia’s reasonable belief is something juries decide tho. Someone was obvs. Afraid because LEOs were called. Again, the laws are conflicting and send very different messages. They don’t say you can defend yourself unless or until police show up.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[SKL]

1 minute ago, kokotg said:

We can't pretend the situation is the same everywhere. According to this chart, there were 3 people killed by law enforcement in the UK in 2019 (since the UK has been singled out a couple of times here as a place where a lot of killings with knives happen). 1146 for the same year in the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_by_country

The UK is not "the world over."

[SKL]

Just now, Sneezyone said:

She probably didn’t even realize the popo had arrived it all happened within moments of him showing up. Ma’Khia’s reasonable belief us something juries decide. Someone was obvs. Afraid because LEOs were called. Again, the laws are conflicting and send very different messages. They don’t say you can defend yourself unless or until police show up.

I think I heard her (or someone close to the cop's mike) "you called the cops??"  I think she knew the cops were there and was mad about it and was going to retaliate by knifing the first person who walked willingly toward the cops (the girl in pink).

This case has nothing to do with stand-your-ground.  That discussion is a big distraction IMO and it's not going to help the next similar situation.

[HeartString]

3 minutes ago, kokotg said:

We can't pretend the situation is the same everywhere. According to this chart, there were 3 people killed by law enforcement in the UK in 2019 (since the UK has been singled out a couple of times here as a place where a lot of killings with knives happen). 1146 for the same year in the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_by_country

I was curious so I counted all of the European countries to compare more in terms of population size.  I came up with less than 60.   Yay American Exceptionalism!  😞 

[kokotg]

3 minutes ago, SKL said:

The UK is not "the world over."

As I said, I picked the UK because it's been mentioned several times in this thread as a place where lots of people are killed with knives. It's true, there are other countries with highly militarized police forces and lots of killings by law enforcement. According to the link I posted, the US is right between Uruguay and Angola in killings per capita, just a smidge better than Sudan and Rwanda. ETA: correction, a smidge worse, I meant.

 

Edited April 22, 2021 by kokotg

[Murphy101]

Seriously. What I would like to see is the cop sue his precinct.

Because of his lack of training and gear - he has to live with the knowledge that they put him in a situation where his only option was to shoot and the result is he killed someone.

Cops need to start saying that blue lives matter enough to deserve better gear and better training so they can be better cops in their communities. 

[Sneezyone]

16 minutes ago, SKL said:

I think I heard her (or someone close to the cop's mike) "you called the cops??"  I think she knew the cops were there and was mad about it and was going to retaliate by knifing the first person who walked willingly toward the cops (the girl in pink).

This case has nothing to do with stand-your-ground.  That discussion is a big distraction IMO and it's not going to help the next similar situation.

You think but don’t know. Neither do I. That’s a lot of thinking for people in the middle of a fight. I do think, however, that you’re kidding yourself about the application of SYG laws and the hazards they create. Duty to retreat is one of the doctrines some groups have worked hard to eliminate in statutes, including in OH. If the reported 911 call included an allegation that people were breaking in, she had no duty to retreat. Do I think an LEO who shows up on scene can accurately ascertain who the aggressor is within seconds, no. I think their training is to neutralize whatever threat they perceive. But that doesn’t mean Ma’Khia actually was the aggressor or legally in the wrong. In this case, only the visiting would be assailants were in the wrong and they’re probably going to be the only ones who escape unscathed.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Sneezyone

[HeartString]

9 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

Seriously. What I would like to see is the cop sue his precinct.

Because of his lack of training and gear - he has to live with the knowledge that they put him in a situation where his only option was to shoot and the result is he killed someone.

Cops need to start saying that blue lives matter enough to deserve better gear and better training so they can be better cops in their communities. 

I think the problem is they do think they are well trained.  And so do a lot of people.  On this thread I’ve seen people say the police are highly trained.  
 

I know police and former police.  Outside of the academy or something like SWAT school the training is almost nonexistent, especially outside of the big city para-military forces like NYPD or LAPD.  They don’t have required range hours, they only have to re qualify with their weapons once a year. They receive a few one day seminars every year.  They aren’t spending days and weeks doing shoot houses.   They have 18 weeks of mostly textbook based academy training and a year being supervised by a senior officer.  Which, reminder - Derek chauvin was training someone the DAY he killed George Floyd.  

Edited April 22, 2021 by HeartString

[Harriet Vane]

48 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:

The more I read about this, the more use of force seems justified.  I wish I didn't feel that way, though.   It sounds like this girl had a rough life.     I do think four shots was excessive, but just one shot could've easily killed her, too.   I feel sorry for both girls.  

That's where I have landed on this one. I really appreciate all the people who calmly laid out the facts. 

It is possible to believe that LEOs should shoot less as a general rule and also believe that sometimes (as in this case) there is no other option. 

[kokotg]

9 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

Seriously. What I would like to see is the cop sue his precinct.

Because of his lack of training and gear - he has to live with the knowledge that they put him in a situation where his only option was to shoot and the result is he killed someone.

Cops need to start saying that blue lives matter enough to deserve better gear and better training so they can be better cops in their communities. 

There's just so much. I had a lightbulb moment the other day when someone on one of my local facebook groups talked about the need to push for affordable housing (in my very expensive suburb) so that our teachers and law enforcement can afford to live in the community they serve. That, too! (and, then, of course, the flip side is paying police enough to afford housing in the communities they serve). 

[Harriet Vane]

48 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:

The more I read about this, the more use of force seems justified.  I wish I didn't feel that way, though.   It sounds like this girl had a rough life.     I do think four shots was excessive, but just one shot could've easily killed her, too.   I feel sorry for both girls.  

That's where I have landed on this one. I really appreciate all the people who calmly laid out the facts. 

It is possible to believe that LEOs should shoot less as a general rule and also believe that sometimes (as in this case) there is no other option. 

[WildflowerMom]

1 minute ago, Harriet Vane said:

That's where I have landed on this one. I really appreciate all the people who calmly laid out the facts. 

It is possible to believe that LEOs should shoot less as a general rule and also believe that sometimes (as in this case) there is no other option. 

Agreed.  
Also, I really tried to imagine my son being threatened by someone with a knife that was inches from him.  
It's sad that it happened, but I don't think this particular shooting is a good example of police violence.  

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Stand Your Ground does not apply here as the Bryant is not facing any criminal charges.  If she were alive and facing charges,  her SYG claim would be weak (based on the video evidence we have) as she is physically engaging with someone who does not pose an immediate threat.  While it is possible the person did previously, *generally* the defense is going to be difficult to use when the person you stab is unarmed and not engaging you. With no video evidence it would come down to witness testimony where Bryant would stand a better chance of acquittal. Police arriving on the scene would also eliminate the justification for SYG in most cases except in rare occurrences where the other party is armed and still engaging when the police arrive. (Think of a simple fist fight scenario.  While you may be within your right to defend yourself with a punch, you aren't allowed to punch the guy you were fighting with 5 minutes after the cops arrive and claim you were still acting in self defense.)

The SYG claim is not relevant to the officer as he can only react to what he sees in the 10 seconds before the shooting.  Based on the body cam we see a violent confrontation in progress, and he then observes someone charging at an unarmed person with a knife.  He gave multiple verbal instructions to all and then saw someone attempting to use deadly force against an unarmed person.  The attempted use of deadly force by Bryant meets the standard criteria for the officer responding with deadly force.  Based on the body cam he seems to be too far away to intervene physically before the assault can occur, and he is likely outside of or just on the edge of effective taser range.  However, in general when protecting someone else from deadly force a taser would not be used due to its ineffectiveness at times.  Discharging his weapon is a reasonable response to prevent someone from being potentially stabbed in vital organs.  Contrary to the nonsense being displayed on twitter, he is not expected to allow the victim to be stabbed just because she is more likely to survive a stabbing than Bryant is a gunshot.

Anyone trying to compare this situation to the Martin case has very limited knowledge of that trial.

 

[Goldcrest]

18 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

Seriously. What I would like to see is the cop sue his precinct.

Because of his lack of training and gear - he has to live with the knowledge that they put him in a situation where his only option was to shoot and the result is he killed someone.

Cops need to start saying that blue lives matter enough to deserve better gear and better training so they can be better cops in their communities. 

According to the news, he is a decorated sharp shooter who is also an MP in the National Guard. He did not appear to lack in marksmanship training in any way whatsoever. 

[SKL]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

You think but don’t know. Neither do I. I do think, however, that you’re kidding yourself about the application of SYG laws and the hazards they create. Duty to retreat is one of the doctrines some groups have worked hard to eliminate in statutes, including in OH. If the reported 911 call included an allegation that people we breaking in, she had no duty to retreat. Do I think an LEO who shows up on scene can accurately ascertain who the aggressor is within seconds, no. I think their training is to neutralize whatever threat they perceive. But that doesn’t mean Ma’Khia actually was the aggressor or legally in the wrong. In this case, only the visiting would be assailants were in the wrong and they’re probably going to be the only ones who escape unscathed.

It's a fact finding matter whether Ma'Khia was the original aggressor.  That isn't something cops could know, nor could they know whether the person with the knife in the video was the person who called 911.  However, the video makes it clear clear that there was no immediate threat to Ma'Khia from the girl in pink when Ma'Khia approached her (from close to where the cop was standing).  SYG is about immediate threat, not what we say happened some minutes ago.

I think it's possible that Ma'Khia was seriously upset and panicked, and if she had a troubled past, she likely didn't get warm feelings from seeing the cops there.  She may have felt in fear on various levels.  But that has nothing to do with SYG.

If, in her mind, she was truly acting in self-defense, then it would be a question of self-defense, regardless of SYG.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

22 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

Seriously. What I would like to see is the cop sue his precinct.

Because of his lack of training and gear - he has to live with the knowledge that they put him in a situation where his only option was to shoot and the result is he killed someone.

Cops need to start saying that blue lives matter enough to deserve better gear and better training so they can be better cops in their communities. 

What training or gear do you believe he lacked?