Teenager Shot Dead for Holding a Wii Remote

[senordesol]

You know, I'd get it if it were an airsoft weapon (particularly since people like to paint the tips black for some reason), but how do you go to that kind of panic state?

It seems to me that in the amount it time it took to draw and fire, he could have literally been holding anything; and she'd still have shot him. I'm all for waiting for more info and hearing what really happened, but as it stands, it sounds like this woman has no business in a police uniform and -since her inability to respond appropriately cost someone his life- should see some time in prison.

Obviously their warrant wasn't a no-knock so they clearly didn't think their target was all that dangerous. He was just on probation, for heaven's sake.

Just sad. I'm sure the officer is devastated over this, but just being sad isn't good enough. This appears to be a dereliction unbecoming and criminal.

 

[tippy2k2]

You won't take any information that isn't confirmed? Why are you even discussing this at all then since NOTHING is confirmed except that the teenager is dead and the cop shot him.

I think that the cops are staying silent because there is nothing positive they can say but if you want to wait for an official statement, why be here?

Uninformed opinions are the only opinions allowed on this board?

That's why I'm here; to remind people that we literally don't know shit about what actually happened here. Every single person here is going off of rumor and heresy (and yes, myself included; it's why I haven't shouted how innocent she is). I'm just here to remind people that maybe waiting for some actual info would be a good idea before calling for the officer to rot in jail her entire life (something a poster above has called for).

As to why they're silent, I'll respond to you and Hidden with the same message:

That must explain why there was no sort of investigation and the lady was put on administrative leave.The police dept confirms the story so I don't see how there's any missing facts.

There IS an official investigation going on right now.

"The case has been turned over the Georgia Bureau of Investigation." The officer is put on administrative leave because that's what happens in any case where a cop had to use deadly force and she will likely stay that way until the investigation has concluded.

They're silent because you don't talk about an ongoing case. Again, that's standard police procedure.

 

[WeepingAngels]

You won't take any information that isn't confirmed? Why are you even discussing this at all then since NOTHING is confirmed except that the teenager is dead and the cop shot him.

I think that the cops are staying silent because there is nothing positive they can say but if you want to wait for an official statement, why be here?

Uninformed opinions are the only opinions allowed on this board?

That's why I'm here; to remind people that we literally don't know shit about what actually happened here. Every single person here is going off of rumor and heresy (and yes, myself included; it's why I haven't shouted how innocent she is). I'm just here to remind people that maybe waiting for some actual info would be a good idea before calling for the officer to rot in jail her entire life (something a poster above has called for).

As to why they're silent, I'll respond to you and Hidden with the same message:

That must explain why there was no sort of investigation and the lady was put on administrative leave.The police dept confirms the story so I don't see how there's any missing facts.

There IS an official investigation going on right now.

"The case has been turned over the Georgia Bureau of Investigation." The officer is put on administrative leave because that's what happens in any case where a cop had to use deadly force and she will likely stay that way until the investigation has concluded.

They're silent because you don't talk about an ongoing case. Again, that's standard police procedure.

Well whatever, you go on being holier than thou and defending this cop even though you have no CONFIRMED information that makes this a justifiable kill. All the information we have makes the cop 100% to blame. There is literally no information that makes this a justifiable kill. Even the idea that this kid had a BB Gun doesn't justify this kill.

Are you expecting the cops to come out and say "the kid had an M240 Bravo and he was laying behind it threatening to light them up"?

 

[tippy2k2]

Well whatever, you go on being holier than thou and defending this cop even though you have no CONFIRMED information that makes this a justifiable kill. All the information we have makes the cop 100% to blame. There is literally no information that makes this a justifiable kill. Even the idea that this kid had a BB Gun doesn't justify this kill.

Are you expecting the cops to come out and say "the kid had an M240 Bravo and he was laying behind it threatening to light them up"?

Holier than though? Did I miss the part where I'm lording over how insightful I am? Hell, did I miss the part where I even took a freaking side in this debate (Because feel free to look over my post; all I've asked is for people to stop jumping to conclusions).

I thought I was being pretty reasonable when I thought that condemning an officer to rot in jail her entire life based no reliable information but I guess not.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Well whatever, you go on being holier than thou and defending this cop even though you have no CONFIRMED information that makes this a justifiable kill. All the information we have makes the cop 100% to blame. There is literally no information that makes this a justifiable kill. Even the idea that this kid had a BB Gun doesn't justify this kill.

Are you expecting the cops to come out and say "the kid had an M240 Bravo and he was laying behind it threatening to light them up"?

Holier than though? Did I miss the part where I'm lording over how insightful I am? Hell, did I miss the part where I even took a freaking side in this debate (Because feel free to look over my post; all I've asked is for people to stop jumping to conclusions).

I thought I was being pretty reasonable when I thought that condemning an officer to rot in jail her entire life based no reliable information but I guess not.

You seem to have this idea that your opinions are the only ones that are informed. I would call that holier than thou.

Also, this information that you are dismissing is coming from eye witnesses. It is the same information that will be used to investigate this tragedy. Unless you think the eye witnesses are lying and that the investigation will reveal that this kid really was to blame then I don't see why you are dismissing the only information available.

It is also disturbing to me that the only information you will accept is information that comes from the side responsible for the shooting.

 

[tippy2k2]

You seem to have this idea that your opinions are the only ones that are informed. I would call that holier than thou.

Also, this information that you are dismissing is coming from eye witnesses. It is the same information that will be used to investigate this tragedy. Unless you think the eye witnesses are lying and that the investigation will reveal that this kid really was to blame then I don't see why you are dismissing the only information available.

It is also disturbing to me that the only information you will accept is information that comes from the side responsible for the shooting.

But I am not dismissing any confirmed info. The lawyer on the family side is saying that stuff (he says he's getting it from eyewitnesses but an actual eyewitness named in the story is conflicting his info; so between an actual witness talking to the news crew and a biased source of info, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the actual witness). Someone is wrong here (or more than likely, it's in-between).

And again, I have not defended (or attacked) either party here. I have not taken a side. You seem dead-set that because I'm not agreeing with you that I must be agreeing with them. I'm not. I'm saying that we have no info (and the info we do have is conflicted) and any judgement anyone makes right now is going to be uninformed because we don't have any info.

At this point, we're just going to keep going around in circles so I'm going to bow out of the conversation.

 

[WeepingAngels]

You seem to have this idea that your opinions are the only ones that are informed. I would call that holier than thou.

Also, this information that you are dismissing is coming from eye witnesses. It is the same information that will be used to investigate this tragedy. Unless you think the eye witnesses are lying and that the investigation will reveal that this kid really was to blame then I don't see why you are dismissing the only information available.

It is also disturbing to me that the only information you will accept is information that comes from the side responsible for the shooting.

But I am not dismissing any confirmed info. The lawyer on the family side is saying that stuff (he says he's getting it from eyewitnesses but an actual eyewitness named in the story is conflicting his info; so between an actual witness talking to the news crew and a biased source of info, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the actual witness). Someone is wrong here (or more than likely, it's in-between).

And again, I have not defended (or attacked) either party here. I have not taken a side. You seem dead-set that because I'm not agreeing with you that I must be agreeing with them. I'm not. I'm saying that we have no info (and the info we do have is conflicted) and any judgement anyone makes right now is going to be uninformed because we don't have any info.

At this point, we're just going to keep going around in circles so I'm going to bow out of the conversation.

Since you don't think we should be talking about this at all because we have no "police certified" information, then it makes sense that you should bow out and let the rest of us discuss the information that we do have.

No matter which information you like better, the cop is 100% to blame for this shooting.

 

[lacktheknack]

You seem to have this idea that your opinions are the only ones that are informed. I would call that holier than thou.

He just said that even he didn't have all the info.

Also, this information that you are dismissing is coming from eye witnesses. It is the same information that will be used to investigate this tragedy. Unless you think the eye witnesses are lying and that the investigation will reveal that this kid really was to blame then I don't see why you are dismissing the only information available.

It is also disturbing to me that the only information you will accept is information that comes from the side responsible for the shooting.

False false false. Why do you read this stuff into it?

He said we don't have information. This is true.

He ALSO said he wasn't siding with the cops (which you conveniently glanced over), because he doesn't know what's going on. And neither do you.

The most reliable witness is the neighbour, because the family of the victim are obviously going to say things that make the attacker look awful (how far they go varies according to their ethics), and the cops are going to leave it as low-detail as possible. The fact that YOU only want to take the info from the highly emotional and angry witnesses is even more disturbing than siding with the cops.

You don't know if the teen acted aggressively, you don't know whether it appeared that he was holding a real gun, you don't know what the cop said, you don't know what will happen to her now. You don't have enough info to decry one side or the other. You. Don't. Know.

But hey, why let that get in the way of a good cop-bashing, right?

how many cops have to "overreact" and kill someone before people stop making excuses for cases like this?

A proportionally significant number.

As is, the number of mistakes made by police and the number of people killed in a country of nearly 300 million is extremely low. We're human, mistakes are made, and the fact that we've had a single-digit number of fatal mistakes so far this year is fantastic.

No matter how paranoid this bloody forum wants to be, it's unfounded.

 

[Compatriot Block]

You seem to have this idea that your opinions are the only ones that are informed. I would call that holier than thou.

He just said that even he didn't have all the info.

Also, this information that you are dismissing is coming from eye witnesses. It is the same information that will be used to investigate this tragedy. Unless you think the eye witnesses are lying and that the investigation will reveal that this kid really was to blame then I don't see why you are dismissing the only information available.

It is also disturbing to me that the only information you will accept is information that comes from the side responsible for the shooting.

False false false. Why do you read this stuff into it?

He said we don't have information. This is true.

He ALSO said he wasn't siding with the cops (which you conveniently glanced over), because he doesn't know what's going on. And neither do you.

The most reliable witness is the neighbour, because the family of the victim are obviously going to say things that make the attacker look awful (how far they go varies according to their ethics), and the cops are going to leave it as low-detail as possible. The fact that YOU only want to take the info from the highly emotional and angry witnesses is even more disturbing than siding with the cops.

You don't know if the teen acted aggressively, you don't know whether it appeared that he was holding a real gun, you don't know what the cop said, you don't know what will happen to her now. You don't have enough info to decry one side or the other. You. Don't. Know.

But hey, why let that get in the way of a good cop-bashing, right?

how many cops have to "overreact" and kill someone before people stop making excuses for cases like this?

A proportionally significant number.

As is, the number of mistakes made by police and the number of people killed in a country of nearly 300 million is extremely low. We're human, mistakes are made, and the fact that we've had a single-digit number of fatal mistakes so far this year is fantastic.

No matter how paranoid this bloody forum wants to be, it's unfounded.

As someone with multiple former police family members, it makes me happy to see that whenever a thread like this pops up and I want to respond bitterly and rashly, you've already posted something I agree with.

I'm never going to pretend like all cops are saints, but I just cannot for the life of me understand the rage that some people seem to feel towards all police officers at the drop of a hat.

 

[NiPah]

Let's not get our news from Youtube channels or fringe websites with obvious bias, it's like getting a science lesson from the ICP (fuckin' magnets amirite?).
There is due process here, yes there needs to be a healthy concern for police corruption but also have some faith in our trial system. There is a lot of evidence to go over (and most will not be made public until after a trial or the DA decides not to pursue), just because the state doesn't deny something doesn't mean they are confirming it either, thats common knowledge.

Also of course the family lawyer is going to be biased, it's his job to sway public opinion and get the case to a jury. Also he can certainly lie, getting the case to trial is his number one goal at the moment so take what he says with a grain of salt.

I guess what I'm trying to say is just be smart about this, we're all educated people here so keep a level head.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Hey lacktheknack. Why do you dismiss the only information we have and choose to just trust the trigger happy cop?

