From accounts it was a well lit alley.
Was she standing in the light?
From accounts it was a well lit alley.
If that is the case then IMO, he is in the wrong job.
Was she standing in the light?
Have you approached a police car in the middle of the night in an alley?
Whatever he was thinking, how is it going to justify shooting an unarmed woman? Are cops allowed to shoot people for no real reason, but because of what they are thinking?
She was talking to the driver through the driver's window.
And for all we know, the officer may have told her to step away from the car and she refused.
Not in an alley, but def in the dark. By all media reports, this alley was well-lit, as are many alleys in the Twin Cities.
I have a conservative viewpoint. I support the police. I do not think they are inherently evil.
This case sets my hinky meter going.
Others have mentioned a language barrier~ I don't think so. He graduated from a private college (Augsburg) with a degree in business and economics. Hard to believe he accomplished that with a poor understanding of english.
And for all we know, the officer may have told her to step away from the car and she refused.
So he shoots her?
Wow.....news articles about this made international headlines.....I have family in LE and am quick to defend their actions when an armed (even with a knife) person makes any kind of threat - to the officers or others. But this.....is not right. When I first read it I thought, "it must have been an accident - his gun went off somehow - he would never shoot an unarmed person through a door"....and then another news report said, "multiple times". So my accident theory went out the window. It shouldn't matter who the victim was, but the fact that she was Australian and vocally anti-violence and anti-gun makes this feel less real. A meditation and yoga teacher......she looks about as non-threatening as one can.....This doesn't happen. This shouldn't have happened. I can't imagine a scenario where the officer is in the right. RIP Justine.....I hope your death creates awareness for better training and I hope that no one involved is above the law.
I think the Michael Brown shooting changed police procedures in many places. Brown reached through the officer's window and tried to grab his weapon. The officer was vilified on social media.
If she refused his request and continued to approach, it will be ruled justified, imo.
If she refused his request and continued to approach, it will be ruled justified, imo.
Sadly, the answer is "yes", cops can shoot because of what they are thinking. It's been proven in court over and over, that if the cop says he or she believed he or she was in danger, then they can shoot to kill, regardless of whether or not, their thinking was correct.
It is so entrenched into law, that there really is no reason to charge cops with killing unarmed, innocent people. The whole pretense of a trial just gives the families a false hope that there will be justice.
Whatever he was thinking, how is it going to justify shooting an unarmed woman? Are cops allowed to shoot people for no real reason, but because of what they are thinking?