Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

US police shooting - 6 year old boy slain

13»

Comments

  • #62
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,115 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    Overheal wrote: »
    I'd rather be fully aware of the depth and scope of whats happening in my world.

    People are having their throats cut in the middle east - I'm fully aware of it yet I haven't watched one video of it.
    Ignorance is apathy.

    Watching videos of people being murdered/killed is morbid curiosity. If there was footage of a child being tortured and murdered would you feel you'd need to watch it or would knowing it happened suffice?


  • #63
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    People are having their throats cut in the middle east - I'm fully aware of it yet I haven't watched one video of it.

    Watching videos of people being murdered/killed is morbid curiosity. If there was footage of a child being tortured and murdered would you feel you'd need to watch it or would knowing it happened suffice?

    I, as an American, have little to no control over the Middle East. As an American, I have a direct say in the nation's politics; the current state of law enforcement in my country, is a matter of national importance. I have already seen plenty of videos, from Massachusetts, New York, South Carolina, Florida, California, Louisiana, Washington, Washington DC, Missouri, the list goes on. I've seen through this video and journalistic evidence: cops chokehold people to death for petty offenses; smother an elderly man to death and then try to have the body cremated before an autopsy could be performed; I've watched a dozen cops, dump a dozen clips into a car, and then try to arrest and beat up bystanding videographers (phone completely destroyed, the evidence survived in the guy's mouth, in his SD card); I've seen them body slam kids and shoot people for reaching for their ID when asked to produce ID.

    Because a video involves the death of a 6 year old autistic boy does nothing to dissuade me from viewing the evidence. Without this evidence, these types of atrocities would go unnoticed. If people didn't watch them, and nobody cared, these cops would continue to go about their brutal business. Instead, bad cops around the country are now literally whining about how apprehensive they are about even leaving their vehicles because they are concerned about the cameras rolling. There is no way to quantify how many lives have been saved by shooting the cops, with cameras. It would have no meaning if nobody watches the watchers. If cops could get a pass on revealing evidence because it involved an even more heinous crime than we are already sadly accustomed to, that would be a superb injustice, and in the future, evidence could be sealed for being "too graphic for a fragile public". In contrast, the military goes unchecked, bombing hospitals and civilians knowing full well that in all likelihood nobody will ever get to see the footage.


  • #64
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,895 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    I definitely don't and will not watch it if it does surface. Who the hell wants to watch a child being killed?

    I would. Not because I want to watch a child being killed, but because I believe that if I want to have the best possible informed opinion on something, I want to have the best possible information. Not watching a video isn't going to make the child any less dead, and I, for one, would like to know just what transpired that resulted in the death.


  • #65
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,129 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Where does it say that about the no outstanding warrants?

    The point I'm making is we don't know why they shot. Or what the guy was doing to warrant this, prior to driving into the Marshal's car. It's horrible that a child died, but we're going off little or no evidence.

    This child was shot in the head and chest five times. Whatever the father had done there is absolutely no justification for shooting 18 times into the car of an unarmed person, let alone when there is a child in the passenger seat.

    I've read that these officers have multiple lawsuits against them for violation of civil rights during arrests and one of them has been accused of rape. The whole police force should be held liable for allowing them to continue working with so many complaints against them.
    In October, 2011, Lt. Derrick Stafford was indicted by a Rapides Parish grand jury on two counts of aggravated rape. The case was resolved, we reached out to the clerk of court's office for the outcome, we are awaiting those documents.

    Lt. Derrick Stafford also has five pending civil lawsuits involving him in Avoyelles Parish. He's also worked for the Avoyelles Parish Sheriff's Department, Marksville Police Department and the Chenyville Police Department. Norris Greenhouse Jr. was also named in several of the suits. Greenhouse is a reserve officer with the Marksville Police Department, part-time Marksville City Marshal, and full-time Alexandria City Marshal.

    All of the following civil suits are still pending in Avoyelles Parish:

    January 3, 2011 -- While arresting a woman, Stafford allegedly threw her in the backseat with her hands cuffed and tased her without warning in the left side of her stomach while she was sitting in the backseat.

    July 4, 2012 -- While the Fourth of July parade was in progress, a family with a dog suffering from seizures and a stroke says they tried to get across the parade to make it to a veterinarian's and was told he could not go cross. The officer allegedly yelled at the wife and the husband ran across the street to make it to the vet. The man later called the sheriff's office to make a complaint against the officer, and was arrested for disturbing the peace. While he was being arrested, Stafford reportedly arrived and asked to arrest the suspect himself and put his handcuffs on him. The man spent the night in jail and later filed a lawsuit. The lawsuit is still pending.

    December 2012 -- While breaking up a fight between two girls on an Avoylles Parish school bus, Stafford was working for the City of Marksville and allegedly pulled a 15-year-old girls' arms behind her back and apparently broke it. The girl's mother filed suit and it's still open.

    June 18, 2013 -- Stafford and Greenhouse were driving a Marksville Police Department cruiser when they ran into an open gate owned by the Avoylles Parish Sheriff's Department. They sued the department and the case is still open.

    July 4, 2013 -- Greenhouse and seven other officers, including Stafford, broke up a fight during a Fourth of July Celebration by pepper spraying into the crowd. It was here another officer allegedly arrested and assaulted a 14-year-old boy. A mother who was there with her three children, sued. The case is still pending. At the same event another man says he lost his keys in the confusion of the spray, and was slammed to the ground and assaulted by several officers who also allegedly pepper sprayed him again. The man sued. The suit is still pending.


  • #66
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,115 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    Overheal wrote: »
    Because a video involves the death of a 6 year old autistic boy does nothing to dissuade me from viewing the evidence.

    You don't need to. You will know its content without sating your morbid curiosity.
    There is no way to quantify how many lives have been saved by shooting the cops, with cameras.

    I'm all for it. Body cameras on police should be a legal requirement.
    It would have no meaning if nobody watches the watchers. If cops could get a pass on revealing evidence because it involved an even more heinous crime than we are already sadly accustomed to, that would be a superb injustice, and in the future, evidence could be sealed for being "too graphic for a fragile public"

    Oh I'm all for mandatory body cameras on police and the public recording what those tasked to protect them are doing. Just because I don't want to see children being shot dead doesn't mean I don't want there to be evidence that it happened.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    You don't need to. You will know its content without sating your morbid curiosity.

    I'm all for it. Body cameras on police should be a legal requirement.

    Oh I'm all for mandatory body cameras on police and the public recording what those tasked to protect them are doing. Just because I don't want to see children being shot dead doesn't mean I don't want there to be evidence that it happened.

    Then you'll just have to agree to disagree then. I think the boy's death is better served by having the truth out in the light of day. A judge, an attorney, they can use whatever fanciful terms they want to "describe" an incident, but it does not provide nearly the fidelity or transparency that video does. He's a public servant, he answers to the people and as one of the people I will insist on seeing the best information available. Would you trust the US military investigation into this incident ("We looked at all the evidence and we did nothing wrong. Trust us"), or do you want to see the aircraft footage?

    In a not too unrelated case, CMP's videos about planned parenthood are full of spin and graphic imagery, but if people don't watch it they are predisposed to either think the videos are all complete and utter forgeries, or that planned parenthood is a cabal of capitalist money hungry baby part peddlers. And while they may reach either conclusion watching the videos anyway, they should probably watch the videos that have sparked a bunch of bull**** legislative controversy around the country..


  • #68
    Sand
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,280 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    walshyn93 wrote: »
    You don't care what happens to joyriders but you seem perfectly happy to come to the defence of child killers.

    Licked any nice boots lately?

    I haven't come to the defence of any child killers. I just have an allergy to people who have no idea what happened stating opinions and theories as facts. If that irritates or threatens you, you will just have to find some way to get over it.


  • #69
    Wompa1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,360 ✭✭✭Wompa1


    America can be such a draining place to live. So much senseless killing. The poor kid...


  • #70
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Wompa1 wrote: »
    America can be such a draining place to live.