Seriously, why do you automatically think that the family is lying? If it happened to your family and you were an eye witness would you lie about it?

Even if we go with the idea that he had a BB gun, is it really police procedure to just start shooting? Are they trained to kill you for holding a gun in your own house? Aren't they trained to identify themselves? There is no excuse for her behavior and like I asked the other poster (and he never responded), are you expecting the investigation to reveal that the kid was instead to blame? If not then where is your justification to automatically assume the family is lying?

 

[lvramire]

Things I think that are fair to say (that I think most people would agree with?) :

- More information needed all-around. Conflicting information about a BB-Gun/Wii-mote, conflicting information from eye-witnesses etc.

- The source-site seems more than a little biased. Now, just because information is coming from a potentially-biased source doesn't make it invalid. Just something that needs to be scrutinized a little more.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Let's not get our news from Youtube channels or fringe websites with obvious bias, it's like getting a science lesson from the ICP (fuckin' magnets amirite?).

This news is not limited to YouTube. How ridiculous for you to criticize it for such a silly reason. Actually, I posted a thread on this, with a link to the news source, yesterday. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.842885-Teen-shot-dead-by-police-for-holding-a-Wii-Remote

There is due process here, yes there needs to be a healthy concern for police corruption but also have some faith in our trial system. There is a lot of evidence to go over (and most will not be made public until after a trial or the DA decides not to pursue), just because the state doesn't deny something doesn't mean they are confirming it either, thats common knowledge.

So...you don't think we should discuss this until after a trial?

Also of course the family lawyer is going to be biased, it's his job to sway public opinion and get the case to a jury. Also he can certainly lie, getting the case to trial is his number one goal at the moment so take what he says with a grain of salt.

Just because he can lie doesn't mean that he is. You assuming he is lying just because it condemns the police shows your own bias.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Since when does opening a DOOR warrant being shot to death?It's not like the kid was a wanted criminal or anything.

Since a cop was doing the shooting.

 

[Roxas1359]

Since when does opening a DOOR warrant being shot to death?It's not like the kid was a wanted criminal or anything.

The lady was a probation officer, checking in on the person's father while serving a police warrant since the father had violated probation, not complying with your probation officer is a violation of your probation and is punishable with jail time.

 

[lacktheknack]

Hey lacktheknack. Why do you dismiss the only information we have and choose to just trust the trigger happy cop?

I liked the part where you assumed I was siding with the cops, instead of just attacking people who just want to attack cops.

Why do you dismiss the likely statement that it was an honest tragic accident, and instead listen to to the emotional and furious witnesses?

Better yet, why not listen to the neighbour, as I said we should?

Seriously, why do you automatically think that the family is lying? If it happened to your family and you were an eye witness would you lie about it?

I've already said why.

In that moment? Yes, I might. Because unlike 99% of this website, I understand that humans are emotional and non-logical creatures.

Even if we go with the idea that he had a BB gun, is it really police procedure to just start shooting?

No. She needed to have taken longer to assess the object. However, it's no stretch to imagine that she could have instantly panicked on seeing the gun, seeing how she's human and that's literally the worst case scenario.

Are they trained to kill you for holding a gun in your own house?

If you point if at them, yes.

Aren't they trained to identify themselves?

Ten bucks says they did. There's no adequate reason for her not to.

There is no excuse for her behavior and like I asked the other poster (and he never responded), are you expecting the investigation to reveal that the kid was instead to blame? If not then where is your justification to automatically assume the family is lying?

I assume the angry people are bending the truth because that is what they do. See: The propaganda of every revolution ever. Also see: Every petty court case involving someone doing something in rage - they'll lie every which way to make the person who pissed them off look guilty.

Anyways, regardless of what the kid was doing, she'll be heavily reprimanded, as she should be. The severity of the reprimand will be proportional to the incident: If it was a Wii-Mote, she's probably out of the force and will face legal action, as you want. If it was a realistic BB gun, then she'll be heavily demoted.

That's what you want, is it not?

Source: Family in force.