Officer who shot Philando Castile found not guilty

[purebalance]

Id trust a real person over a cop any day though real people are way more trustworthy.

lol no they aren't. "How fast were you going?" "How many drinks did you have tonight?" Totally trustworthy lol. People lie to the cops constantly. Oh and reach for cops guns or their own guns when pulled over for something they actually did(see this case and Michael Brown who both got what was coming to them).

[Kellhound]

It's also a fact that he was shot for refusing to stop reaching in the direction of a firearm after being told to stop.

Now say half-life 2 is a true story again.

What proof is there that this is a fact and not a story to get out of jail free?

[Orbitus]

I'm not justifying what the police officer did, and I'm definitely not defending Castile.

Here's how the traffic stop should have gone down:
Officer: Sir, do you have a weapon on you?
*Castile has hands at 10/2 on steering wheel*
Castile: Yes, I do.
*Officer draws weapon*
Officer: Where is the weapon?
Castile: In my waistband.
*Castile's hands should STILL be at 10/2, visible, no movement*
Officer: Get out of the vehicle, SLOWLY, put your hands on the hood, spread your legs. DO NOT reach for the weapon, DO NOT do anything else unless instructed to do so.
Castile: *Does what he was instructed to do*
Officer: *Searches Castile and pulls firearm from waistband, places it out of reach from Castile.*
Officer: Do you have a permit for this? *traffic stop continues on, no one gets shot*

This particular traffic stop did not go down like that, obviously. When asked if he had a weapon, Castile chose to reach for something. The police officer yelled at him not to reach for it - whatever the IT was - and Castile reached anyway. Castile's actions will get you shot, tasered, or beaten, 99.9% of the time. Whether that's his wallet, or the weapon, none of us will ever know. What we do know, is that a jury of 12 ordinary citizens, including 2 black jurors, found this police officer innocent. That means that all 12 of those jurors were presented all evidence from both parties, including testimony from the girlfriend, and declared there was no wrong-doing. For us to sit here and pick apart piecemeal evidence presented by our favorite biased media organization over a year after the fact is ridiculous.

Also, the video that the girlfriend took AFTER THE SHOOTING means nothing to this case. "Feels" aren't evidence. Speaking of feels, you can clearly hear the police officer is upset, knowing that he just took a life. People act as if killing someone is easy because they do it all day in their video games.

Honestly, in all of these cases my thought has always been, "Why is the Police Officer alone?" With the way society is today, and people wanting cops to be hung, I don't understand why cops don't have partners in every situation, and body cams. Juries would have two angles of every situation, and there would be no guesswork. I can also guarantee that police shootings would go down as well because police officers would feel safer having a partner covering their ass.

Just an FYI, Castile was in the passenger seat. So your scenario doesn't work. Also, he told the cop that he was a concealed carry holder and had his gun on him. The officer asked for his license/permit. So he reached for his wallet. Where are most guys' wallets? In their back pocket where he was reaching. The cop shot him for getting his wallet 7 fucking times.

- - - Updated - - -

It's also a fact that he was shot for refusing to stop reaching in the direction of a firearm after being told to stop.

Now say half-life 2 is a true story again.

He was asked to get his license/permit when he told them he was a CCW permit holder and that he had his gun on him. He was reaching for his wallet where most users keep their license.

[Endus]

No Endus, that is not how this works. The law I quoted very clearly states that it is illegal for a person abusing a controlled substance to possess a handgun. The issuance of a concealed carry license does not override that prohibition, as it is a permit to carry a handgun within the confines of the law. You are basically saying its ok to drive drunk so long as you are properly licensed.

And the way the law works is, if you suspect an individual who owns a gun is abusing a controlled substance, you have to prove that and get that permit revoked.

If you don't, then the permit stands. As Castile's did.

Permits and licenses are not revoked retroactively, and it's a ridiculous assertion to make. Is someone guilty of speeding also guilty of driving without a licence, if the officer revokes their license for that same speeding charge? Of course not. Because the law does not work that way.

[Kellhound]

And the way the law works is, if you suspect an individual who owns a gun is abusing a controlled substance, you have to prove that and get that permit revoked.

