• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

Delete

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/...adly-police-shooting-native-american-seattle/

as in the example of the deaf woodcarver http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/...adly-police-shooting-native-american-seattle/
Case goes to trial, he is convicted, instead of just getting fired, he needs to pull prison time just as anyone else would.
Gen Pop, no considerations that the common person would not get.

Good find. I hate when I can never find the conclusion of the story.
 
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/...adly-police-shooting-native-american-seattle/

as in the example of the deaf woodcarver http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/...adly-police-shooting-native-american-seattle/
Case goes to trial, he is convicted, instead of just getting fired, he needs to pull prison time just as anyone else would.
Gen Pop, no considerations that the common person would not get.

The case did not go to trial because Washington law does not view shootings by law enforcement and private citizens equally. The burden of proof under Washington law is almost insurmountable. The words "probable cause to believe" (RCW 9A.16.040) are actually in the law and it is impossible to prove what the officer believed.

The poor innocent victim here was not pure as the driven snow either. Apparently he was a falling down alcoholic and had "mental problems". I'm not saying he deserved it but he should not be portrayed as a poor, abused, down trodden, Native American artist assassinated by the pale faces like his forefathers.

http://www.seattleweekly.com/2011-02-23/news/ian-birk-why-he-wasn-t-charged-and-what-happens-next/
 
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/05/28/seattle-pays-1-5m-to-family-of-victim-of-police-shooting/
Officer Birk was not criminally charged in the shooting.

and I firmly believe, given the facts, that he stepped well outside of the law and murdered a man. He then used his badge as an excuse.
the killer needs to be imprisoned.

the report http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattle911/files/2011/02/Firearms-review-board-report.pdf

shoot.jpg
 
9A.16.040
Justifiable homicide or use of deadly force by public officer, peace officer, person aiding.
(1) Homicide or the use of deadly force is justifiable in the following cases:

(a) When a public officer is acting in obedience to the judgment of a competent court; or

(b) When necessarily used by a peace officer to overcome actual resistance to the execution of the legal process, mandate, or order of a court or officer, or in the discharge of a legal duty.

(c) When necessarily used by a peace officer or person acting under the officer's command and in the officer's aid:

(i) To arrest or apprehend a person who the officer reasonably believes has committed, has attempted to commit, is committing, or is attempting to commit a felony;

(ii) To prevent the escape of a person from a federal or state correctional facility or in retaking a person who escapes from such a facility; or

(iii) To prevent the escape of a person from a county or city jail or holding facility if the person has been arrested for, charged with, or convicted of a felony; or

(iv) To lawfully suppress a riot if the actor or another participant is armed with a deadly weapon.

(2) In considering whether to use deadly force under subsection (1)(c) of this section, to arrest or apprehend any person for the commission of any crime, the peace officer must have probable cause to believe that the suspect, if not apprehended, poses a threat of serious physical harm to the officer or a threat of serious physical harm to others. Among the circumstances which may be considered by peace officers as a "threat of serious physical harm" are the following:

(a) The suspect threatens a peace officer with a weapon or displays a weapon in a manner that could reasonably be construed as threatening; or

(b) There is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed any crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm.

Under these circumstances deadly force may also be used if necessary to prevent escape from the officer, where, if feasible, some warning is given.

(3) A public officer or peace officer shall not be held criminally liable for using deadly force without malice and with a good faith belief that such act is justifiable pursuant to this section.

(4) This section shall not be construed as:

(a) Affecting the permissible use of force by a person acting under the authority of RCW 9A.16.020 or 9A.16.050; or

(b) Preventing a law enforcement agency from adopting standards pertaining to its use of deadly force that are more restrictive than this section.


[1986 c 209 § 2; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.16.040.]
 
The problem with the wording above is that if a person waves a pocket knife in a threatening manner the cop can shoot them... (Section 2 a) Even if they are 30 feet away???

Yup.

That is a legislative problem not an enforcement one.

Hell I would like to see the "Equal Protection Clause" applied here.
 
Well, I guess we've beat this dead horse enough.

Not one police officer has come forward with suggestions on how to improve their image or try to convince us that we have nothing to fear from them. The only responses so far have been to bash us for not kissing their collective asses.
 
Those interested in the shooting of the deaf guy might be interested in this link and the video with the footage from the other police car. http://jonathanturley.org/2011/05/28/seattle-pays-1-5m-to-family-of-victim-of-police-shooting/
It's fine to defend certain things and give the benefit of the doubt. But to defend the indefensible....

At 4:01 his fellow officer tells him "good job". Plus TONS of cops show up in the first 2 or 3 minutes but I never see an ambulance. Just saying. I also do believe the knife was open in the beginning as he was carving from what I could tell, still it was a legal knife.

If you click on the report and read the findings it's pretty interesting.
 
Well, I guess we've beat this dead horse enough.

Not one police officer has come forward with suggestions on how to improve their image or try to convince us that we have nothing to fear from them. The only responses so far have been to bash us for not kissing their collective asses.

cartman.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom