Cops acquited after shooting ONE black man 50 times
As a black man, I have so much faith in the system! 💃
Cops acquited after shooting ONE black man 50 times
As a black man, I have so much faith in the system! 💃
Re: Cops acquited after shooting ONE black man 50 times
Originally posted by chithappensAs a black man, I have so much faith in the system! 💃
Trying to bring race into it like that is pretty dumb, seeing only one of the firers was white and the officer that began the gunfire was black.
Meanwhile, your cheap sensationalism in the title is ridiculous and I will edit. he was NOT shot fifty times, that is the number of shots that were fired in the confrontation. This is how ridiculous rumours get started. He was shot FOUR times.
Frankly it seems it was impossible for the prosecution to make a case here with such godawful witnesses. It had to be established that the police acted maliciously which I think cannot be done.
Re: Re: Cops acquited after shooting ONE black man 50 times
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Trying to bring race into it like that is pretty dumb, seeing only one of the firers was white and the officer that began the gunfire was black.Meanwhile, your cheap sensationalism in the title is ridiculous and I will edit. he was NOT shot fifty times, that is the number of shots that were fired in the confrontation. This is how ridiculous rumours get started. He was shot FOUR times.
Frankly it seems it was impossible for the prosecution to make a case here with such godawful witnesses. It had to be established that the police acted maliciously which I think cannot be done.
1) Would a cop fire at a white person 50 times? I have NEVER heard of that.
2) If 1 occurs, would they be acquited? Most likely not, but then again, cops never do this to white people.
Re: Re: Re: Cops acquited after shooting ONE black man 50 times
Originally posted by chithappens
1) Would a cop fire at a white person 50 times? I have NEVER heard of that.
They have.
Originally posted by chithappens2) If 1 occurs, would they be acquited? Most likely not, but then again, cops never do this to white people.
They do.
Trying to use newspapers sometimes printing lies as justifcation for chill posting a completely inaccurate title is quite strikingly silly.
Your other comment is just trolling. Don't do it again.
Chill- are you saying that the black cop had been brainwashed into only firing at other black people? Are youy seriously suggesting that if the target had been white, he would have thought "Oh, he's not my race, so I will not shoot him"?
This whole thing could not have had less to do with race.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Trying to use newspapers sometimes printing lies as justifcation for chill posting a completely inaccurate title is quite strikingly silly.Your other comment is just trolling. Don't do it again.
Chill- are you saying that the black cop had been brainwashed into only firing at other black people? Are youy seriously suggesting that if the target had been white, he would have thought "Oh, he's not my race, so I will not shoot him"?
This whole thing could not have had less to do with race.
I said cop. Not white cop. Not black cop.
Cops in the city do not give a **** about anyone who is poor, but it is a known fact that police brutality is a huge problem when dealing with black people.
One of the other guys, who did not die, was shot 19 times. That is excessive by ANY standard.
My point is the justice system letting it go. If you look into the entire story, no one has a solid story but shooting 50 times at 3 men in a car is stupid. They were outgunned, outmanned. I understand a lesser sentence, but no charges go through? Complete bullshit
Originally posted by Ushgarak
This whole thing could not have had less to do with race.
That's not quite true. If they had all been the same colour it would have had less to do with race. If only slightly.
Anyways, since I am not going to read a freakin' article on the case I will just have to assume that chit is right and the kkk ****** hating judge chose to let them go on account that they shot a negro.
Originally posted by chithappens
My point is the justice system letting it go. If you look into the entire story, no one has a solid story but shooting 50 times at 3 men in a car is stupid. They were outgunned, outmanned. I understand a lesser sentence, but no charges go through? Complete bullshit
Where the three men in the car shooting back?
Originally posted by Robtard
Where the three men in the car shooting back?
No. This is the synopsis (in my words):
Nov 25, 2006: Guzman, one of the three with Bell, had an argument with a girl in the club. According to an undercover cop, he threatened to go get a gun to shoot the girl. Bell and the other two go outside and get into a car. They are confronted by an undercover cop and told to put their hands up (at this point, cops say they identified themselves as cops; witnesses say otherwise). Bell, who was later found to be drunk, accelerated and hit an unmarked police van. After this, the cops opened fire without a prior warning, according to witnesses and Guzman.
After a thorough report, police confirmed that no other weapons besides those of the officers were fired at the scene.
(a fourth man, assumed to have a gun, was mentioned in the preliminary police report but a law enforcement officer later said no fourth man was present which brought up a lot of questions.)
That's all the important stuff.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
It possibly was excessivem though it is easy to comment from the sidlines with no actual knowledge of the events- especially as they were firing at a car, not any individuals.Anyway, whether you said 'black cop or not', my point still stands.
You should look into it rather than contradicting yourself. Makes you look like an ass.
Besides, I don't understand your point at all: Shooting at a car, with people in it, is no different than shooting a guy in open space. 50 shots in an enclosed area is actually worse. Fish in a barrel, so to speak.
Originally posted by chithappens
You should look into it rather than contradicting yourself. Makes you look like an ass.Besides, I don't understand your point at all: Shooting at a car, with people in it, is no different than shooting a guy in open space. 50 shots in an enclosed area is actually worse. Fish in a barrel, so to speak.
If you don't understand me it is only because you are not thinking clearly. Nor did anything I say contradict myself so who is the ass?
You say he was shot 19 times, but it is vitally important to give the context. They did not stand over a guy who was shot and repeatedly and pointlessly put bullets into him.
It just so happens they pumped a lot of bullets into the car and a certain proportion of them hit that guy.
Btw, saying that the police gave no warning 'according to witnesses' is also you being selective- because according to other witnesses, they did.
The police contention is that they were convinced they were preventing a shooting and that they were in fear for their lives. That is a viable defence. The prosecution has to PROVE that they were acting maliciously to get a conviction.
Things have to be established beyond reasonnable doubt, remember? That is impossible here. The witnesses are contradictory and there is no hard evidence that helps.