If you don't, then the permit stands. As Castile's did.

Permits and licenses are not revoked retroactively, and it's a ridiculous assertion to make. Is someone guilty of speeding also guilty of driving without a licence, if the officer revokes their license for that same speeding charge? Of course not. Because the law does not work that way.

A license/permit says you can do something so long as you follow all applicable laws. Permit or no, it is illegal in Minn to possess a handgun if you are abusing a controlled substance. Just like it is illegal to drive drunk even if you are licensed.

[petej0]

Someone who is armed and is conditioned to treat anyone they come into contact with during the course of their official duties in such a manner is not a civilian police officer, but a soldier in a region under military occupation and martial law.

I am not going to argue about it. Go take a ride with a police officer and conduct traffic stops, join them on a domestic violence call, tag along on a burglary call at 2am. Until you walk a mile in their shoes you cant even comprehend what they have to go through. Your next line of thinking is what, "Well they knew what they were singing up for" Yes, but it doesnt mean these men and women who put on that uniform dont get scared. These are normal humans, they arent superheroes. Go watch any number of police videos and see how fast a normal traffic stop goes bad. You can be talking calm, polite to the person you pulled over one second and be staring down the barrel of a weapon the very next. Or the guy takes off, or the guy punches you and knocks you out.

There are evil people out there and they must remain vigilant at all times. You can sit there and arm chair police all day from the luxury and safety of your home. Any moment could be the last for a police officer. I will admit the cop in this case was a bit too high strung and was, for whatever reason, in deep fear of his life.

A society that permits this cannot be called free in any sense of the word.

Seeing how they still need probable cause to administer a traffic stop this notion is without basis.

[Slybak]

I am not going to argue about it. Go take a ride with a police officer and conduct traffic stops, join them on a domestic violence call, tag along on a burglary call at 2am. Until you walk a mile in their shoes you cant even comprehend what they have to go through.

"The poor benighted police officers, having their heretofor unquestionable license to kill with impunity called into question! How will civilization survive?"

Cry me a fucking river with this shit. When police associations start demanding more funding for social workers and mental health professionals to handle these types of situations (without murdering people), and less funding for equipment designed for a goddamned battlefield, and less public oversight, I might start giving this argument the time of day.

Seeing how they still need probable cause to administer a traffic stop this notion is without basis.

Irrelevant. Probable cause is malleable to the point of farce. Freddie Gray, for instance, was searched for looking at a police officer and walking away, and arrested for possessing a pocket knife that was within his legal right to carry. Now you could say that the resulting prosecution of those officers (we'll leave aside their acquittals/mistrials, natch) places limitations on those actions, but fat lot of fucking good they'll do Freddie Gray because he's dead, and fat lot of fucking good they'll do future victims because the DA in the case is being dragged into civil court by his murderers.

[vhatever]

And the way the law works is, if you suspect an individual who owns a gun is abusing a controlled substance, you have to prove that and get that permit revoked.

If you don't, then the permit stands. As Castile's did.

Permits and licenses are not revoked retroactively, and it's a ridiculous assertion to make. Is someone guilty of speeding also guilty of driving without a licence, if the officer revokes their license for that same speeding charge? Of course not. Because the law does not work that way.

If you lied or falsified information to obtain them, permits are indeed revoked retroactively as they were never legally binding in the first place. You just don't seem to know what you are talking about. You don't get to make the law up as you go. Also, when either the defense or prosecution makes an assertion of fact in a trial and during cross examination that assertion is not challenged then that assertion of fact is accepted as a fact. The prosecution never challenged the defenses claims that Castile was not a legal gun owner on the day of the shooting in question.

[Orange Joe]

If you lied or falsified information to obtain them, permits are indeed revoked retroactively as they were never legally binding in the first place. You just don't seem to know what you are talking about. You don't get to make the law up as you go. Also, when either the defense or prosecution makes an assertion of fact in a trial and during cross examination that assertion is not challenged then that assertion of fact is accepted as a fact. The prosecution never challenged the defenses claims that Castile was not a legal gun owner on the day of the shooting in question.

Prove he was smoking when he got the permit.

[vhatever]

"The poor benighted police officers, having their heretofor unquestionable license to kill with impunity called into question! How will civilization survive?"

Cry me a fucking river with this shit. When police associations start demanding more funding for social workers and mental health professionals to handle these types of situations (without murdering people), and less funding for equipment designed for a goddamned battlefield, and less public oversight, I might start giving this argument the time of day.


Irrelevant. Probable cause is malleable to the point of farce. Freddie Gray, for instance, was searched for looking at a police officer and walking away, and arrested for possessing a pocket knife that was within his legal right to carry. Now you could say that the resulting prosecution of those officers (we'll leave aside their acquittals/mistrials, natch) places limitations on those actions, but fat lot of fucking good they'll do Freddie Gray because he's dead, and fat lot of fucking good they'll do future victims because the DA in the case is being dragged into civil court by his murderers.

That knife was illegal. It's amazing people are still lying about this stuff. Gray shouldn't have been running around with an illegal knife if he didn't want to risk being arrested.

- - - Updated - - -

Prove he was smoking when he got the permit.

The prosecution wasn't dumb enough to even try to make such childish "prove you exist" argument. Though it probably had little to do with the abject stupidity of the question since one of their own witness had already given testimony that indicated he was a habitual user prior to obtaining it, but perhaps more to the fact it was irrelevant since they knew had used pot the day of the shooting which as far as it related to the shooting was good enough on its own to make the claim that the firearm was illegal in possession of Castile.

[RickJamesLich]

Was there literally any evidence that suggested the cop shot the guy for no reason? The only thing I remember from this case was that they were both high and the girlfriend pretty much said the cop shot him for no reason and a lot of people just took that as fact.

[Masark]

The only thing I remember from this case was that they were both high

So the only thing you remember is a lie.

That certainly explains basically everything about your professed worldview.

[RickJamesLich]

So the only thing you remember is a lie.

That certainly explains basically everything about your professed worldview.

Well feel free to clear things up then... was there any actual evidence that the cop decided to simply assassinate him?

[Kellhound]

Prove he was smoking when he got the permit.

The way the law is written that doesnt matter.

- - - Updated - - -

Well feel free to clear things up then... was there any actual evidence that the cop decided to simply assassinate him?

Was there any actual evidence that he was in danger?

[joeymagz]

Just an FYI, Castile was in the passenger seat. So your scenario doesn't work. Also, he told the cop that he was a concealed carry holder and had his gun on him. The officer asked for his license/permit. So he reached for his wallet. Where are most guys' wallets? In their back pocket where he was reaching. The cop shot him for getting his wallet 7 fucking times.

The video taken by the girlfriend clearly shows him in the drivers seat. So, my scenario definitely does work and is perfectly valid for this exact situation. Unless the girlfriend and the police officer worked together to move his body into the drivers seat, and then put the seat belt on him after he was shot...

My point still stands. As soon as Castile said he has a weapon on him, there is no damn way the police officer would want him reaching around his body.

[Orbitus]

The video taken by the girlfriend clearly shows him in the drivers seat. So, my scenario definitely does work and is perfectly valid for this exact situation. Unless the girlfriend and the police officer worked together to move his body into the drivers seat, and then put the seat belt on him after he was shot...

My point still stands. As soon as Castile said he has a weapon on him, there is no damn way the police officer would want him reaching around his body.

Sorry, my bad, I thought he was on the right hand side of the car. Must have been another police execution I saw.

[RickJamesLich]

Was there any actual evidence that he was in danger?

In this type of situation the burden lies on the prosecution, if they aren't able to do that, you can't fault the jury for the not guilty verdict.

[vhatever]

Sorry, my bad, I thought he was on the right hand side of the car. Must have been another police execution I saw.

Luckily, we are not privy to your imagination in the real world.

[Orbitus]

Luckily, we are not privy to your imagination in the real world.

Says the burner account that doesn't live in reality and lost the conversation earlier about Philando having a gun permit legally.

[vhatever]

Says the burner account that doesn't live in reality and lost the conversation earlier about Philando having a gun permit legally.

LOL lost the conversation. Not a surprising absurdity for the guy who writes trash like this and expects anyone to take them seriously:

Must have been another police execution I saw.