Police In Tulsa
- Thread starter btbones
- Start date
I mean.......yeah? Just take out the sarcastic ninja reference and attempting to detain without ****ing guns seems like a reasonable scenario when it's 4 on 1. Or just even 1 on 1.
But no. shoot first and have people dissecting video frames later to make the excuses.
I have no idea. I'm not referring to those cases.
Lol. She would not have pulled her weapon if he was being cooperative.
PCP? Someone must have just finished watching a 90s cop film with a black guy strung out on drugs or listening to a Brothers Johnson recording.
Yeap, she pulled her gun without saying anything to the guy with the intention of murdering him. She then told the guy to walk over to his unsecured car and try to get in. She called for backup and helicopter support not because the guy was being uncooperative but because she wanted other people to see her murder him. smh.
While that's an exaggeration, it's possible. Another possibility is that Crutcher could have been uncooperative until she pulled her gun, then he became cooperative and followed her instructions to go back to the car with his hands up and put his hands on the car. Then she shot him accidentally after he was tased.
We don't know what was said. You only know what *should* have been said.
A large amount of misunderstanding, misinformation, and sadly, misdirection in this thread.
The police have to minimize risk to survive and prevent innocent people from being caught in the crossfire. Guns are everywhere in Oklahoma. Nearly everyone carries one or has one in their car. It is simply absurd in that environment to expect police to treat everyone the same regardless of the context. Presuming there is no threat and waiting until it manifests itself before you undertake any type of risk minimization, deterrence, or threat response is absurd, if for no other reason that the physiological limits of the human body. Tunnel vision, auditory limitations, involuntary muscle movements, if you don't expect that everyone might have a gun and you wait until you see a gun to react, you will be dead. Anyone who has gone through even basic, rudimentary simulations and training knows this. Heck, a five minute search on youtube will turn up countless dash cam videos of cops caught by surprise because they made bad decisions about risk minimization because they thought the person was harmless or it was a 'routine traffic stop'. If you do that search, I hope you like snuff films, because you will see a LOT of dead cops who waited until the gun was out before they did anything.
For the record, TPD has had four deadly officer involved shootings in 2016. All other incidents were white men who were armed and displayed the weapon. The last time a black man was killed by a police shooting in Tulsa was 2015 and that was the Tulsa County Sheriff's Office. It was a reserve deputy. The shooting, although arguably accidental, was ruled unlawful. He was tried and convicted. He is in prison. The sheriff who tried to cover it up pled guilty to other crimes and is no longer in office.
The police have to minimize risk to survive and prevent innocent people from being caught in the crossfire. Guns are everywhere in Oklahoma. Nearly everyone carries one or has one in their car. It is simply absurd in that environment to expect police to treat everyone the same regardless of the context. Presuming there is no threat and waiting until it manifests itself before you undertake any type of risk minimization, deterrence, or threat response is absurd, if for no other reason that the physiological limits of the human body. Tunnel vision, auditory limitations, involuntary muscle movements, if you don't expect that everyone might have a gun and you wait until you see a gun to react, you will be dead. Anyone who has gone through even basic, rudimentary simulations and training knows this. Heck, a five minute search on youtube will turn up countless dash cam videos of cops caught by surprise because they made bad decisions about risk minimization because they thought the person was harmless or it was a 'routine traffic stop'. If you do that search, I hope you like snuff films, because you will see a LOT of dead cops who waited until the gun was out before they did anything.
For the record, TPD has had four deadly officer involved shootings in 2016. All other incidents were white men who were armed and displayed the weapon. The last time a black man was killed by a police shooting in Tulsa was 2015 and that was the Tulsa County Sheriff's Office. It was a reserve deputy. The shooting, although arguably accidental, was ruled unlawful. He was tried and convicted. He is in prison. The sheriff who tried to cover it up pled guilty to other crimes and is no longer in office.
Stop it. Just stop guessing. We know from the 911 transcript that he was disoriented and uncooperative with bystanders before any of the police arrived. People don't tell bystanders "Hey, my car is going to blow up, please come over here closer" then suddenly decide to become compliant when an officer raises their gun.
