I don't usually post these, but this one is bad...let's hear the justification

[dunkel]

http://mdjonline.com/view/full_stor...an-s-car?instance=secondary_story_left_column

Oops, no gun was found. Was that the obstruction charge? The guy had his GWL but "refused" to hand over the gun that he didn't have?

 

[dunkel]

http://cumming.patch.com/articles/c...ot-cumming-man-advised-to-use-better-judgment

More about the officer. They day once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action. What's four times? He needs to use "better judgement"? I guess that's one way to put it.

 

[unclear.six]

I'm sure there will be an LEO posting in here soon clearing things up, obviously they must have had sufficient probable cause to justify their actions and that there are always two sides to every story...

 

[georgia357]

I'm gonna withhold comments until I hear Matt Murdock's side of the story. Always two sides of every story.

 

[unclear.six]

http://cumming.patch.com/articles/c...ot-cumming-man-advised-to-use-better-judgment

More about the officer. They day once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action. What's four times? He needs to use "better judgement"? I guess that's one way to put it.

Probably just needs a few more sensitivity training classes and therapy...heck they should give him a taser, that way he wouldn't have to shoot people.

 

[Sagan]

Ok, not having seen the other side of this. I do have to agree with one of the posters... If the officer's story is true and they were locked in close combat, who in their right mind would decide to draw and fire their sidearm 6 times??? He had absolutely no fear of hitting his fellow officer? Really? Or is it because they were not as close as the officer's report states?

 

[tlw1179]

hit a man 39 times in the leg with a baton after he pepper sprayed him! 10 days after the Admin leave is when he shot murdock . . . i'd say this particular LEO needs more than therapy and paid leave!!

 

[dunkel]

I believe it said "physically engaged"...not that he was actually fighting the cops. If he was actually fighting, wouldn't there have been other charges?

Sure would be nice if the audio/video came out. But I'm not holding my breath.

 

[GDAWG1958]

 

[Sagan]

I believe it said "physically engaged"...not that he was actually fighting the cops. If he was actually fighting, wouldn't there have been other charges?

Sure would be nice if the audio/video came out. But I'm not holding my breath.

You are correct. They used the term physically engaged. I think that makes my point even better. Doesn't physically engaged mean touching? I sure as hell don't want someone who's review said "needs to work on firearm scores" (or something close to that), shooting at someone I am touching. Something sure sounds fishy, but we are only getting one side, since the other is being tight lipped.