    True story.


  • #71
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    It appears the camera footage is not from one of the arrested cops -
    "Mike Edmonson, who heads the Louisiana State Police, ordered the marshals’ arrest after reviewing forensic evidence, a 911 recording, accounts from some of those involved and images from a body camera worn by one of two city police officers who joined the pursuit behind Stafford and Greenhouse.
    The footage “was one of the most disturbing videos I’ve ever seen under these circumstances,” Edmonson said Saturday. “It troubled me as a police officer and as a father. There’s no reason that boy deserved to die like that.”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/theres-no-reason-that-boy-deserved-to-die-like-that/2015/11/07/fec2495e-8575-11e5-a7ca-6ab6ec20f839_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_lacops732pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    pmasterson95
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,074 ✭✭✭pmasterson95


    Corvus Maximus wrote: »
    They should probably stop wasting time & money training them to use their batons, pepper spray or tasers. Since they seem to have a penchant for blowing you away, even if you present no threat to them.

    To be fair thats just Murica. If you have any problem just shoot it. That'll fix it.


  • #73
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    More guns would have stopped this....


  • #74
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,801 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    I don't know how I feel about this until I actually see the snuff murder porn bodycam video.


  • #75
    fly_agaric
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,764 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »
    This is America 2015 different rules now it's a military police force, have the inhabitants not copped onto this?

    rip kid you were surrounded by fools on all sides

    I reason that alot must like it, having quasi-military police forces makes them feel safe. It's another American myth/mass delusion like "an armed society is a polite society", if only the teacher had a big gun in their desk drawer and the groundsman had rifle stored away in his shed the kids would be safe from school shootings.


  • #76
    fly_agaric
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,764 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    Overheal wrote: »
    I'd rather be fully aware of the depth and scope of whats happening in my world. Ignorance is apathy.

    Nobody can be "fully aware". We all trust as some point (probably even powerful govt's with armies of people to spy and bring them info most others aren't aware of). You can do the best you can but watching lots of videos of atrocities to become "aware" may just dull your awareness if you watch one too many. (edit: That's if you're lucky and don't do more permanent damage)


  • #77
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,895 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Overheal wrote: »
    Then you'll just have to agree to disagree then. I think the boy's death is better served by having the truth out in the light of day. A judge, an attorney, they can use whatever fanciful terms they want to "describe" an incident, but it does not provide nearly the fidelity or transparency that video does. He's a public servant, he answers to the people and as one of the people I will insist on seeing the best information available. Would you trust the US military investigation into this incident ("We looked at all the evidence and we did nothing wrong. Trust us"), or do you want to see the aircraft footage?

    In a not too unrelated case, CMP's videos about planned parenthood are full of spin and graphic imagery, but if people don't watch it they are predisposed to either think the videos are all complete and utter forgeries, or that planned parenthood is a cabal of capitalist money hungry baby part peddlers. And while they may reach either conclusion watching the videos anyway, they should probably watch the videos that have sparked a bunch of bull**** legislative controversy around the country..

    Two comments. Even video footage is only an additional data source, and will rarely show the full and complete story. We agree that they are valuable sources of information, but be cautious of overemphasizing.

    Secondly, what exactly do you submit the military did wrong when one of its pilots dropped a bomb onto a hospital if he had no reasonable way of knowing was a hospital? More on your linked thread.


  • #78
    allibastor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,520 ✭✭✭allibastor


    Wow, reading all the posts and the news reports, all I can say is wow.

    It is absolutely shocking that the police can act this way. As others have pointed out, I wonder will there be a repeat of the Ferguson riots over this, or will it just be accepted.

    How the **** can the cops justify shooting 18 times into a car, they must have seen the child as a passenger?


  • #79
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    allibastor wrote: »
    It is absolutely shocking that the police can act this way. As others have pointed out, I wonder will there be a repeat of the Ferguson riots over this, or will it just be accepted.

    There'll be no riots, the cops are black.


  • #80
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,920 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    And there shouldn't be riots. What have they ever actually solved, in these circumstances? Usually what happens in; people who actually want to conduct a peaceful protest goes out and does so. As the hours go by, it attracts the wrong kind, and then it just turns into anarchy. Look at the London riots. Look at the Fergusson riots.


  • #81
    asherbassad
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,869 ✭✭✭asherbassad


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Again.. no details are known at present.

    We don't know his criminal record, how dangerous he was, whether it was known if he was armed, if the cops actually knew that a child was there.

    Excuse me, but

    a) It doesn't matter what he did. If it did then you are suggesting that the police are justified in shooting people as extra-judicial punishment rather than to save their own or a third party's lives.

    b) His record is irrelevant.

    c) If the cops didn't know whether there was a kid in the car then them opening fire on the car is wholly criminal.


    In war if action is taken that could cause civilian casualties then it is classified as illegal, i.e. a war crime, e.g. if a commander decides the lay down an artillery barrage on an area and he isn't POSITIVE that there aren't civilians in the area then he must desist, otherwise he's committing a war crime. Of course this is rarely adhered to and even more rarely punished but that's another story. I'm not trying to equate police malfeasance with war crimes but both involve decisions that must take into account innocent victims of deadly force.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    asherbassad
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,869 ✭✭✭asherbassad


    StringerBell wrote: »
    Well, and I don't wanna sound too terrible here, but since this time it was a white kid I do expect these two cops/murderers to fry.

    I can't help but agreeing with you. I have this nagging suspicion that if the father and child were black and the 2 cops were white then the situation would be different. I get this feeling that they would have been placed on "administrative leave" pending an investigation. I can't help but doubt they would be so expeditiously charged with murder.
    Charges are yet to be brought in the Tamir Rice case as far as I know and that happened well over a year ago.


  • #83
    asherbassad
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,869 ✭✭✭asherbassad


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    There'll be no riots, the cops are black.

    Which sadly means they have less of a chance of benefitting from a coverup than their white counterparts.


  • #84
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    asherbassad wrote: »
    Excuse me, but

    a) It doesn't matter what he did. If it did then you are suggesting that the police are justified in shooting people as extra-judicial punishment rather than to save their own or a third party's lives.

    b) His record is irrelevant.

    c) If the cops didn't know whether there was a kid in the car then them opening fire on the car is wholly criminal.


    In war if action is taken that could cause civilian casualties then it is classified as illegal, i.e. a war crime, e.g. if a commander decides the lay down an artillery barrage on an area and he isn't POSITIVE that there aren't civilians in the area then he must desist, otherwise he's committing a war crime. Of course this is rarely adhered to and even more rarely punished but that's another story. I'm not trying to equate police malfeasance with war crimes but both involve decisions that must take into account innocent victims of deadly force.

    More importantly than that you're police policing citizens, not soldiers fighting combatants. There has been a flip in America, where the cops are afforded the benefit of doubt - shoot first, ask questions later. They're never adequately held accountable for mistakes they make (like you would in most any other profession) and so building off of that, they take more and more latitude with their jobs. "50/50 sure you might have the legal authority to search the vehicle? **** it: search the vehicle anyway, if the lawyers decide it's inadmissible, you'll never even get a write-up about it."


  • #85
    Samaris
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Samaris


    There is really no point in arguing that there won't be riots in this case because blah blah black/white, etc. Why there probably won't be riots in this case is because the two cops have been ARRESTED FOR MURDER. There is a very plain investigation and punishment process going on here.

    To start bringing the race factor into this is just bad egging.


  • #86
    allibastor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,520 ✭✭✭allibastor


    Samaris wrote: »
    There is really no point in arguing that there won't be riots in this case because blah blah black/white, etc. Why there probably won't be riots in this case is because the two cops have been ARRESTED FOR MURDER. There is a very plain investigation and punishment process going on here.

    To start bringing the race factor into this is just bad egging.

    Not so much about race, but it is interesting how quick the cops reacted to the killer cops in this case. One does wonder is it from lessons learned or is it colour.


Advertisement
Advertisement