The standard to judge this incident is what would a reasonable officer do when pointing a handgun lawfully at a disoriented and possibly intoxicated suspect who is disobeying commands and may be trying to re-enter his vehicle. Under the facts, I don't think a reasonable officer would discharge their firearm. Assuming she is reasonable, that means the firearm was either involuntarily discharged (stress induced response when the taser was deployed) or accidentally discharged (she thought she was using her taser under stress, but she was actually holding her gun).
A segment of our country, regardless of race, wants to believe that she acted unreasonably. That's fine. You are allowed to believe that, but it isn't based on facts. There simply is no evidence at this point that she consciously and purposefully intended to shoot the guy.
And how many TPD or TCSO officers have been shot by suspects in traffic stops? I get that they have to be prepared for anything. I get that it's split-second decision making. I get that you have to assume harm is coming. And yes, BTK I get that Crutcher should have cooperated. But at some point, we have to abide by the principles of our justice system, which was founded on the belief that guilty men going free is preferable to innocent men going to jail, or being killed, in the name of justice and safety. I think that some of that has to carry over to the law enforcement side of the process. You can assume the worst and still not have to kill someone. I think we can be better than accepting the police killing an unarmed person as justified in the name of some false sense of security.
The last TPD officer killed on duty was in 1996. He went down a dark alley to confront a fleeing armed robbery suspect who had just shot his dog.
The reason no one else has been shot in traffic stops is because they know what they are doing and the techniques work. Arm chair QBs with no training or experience want to change that.
The reason no one else has been shot in traffic stops is because they know what they are doing and the techniques work. Arm chair QBs with no training or experience want to change that.
Here is the full release form the shooting officer's side of the story (via her attorney):
http://abcnews.go.com/US/tulsa-police-officer-shares-side-story-terence-crutchers/story?id=42243843
Her story is kind of all over the place. First she pulls up to the SUV and claims the windows were down (they were not) She had already cased the SUV before she started talking to Crutcher
So then she magically goes from being by the SUV to being by her patrol car, after trying to talk to Crutcher, who doesn't respond, but then puts his hands in the air after she asks him to take his hands out of his pocket.
And she continues the fallacy that the window was open.
So while I can understand if it was an accident or negligent, the whole story from the officer is sketchy. She even somewhat admits she shot as the taser was deployed.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/tulsa-police-officer-shares-side-story-terence-crutchers/story?id=42243843
Her story is kind of all over the place. First she pulls up to the SUV and claims the windows were down (they were not) She had already cased the SUV before she started talking to Crutcher
So then she magically goes from being by the SUV to being by her patrol car, after trying to talk to Crutcher, who doesn't respond, but then puts his hands in the air after she asks him to take his hands out of his pocket.
And she continues the fallacy that the window was open.
So while I can understand if it was an accident or negligent, the whole story from the officer is sketchy. She even somewhat admits she shot as the taser was deployed.
OK. Got it. So we agree that she spent a minute or less with him, he had his hands in his pockets, then at some point he put his hands up and wasn't a threat, but decided to go back to his car for whatever reason, despite being told not to.
Watch this video, shown at every police academy in America, tell me how this scenario is different from what we know about Tulsa, and how she could ensure compliance or minimize risk while waiting to point her firearm at the subject.
So 1 cop 20 years ago vs. 4 people in this year alone - including one that was not armed. And why shouldn't people demand changes when unarmed people are killed by those sworn to protect them?
The Tallahassee based civil rights lawyer that represented Trayvon Martin who was hired before this poor guy's body was cold claims that you can see blood on the window from the helicopter video.
The helicopter video that shows a blood streak on the window after Crutcher was shot.
See still shots attached to this tweet
You are either having fun trolling or you are willfully ignorant. More than 1 cop 20 years ago has been killed at roadside in this manner. Its several a year nationwide. And the reason owe shouldn't demand changes is the techniques work and we need cops, but we can't afford to pay them more than $15.00 an hour - some more than that, but a lot more get paid less. If you want crappy cops or cops that don't do anything, pay them crappy then tell them to go out there and do their job where their risk of death or injury is substantially raised simply because a few smarty pants with no experience think this world would be perfect if we treat everyone driving down the road like 55 year old female hippie yoga instructor until they pull out a gun and announce otherwise.
Last edited:
You would never believe the amount of former law enforcement and crime scene investigators that roam these forums.
Let's assume that he was high on PCP, just for the sake of argument. This is what happens when cops do what you think is right. The cop does not unsnap his holster, doesnt produce a weapon, and this was before tasers, but he did have a baton. He is like you. He thinks he can talk himself out of any situation and that pulling your gun isn't justified until the threat is present. He is alone like in Tulsa. He observes an unstable person, like in Tulsa. Unlike Tulsa, he lets the person go back to his car but doesnt take any risk minimization procedures because he was known for being a believer in conflict reduction techniques and all that community based policing that sounds good on paper.
Again, this video is shown at nearly every police academy in America -- and for good reason. Its another dead cop that thought he knew a "better way" Listen to this guy screaming and tell me Im wrong and you are right.
Again, this video is shown at nearly every police academy in America -- and for good reason. Its another dead cop that thought he knew a "better way" Listen to this guy screaming and tell me Im wrong and you are right.
Ive been to the police academy. I've taught evidence collection to police officers for nearly a decade. As a statewide investigator, I conducted interview training for more than 100 officers. Some cops are dirty. Some cops are murderers. Its effing stupid to put all cops at risk because its popular right now to cast all cops as the same as a few rogues. And the same people that want to do that are the same people that defend their police union and stop people like me from sorting the bad apples out. Wake up people.
Last edited:
I've seen that show several times. I've also seen several cops get severely injured trying to take down a drunk or a drug crazed individual who refused to comply. If a taser is not having a subduing effect on someone, I'd be pretty leery about jumping in there and sacrificing my own body.
I've seen that show several times. I've also seen several cops get severely injured trying to take down a drunk or a drug crazed individual who refused to comply. If a taser is not having a subduing effect on someone, I'd be pretty leery about jumping in there and sacrificing my own body.risking my ow
Yes. That's what they do every time on that COPS show you were talking about.
I was only comparing the statistics you gave for Tulsa. Obviously more than 1 cop in 20 years has died from a violent shooting from a suspect. No shit that they need to be vigilant. And I agree they don't get paid enough and need to be trained. No shit on that too.
But that still doesn't mean that unarmed people get to be shot by the cops and have it called justified.
By the shooter's admission, the taser and the gun were fired at the same time. There was no opportunity, or at least only a limited one, to see if the Taser was effective or not.
If you were the cop, what would you have done? What kind of training would you mandate that isn't already mandated?
People have died from tasers. There needs to be a better method to subdue drug crazed individuals.
You keep moving your goal posts. Nobody here is suggesting that her discharge was justified.
You have said, and continue to say, that her producing a weapon was unjustified. That simply isn't realistic from a policy standpoint nor is it true under these facts.
BTW, Im still waiting for you to distinguish what you said should have happened in Tulsa three pages ago and what we saw happen in the last video.
Not really. You gave statistics for officer-involved shootings in Tulsa, I asked how many officers have been shot and killed in Tulsa for an apt comparison. Then you moved the goalposts by saying that many cops die by suspect shootings nationwide, which is a no shit.
I say the brandishing of the gun is unjustified, but I can see the reasoning for her doing so when she was alone (BTW - unless the audio of the dispatch was altered or redacted, she never actually radioed for backup, she only radioed to say he wouldn't show his hands and she was supposedly on her way to another call when she came across the scene, so why is all the backup and helicopter coming to that scene? If they were on the way to the domestic violence call that was so urgent as to require so much backup and a helicopter, why did she stop there? I digress.), but once backup arrived, she had more officers there, so maybe she could have switched to the taser or at least lowered the gun.
The video is very unfortunate, for sure, but the biggest differences between that situation and Crutcher (aside from the fact that Crutcher wasn't armed) is that there were more officers involved at the scene and the SUV door wasn't open. Also, the driver was ordered to get out of the vehicle, which I don't believe is protocol on a speeding traffic stop. I could be wrong though. I've never been asked to exit the car during a traffic stop. As a side note, as I noted earlier ITT that shooter in that video was caught, tried, convicted, and sentenced to death and was executed last year. It's unfortunate that a police officer lost his life, but at least the suspect got the sentence he deserved.
Another conflicting element to Officer Shelby's story:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/crim...cle_ceb93e3d-2ce1-539b-bb89-b849a224e16f.html
Her official story was that she decided not to use her Taser - now it's that she didn't have one.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/crim...cle_ceb93e3d-2ce1-539b-bb89-b849a224e16f.html
Her official story was that she decided not to use her Taser - now it's that she didn't have one.
