Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

Sam Dubose

Page 3 of 11 [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

30 Jul 2015, 4:08 pm

blueblahbleh wrote:
I don't see anything in the video that corroborates the ex-officers claim that he got stuck on the vehicle, dragged down the road and attempted to be run over. When I watched the video, Tensing shot him so fast I had to watch it over again. Sam DuBose was not speeding down the road with an officer being dragged along. The car doesn't really get moving until after he was shot.


How'd he get down the road?

Look how far he ends up after getting back up.

You need to show beyond reasonable doubt here for murder.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

30 Jul 2015, 4:12 pm

blueblahbleh wrote:
I can see how people might try to rationalize because it seems so unbelievable, but honestly I see zero justification for this shooting.


I'd say some people analyze things differently.

I have no care for the officer or perpetrator here. I've seen bad and good acts done by both groups (more bad with perps, though).

All that matters for the law is how the act happens.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

30 Jul 2015, 4:43 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
The thing is, I believe both men were essentially frightened that the other; the difference was, the cop was a professional who was supposed to handle the situation with care, and not just haul off shooting.


The thing about events going south quickly and split second decisions that have fatal consequences is that it tends to throw what people think "professional" entails out the window. The officer was professional almost to the end (putting a hand in the to try and stop the getaway could be seen as unprofessional, though), until the struggle that's not fully in frame of the video.

For people to be impartial, they need to look past their own biases; if all you see is murder when looking at the video, then this is very dangerous.

It's dangerous because if everyone talks "murder", and the courts find that it's not (beyond reasonable doubt), then there's your justification for rioting and greater turmoil due to people being emotional rather than rational.

You don't want to enable more violence and division.



Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1026
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

30 Jul 2015, 5:28 pm

Dillogic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
The thing is, I believe both men were essentially frightened that the other; the difference was, the cop was a professional who was supposed to handle the situation with care, and not just haul off shooting.


The thing about events going south quickly and split second decisions that have fatal consequences is that it tends to throw what people think "professional" entails out the window. The officer was professional almost to the end (putting a hand in the to try and stop the getaway could be seen as unprofessional, though), until the struggle that's not fully in frame of the video.

For people to be impartial, they need to look past their own biases; if all you see is murder when looking at the video, then this is very dangerous.

It's dangerous because if everyone talks "murder", and the courts find that it's not (beyond reasonable doubt), then there's your justification for rioting and greater turmoil due to people being emotional rather than rational.

You don't want to enable more violence and division.


The district attorney does not agree with you.



Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1026
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

30 Jul 2015, 5:34 pm

Dillogic wrote:
blueblahbleh wrote:
I can see how people might try to rationalize because it seems so unbelievable, but honestly I see zero justification for this shooting.


I'd say some people analyze things differently.

I have no care for the officer or perpetrator here. I've seen bad and good acts done by both groups (more bad with perps, though).

All that matters for the law is how the act happens.

Point of order: the officer is the perpetrator of a major crime, in this case. The victim may have been guilty of a minor violation of motor vehicle law. It is factually wrong and deeply prejudicial to use the term "perpetrator" to describe the victim.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

30 Jul 2015, 5:44 pm

Adamantium wrote:
The district attorney does not agree with you.


Good for him.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

30 Jul 2015, 5:48 pm

Adamantium wrote:
Point of order: the officer is the perpetrator of a major crime, in this case. The victim may have been guilty of a minor violation of motor vehicle law. It is factually wrong and deeply prejudicial to use the term "perpetrator" to describe the victim.


No, it's not factually wrong.

Both are potential perpetrators here.

But yes, I should have equally referred to both as potential perpetrators. You have my infinite apologies.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

30 Jul 2015, 6:05 pm

Adamantium wrote:
Point of order: the officer is the perpetrator of a major crime, in this case. The victim may have been guilty of a minor violation of motor vehicle law. It is factually wrong and deeply prejudicial to use the term "perpetrator" to describe the victim.


The biggest concern for the officer would be Sam's alcohol container, and whether he was intoxicated.

If you let a drunk keep driving , and they kill someone, then everyone will be complaining the cop isn't doing his job.



Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1026
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

30 Jul 2015, 6:19 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
Point of order: the officer is the perpetrator of a major crime, in this case. The victim may have been guilty of a minor violation of motor vehicle law. It is factually wrong and deeply prejudicial to use the term "perpetrator" to describe the victim.


The biggest concern for the officer would be Sam's alcohol container, and whether he was intoxicated.

If you let a drunk keep driving , and they kill someone, then everyone will be complaining the cop isn't doing his job.


OK, then certainly you have to take a life to prevent a potential risk from a closed bottle. Because you never know--You know? Safer by far to put a round in the citizen's head.

Or maybe not.

In either case, it has nothing to do with calling the dead man a "perpetrator." That's just horsefeathers.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

30 Jul 2015, 6:53 pm

Adamantium wrote:
In either case, it has nothing to do with calling the dead man a "perpetrator." That's just horsefeathers.


I called him such due to fleeing from an officer's lawful stop, which potentially means the officer ended up defending himself based on my interpretation of the video. I'd say the same if a civilian was potentially being dragged in the same situation (being dragged is no joke and potentially lethal).

Of course, the officer is now a potential perpetrator.

Attempting to flee from an officer isn't a minor crime. Of course, it's not the same as murder/manslaughter, and for that I apologize.



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

30 Jul 2015, 7:33 pm

Dillogic wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
The idea that he was dragged or that there may be some policy that would make this a good shoot is a fabrication.


Wrong.

Being dragged due to direct action of a perpetrator will make someone fear for their life (because it's potentially lethal), and lethal force to stop it is justified.


A man turns the key in his ignition and your instinct is to reach for your gun rather than to take your arm out of the car?



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

30 Jul 2015, 7:42 pm

blauSamstag wrote:
A man turns the key in his ignition and your instinct is to reach for your gun rather than to take your arm out of the car?


It'd depend on the situation, of course.

If you can't remove yourself from being dragged/the person is moving the car into you (say, pulling out; which would knock you over/potentially lead to you being run over), then yeah, stopping the user from making the car do that is sensible.

If you can flee, then that's what you do.

Now, do the police have a duty to flee if someone is in the process of doing/starting to initiate an action that may potentially cause death to them? That's something I haven't thought about with this case.

(As an aside, the guy didn't just turn the car on. He did rev the engine before the shot, which translates into intent.)



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

30 Jul 2015, 8:04 pm

Yeah he was probably trying to escape the stop. Probably scared out of his mind that this cop was going to do something. He was right.

Why didn't the cop just, as was suggested, run his name? He has a radio. It appears that it's not a crime to not be in physical possession of your driving license in ohio.

Why ask him to take off his seatbelt?

Why did the cop have his hand on the handle of the door?

This cop was escalating. He was trying to start something.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

30 Jul 2015, 8:11 pm

ASPickle wrote:
My two hangups:

1. This is a University of Cincinnati police officer. Campus police. You know,... the people who ticket illegally parked student vehicles. This is not someone who needs a firearm.

2. Without the body camera, we would've been stuck with only the police account and this guy could keep abusing his power. How long has it been this way, but we're only alert now because of video everywhere? Sickening.



This is post Seung-Hui Cho so that officer is probably a better shooter than most city cops.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

30 Jul 2015, 8:24 pm

blauSamstag wrote:
Yeah he was probably trying to escape the stop. Probably scared out of his mind that this cop was going to do something. He was right.

Why didn't the cop just, as was suggested, run his name? He has a radio. It appears that it's not a crime to not be in physical possession of your driving license in ohio.

Why ask him to take off his seatbelt?

Why did the cop have his hand on the handle of the door?

This cop was escalating. He was trying to start something.


Your first point is a fallacious argument, as the officer showed zero malice up until things went south. It would be far more likely that Sam was afraid due to doing something wrong, say perhaps driving without a license; sometimes they add up and such a simple thing can mean time/large fines. I recall reading Sam had quite a list of prior arrests, which can affect the outcome of another arrest.

The rest would depend on police procedure there, but it's wrong to say the officer wanted to escalate things. His demeanor shows nothing to point that out. Unless people only focus on the shooting, which itself can be argued (no way is it as clear cut as the media and certain officials are saying; people can have their opinions and all that, but murder is a clearly defined entity that needs intent and the guilty mind proven beyond reasonable doubt).

Failure with police procedure can lead to negligence. I don't recall he was charged with anything there, rather murder and voluntary manslaughter.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

30 Jul 2015, 9:15 pm

The initial report I had heard on the news had been that the cop had shot Dubose in the head, and then the car continued to move because his foot, while he was dying, had pressed down on the gas pedal. Does anyone know if this is true?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer