US Police killing of 13 year old Adam Toledo

Overheal

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I had a question here, but you answered it below. You would prefer the cop to die over other people. You value other peoples lives over the cops.



He was acting on facts available on the night, which were an armed suspect. That's it. After the fact doesn't matter at the time, and he acted as per policy at the time.



So you want a cop to get shot before they can shoot back. You put the value of the lives of cops, also humans with family at home, below that of criminals (he was 13 with a gun in a public place caught up in an act of shots fired, that is a crime, he is a criminal). Nice to know. Hope you never need the police.



Correct, but putting yourself in a situation where you could be shot does. And the suspect did that.



No, the cop only had information of a suspect matching the description being potentially armed. If you want to use the after the facts, as you like to, then it was obvious he was armed. Doesn't matter if the gun was empty. People have already given facts on response times in shootings, and you've already agreed that the cop should wait to be shot before shooting back (more or less).



Yes he didn't say turn around. But the suspect did, while dropping his weapon, which at the angle he was to the cop could correctly be mistaken as lifting the arm the gun is in in order to fire back. Why didn't the suspect stop before then? Why didn't he throw the gun while running? All the blame going on the cop, none on the suspect...



So the cop didn't tell him to not turn around, so it makes it ok to do an action the cop didn't shout out? Again, blaming the cop and not the suspect for his OWN actions, from prior all the way up to the shooting.



Continue as before. He followed procedure. Bad outcome, but wouldn't have happened if:

- kid didn't have a gun
- kid didn't run from the cops
- kid wasn't out at 2-3am with a known criminal who was firing his gun without care
- kid didn't turn when not asked to
- etc

Many things could have prevented this, and most of them fall on the kid. Who at the time wasn't a kid, but a potentially armed suspect.

More mental gymnastics to avoid making then cop take responsibility for murdering an unarmed suspect.

He saw the hands. He saw them empty. And then he still shot him.

I know another “boy” out with a gun on the street. Given water, not fatally shot. And to that all we have are more mental gymnastics arguing the boy would have been better served to brandish a rifle than a handgun.

Fandymo

Effects wrote: »

He wasn't a known gang member, that's just unsubstantiated rumours, circling after his death.

Chicago police union chief said on CNN that he was a known member of the Latin Kings.

Fandymo

GreeBo wrote: »

To those defending the cop, do you think he should face any sanctions at all or should be free to continue policing as before?

He should be free to work as soon as he feels up to returning.

Manic Moran

GreeBo wrote: »

I thought it was obvious, but the point is that a teenager who walked the streets shooting and killing people wasnt shot and killed by police whereas another teenager who didnt shoot or kill anybody and was obeying the orders of police was.
Does it seem correct to you?

I suspect much of the reason that Rittenhouse was not shot by police was because at the time that police saw him, he did not appear to be posing an immediate threat to anyone.

Overheal

Fandymo wrote: »

Chicago police union chief said on CNN that he was a known member of the Latin Kings.

The Police Union President isn't in the Chain of Custody for this case, is he?

Do you have access to some quote of his that I do not? All I have is his initial claim he was known as a Latin Kings member. I have not seen any corroboration.

Bearing in mind, the Chicago Fraternal Order of Police President John Catanzara is hardly a character reference:

Earlier this year he was stripped of his pay and suspended from the force for filing a false police report on former police Supt. Eddie Johnson for his participation in an anti-violence march. Catanzara also received complaints about social media posts where he suggested killing people and called Muslim people “savages” and that “they all deserve a bullet.” He defended the posts saying he was referring to cop killers and people who mutilate women in the name of Islam.

https://www.mediaite.com/crime/president-of-chicago-police-union-says-shooting-of-adam-toledo-was-100-justified-that-officers-actions-were-actually-heroic/

So I'll ask again: anything other than clearly partisan hearsay or unverifiable tweets to "lil homicide" that actually evidence he was a gang member?

Overheal

Manic Moran wrote: »

I suspect much of the reason that Rittenhouse was not shot by police was because at the time that police saw him, he did not appear to be posing an immediate threat to anyone.

And Adam Toledo was running towards.... ?

beauf

Overheal wrote: »

And Adam Toledo was running towards.... ?

Where do 13yr olds with guns run to in the middle of night. No idea.

Where?

Effects

GreeBo wrote: »

Well if you can tell me what he was convicted of then maybe I will.

I don't see why you are arguing about this shooting in that case.

The officer in this case did nothing wrong. He hasn't been convicted of shooting or killing Adam Toledo. You need to give the guy a break for doing is job and making the streets of Chicago safer.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Overheal

beauf wrote: »

Where do 13yr olds with guns run to in the middle of night. No idea.

Where?

Could be anywhere.

So, since we cannot say beyond reasonable doubt that he was running off to harm anyone...

Overheal

beauf wrote: »

Where do 13yr olds with guns run to in the middle of night. No idea.

Where?

Off to hunt deer or other wild fauna if you're of the sport. But seriously.

Funny thought: perhaps more kids are carrying guns to feel safe in Chicago because of all the gun violence. Vicious how these systemic problems happen. Perhaps people are ganging up because they don't feel protected or represented by their GI police force.

Pa ElGrande

Tell me how wrote: »

Yea because neighbouring states including Tennessee have notoriously lax gun laws and there are reports that up to 80% of guns used in criminal activity in Chicago have been purchased legally elsewhere.

The availability of guns is not the controlling factor when you take into account population density of the city, the racial composition, immigration levels, income levels, education levels of those doing the shooting how does the murder rate, and/or shootings in Chicago compare with similar cities across the United States? It is not even the most dangerous city in the United States crime wise.

They did have some success initially using a violence interrupter program for a few years, but it has been waning somewhat recently.

beauf

So the problem isn't a 13yr being at a shooting in the middle of the night with a gun. It's just normal personal safety in kids in Chicago.

I guess the cops finding armed 13yrs in the middle of the night should just let them be. Because it's more important to protect the kid with gun, than the people they might shoot.

beauf

The US has deep complex problems.

Gun culture and police brutality is one of a wide range of complex problems.

Pa ElGrande

beauf wrote: »

So the problem isn't a 13yr being at a shooting in the middle of the night with a gun. It's just normal personal safety in kids in Chicago.

I guess the cops finding armed 13yrs in the middle of the night should just let them be. Because it's more important to protect the kid with gun, than the people they might shoot.

Each situation depends on context. Here is another incident from a few years ago that you might review. The police officer was sentenced for murder and the other officers were subsequently fired.


Former Chicago police officer Jason Van Dyke sentenced to 81 months in prison for Laquan McDonald murder

Manic Moran

Overheal wrote: »

And Adam Toledo was running towards.... ?

He wasn't. Again. The difference is that at the time of police encounter, one was perceived to be an immediate threat to safety, the other was not. It is the bright line between a justifiable shooting and a non-justifiable one.

Tell me how

beauf wrote: »

So the problem isn't a 13yr being at a shooting in the middle of the night with a gun. It's just normal personal safety in kids in Chicago.

I guess the cops finding armed 13yrs in the middle of the night should just let them be. Because it's more important to protect the kid with gun, than the people they might shoot.

Do you think there's room for anything else at all between the 2 extremes of just letting him be and killing him as he complied with an instruction?

Is there anything else that could have happened?

beauf

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

Each situation depends on context...

..and yet people keep posting examples with entirely different contexts. ... One might think they feel the need to change the context to better suit the agenda...

beauf

Tell me how wrote: »

Do you think there's room for anything else at all between the 2 extremes of just letting him be and killing him as he complied with an instruction?

Is there anything else that could have happened?

Not really. If a chase ensues a confrontation is far more likely. If it's a confrontation with guns someone getting shot is also far more likely. The only sure way to avoid that is not to pursue.

Unless you think it's going to have some Hollywood ending like the movies. Like the A Team where they shoot in all directions and miss absolutely everything.

Overheal

Manic Moran wrote: »

He wasn't. Again. The difference is that at the time of police encounter, one was perceived to be an immediate threat to safety, the other was not. It is the bright line between a justifiable shooting and a non-justifiable one.

“Immediate threat.”

Can you elaborate on that? When did this immediacy begin and end?

Far less lethal use of force options have been presented. Why then is it justifiable to escalate an encounter to lethal dispatch of a suspect in a legal framework where all suspects are innocent until proven guilty? And ultimately, is an unarmed suspect an immediate threat insomuch that their execution is justified - and therefore yes, execution being the correct term for it? An unarmed suspect who has become compliant?

Danonino.

.....


Why are people trying to compare cases so different to what happened in hopes to justify or condemn the Cop/Toledo’s actions?

Did people even watch the body cam footage? How it happened and why the Cop felt there was an immediate threat? Or did people just read the OP, see that Toledo was ‘unarmed when shot’.

Like seriously. Eight tenths of a second. From when an armed suspect ignoring instruction and running with a gun in his hand, stops and turns rapidly raising his hands.

Of course WE know he had tossed the weapon along the opposite side of the fence and his hands were empty. We know because of the body cam footage and the ability to watch it back. Not have to make that decision in under a second.

Tragic and sad yes, shot and killed unarmed reads so damning but ignores the events leading up and the less than a second call that had to be made. Some of the stuff I’ve read about this has been off the wall crazy:

“ ...And if he did have a weapon on him at that moment, what he needed was support and safety — help to address why he would feel the need to supposedly brandish a firearm...”

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.refinery29.com/amp/en-gb/2021/04/10428372/adam-toledo-police-shooting-bodycam-details

... I mean. If that moment wasn’t a police confrontation at 2:30am in a dark alley I’d agree.

BanditLuke

This kid was a piece of work, his friends called him Lil homicide for goodness sake but much like Floyd the mob will want the police officer hung, drawn and quartered.

biko

Overheal wrote: »

Both Americans

Both armed

Both suspected of murder

Zero overlap? Lol

Americans? That's your overlap? You can also add both are humans.
As for Adam being under suspicion of murder, do you have a source for that?

Gangs are known for letting children carry and stash their guns since the kids are subject to lower penalties.
This is probably the case here too.

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

So I'll ask again: anything other than clearly partisan hearsay or unverifiable tweets to "lil homicide" that actually evidence he was a gang member?

What difference does it make if Toledo was a gang member. He wasn't shot for being a gang member.

He was shot because the cop justifiably (in my mind) thought Toledo was about to shoot at him.

I can't see the cop being prosecuted over this. And even less so him being convicted.

Boggles

BanditLuke wrote: »

This kid was a piece of work, his friends called him Lil homicide for goodness sake but much like Floyd the mob will want the police officer hung, drawn and quartered.

Okay BanditLuke.

Danzy

Overheal wrote: »

“Immediate threat.”

Can you elaborate on that? When did this immediacy begin and end?

Far less lethal use of force options have been presented. Why then is it justifiable to escalate an encounter to lethal dispatch of a suspect in a legal framework where all suspects are innocent until proven guilty? And ultimately, is an unarmed suspect an immediate threat insomuch that their execution is justified - and therefore yes, execution being the correct term for it? An unarmed suspect who has become compliant?

You consistently defend people who were shot by Police in America who have a history of extreme violence towards the African American community, especially women.

It's a pattern at this stage. I wonder if you prefer to see these violent people continue to inflict misery.

Is it a proxy for you?

Danzy

Boggles wrote: »

Okay BanditLuke.

Does Bandit Luke carry an illegal gun, sell crack and is a member of one of the most murderous crime gangs in America.

Probably not.

Lil Homicide was.

He was shot for having a gun out and being a threat to the police officer.

That he was a cancerous growth to his community is irrelevant.

They are safer now he is gone but he was only shot because he was threatening with a gun.

Boggles

Danzy wrote: »

Does Bandit Luke carry an illegal gun, sell crack and is a member of one of the most murderous crime gangs in America.

No idea.

Badass user name though.

GreeBo

Manic Moran wrote: »

I suspect much of the reason that Rittenhouse was not shot by police was because at the time that police saw him, he did not appear to be posing an immediate threat to anyone.

And while I would strongly disagree with that considering the situation he was in, I have to accept that in the parts of the US at least, this is "normal".
What I can't agree with or accept is that the victim in this case was posing an immediate threat to anyone and needed to be stopped with lethal force.

GreeBo

Effects wrote: »

I don't see why you are arguing about this shooting in that case.

The officer in this case did nothing wrong. He hasn't been convicted of shooting or killing Adam Toledo. You need to give the guy a break for doing is job and making the streets of Chicago safer.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Well I reckon there would have to be a trial before he could possibly be convicted right?
Unlike Mr Toledo who has convicted of being a gang banger involved in shootings already on this thread...
Why wasnt Toledo innocent until proven guilty?

BattleCorp

GreeBo wrote: »

What I can't agree with or accept is that the victim in this case was posing an immediate threat to anyone and needed to be stopped with lethal force.

He was armed less than a second before he was shot. I'll say that again. He was armed less than a second before he was shot. As he started to turn towards the cop he still had the gun in his hand.

Only a blind man wouldn't see that he posed a threat to the cop.

So, in the half a second or so that the cop had to respond, what non-lethal action could the cop have taken?