CO - Jessica Hernandez, 17, killed by police after LEO struck by stolen car

[branwynbreeze]

Take another look at car, there were 5 teens in it. Only Jessie was shot, I'm amazed by that.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Once again, someone stating something as fact that is not proven. The driver being dead or alive when hitting the officer is not an issue with some, it seems. I have no problem with who thinks what with no actual facts.

This type of LE shooting will continue imo, with many folks supporting that LE should go ahead and take unarmed people out for criminal acts - petty or otherwise. Looking forward to more LE shootings of this type and the results. Retaliation may be a consequence - LE is picking their battles, good luck with that. What are they looking for btw? A raise in pay? Or is the court system frustrating cops to the point they are taking matters into their own hands? Idk.

She was not unarmed.
Vehicles can be and have been used as weapons. People kill people with cars all the time. Sometimes intentionally.

 

[Woodland]

She was not unarmed.
Vehicles can be and have been used as weapons. People kill people with cars all the time. Sometimes intentionally.

Facts determine intentional. Jmo?

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Facts determine intentional. Jmo?

BBM

I have no idea what you are asking me.
Are you asking me if my post was just my opinion?
If so, then my answer is no. It's not just my opinion.
It is fact. Vehicles can be and have been used as weapons. People kill people with cars all the time. Sometimes intentionally.

 

[Sonya610]

If that is the rule then every stolen car that tries to get away should be shot at, and the question if the driver was trying to kill the police officer does not even matter anymore. The car could be full with babies but who cares. Shoot to kill. Case closed. JMO.

Personally I would be fine with that rule.

 

[Woodland]

If LE is perceived as being 'fine with that rule' as well, problems will ensue. Jmo.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

If LE can not defend themselves due to fear of being charged with a crime, problems will ensue. JMO

 

[katydid23]

Once again, someone stating something as fact that is not proven. The driver being dead or alive when hitting the officer is not an issue with some, it seems. I have no problem with who thinks what with no actual facts.

This type of LE shooting will continue imo, with many folks supporting that LE should go ahead and take unarmed people out for criminal acts - petty or otherwise. Looking forward to more LE shootings of this type and the results. Retaliation may be a consequence - LE is picking their battles, good luck with that. What are they looking for btw? A raise in pay? Or is the court system frustrating cops to the point they are taking matters into their own hands? Idk.

"Once again, someone stating something as fact that is not proven." I was replying to a post and using an example, a hypothetical scenario. As in 'What would you do IF...' I made no statements offering any facts.

"The driver being dead or alive when hitting the officer is not an issue with some, it seems." The driver was not dead when she hit the officer. She died in the hospital many hours later. RIP :rose: As for the question of ' if she was shot before or after' : I would assume she was shot before, otherwise she wouldn't have been a threat . I am not sure why you keep making a huge issue out of her being shot before she actually hit the officer.

"I have no problem with who thinks what with no actual facts." Ok


"This type of LE shooting will continue imo, with many folks supporting that LE should go ahead and take unarmed people out for criminal acts - petty or otherwise. " Nobody here thinks LE should 'take unarmed people out' for petty acts. All I see are people supporting LE's right to self defense.


"Looking forward to more LE shootings of this type and the results. Retaliation may be a consequence " So you are looking forward to the retaliation against LE?

"LE is picking their battles, good luck with that. What are they looking for btw? A raise in pay? Or is the court system frustrating cops to the point they are taking matters into their own hands? Idk." Who doesn't want a raise? And isn't the court system frustrating everyone these days?
Are you implying that they shot this 17 yr old because they are vigilantes?

 

[CoolJ]

Katy,
" I would assume she was shot before, otherwise she wouldn't have been a threat"
So, if it is found she was shot after hitting the officer would you believe it was an unjustified shooting?

"Nobody here thinks LE should 'take unarmed people out' for petty acts. All I see are people supporting LE's right to self defense"
Actually, have a read through some recent posts. There are posters here who think if someone is a criminal, blow them away.

None of the posters who you consider having a differing opinion think anything other than Supporting LE's right to self defense.
When somebody is killed, there should be a full investigation. If LE do the killing, it should be an independant investigation. What is wrong with having that opinion?

 

[katydid23]

Katy,
" I would assume she was shot before, otherwise she wouldn't have been a threat"
So, if it is found she was shot after hitting the officer would you believe it was an unjustified shooting?

"Nobody here thinks LE should 'take unarmed people out' for petty acts. All I see are people supporting LE's right to self defense"
Actually, have a read through some recent posts. There are posters here who think if someone is a criminal, blow them away.
None of the posters who you consider having a differing opinion think anything other than Supporting LE's right to self defense.
When somebody is killed, there should be a full investigation. If LE do the killing, it should be an independant investigation. What is wrong with have that opinion?

if it was found that she hit the officer with the car, ran into the fence, and then the officer walked over and shot, that would be an UNJUSTIFIED shooting and would warrant charges, imo. But all of the witnesses say she was shot before she hit the cop.

There already is a full investigation after every shooting. These 2 officers are on leave while the investigation is completed.

As for Independent investigation---there might be some real issues with that. I would hate to see a federal witch hunt after every officer involved shooting. And given the current administration, I could easily see that happening.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

if it was found that she hit the officer with the car, ran into the fence, and then the officer walked over and shot, that would be an UNJUSTIFIED shooting and would warrant charges, imo. But all of the witnesses say she was shot before she hit the cop.

There already is a full investigation after every shooting. These 2 officers are on leave while the investigation is completed.

As for Independent investigation---there might be some real issues with that. I would hate to see a federal witch hunt after every officer involved shooting. And given the current administration, I could easily see that happening.

Yep. Happening more every day.
Then when no charges are filed, those who have been fed misinformation and half truths get very upset.

JMO

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Wow. So her sister was a passenger.

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/ne...panic-teen-spurs-calls-for-changes-in-denver/

Police say the young woman refused to get out of the vehicle and instead put her foot on the gas, striking one of the officers, a situation that forced them to open fire on her. Four other young people who were inside the car, including Hernandez's sister, were unharmed.

 

[MyBelle]

That is not the point. It is the risk they took that matters. The risk of hitting an innocent person when there are 5 people inside a small space such as a car is considerable. Such risks should be avoided at all costs. JMO.

Who said they were innocent? All the police knew is that they were sitting in a stolen car and refusing repeated requests to get out.

 

[MyBelle]

If that is the rule then every stolen car that tries to get away should be shot at, and the question if the driver was trying to kill the police officer does not even matter anymore. The car could be full with babies but who cares. Shoot to kill. Case closed. JMO.

Police shooting at fleeing felons isn't exactly a new situation. The decision to shoot has always rested with the officer because the officer's duty is to protect the public.

JMO

 

[Kimberlyd125]

It looks like her girlfriend was also a passenger.



http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_2...o-forum-calls-special-prosecutor-fatal-jessie


Hernandez, the oldest of six children, was a student at New America School-Thornton. She had been out all night with friends, including a girl she was dating, when she was killed.

 

[MyBelle]

Once again, someone stating something as fact that is not proven. The driver being dead or alive when hitting the officer is not an issue with some, it seems. I have no problem with who thinks what with no actual facts.

This type of LE shooting will continue imo, with many folks supporting that LE should go ahead and take unarmed people out for criminal acts - petty or otherwise. Looking forward to more LE shootings of this type and the results. Retaliation may be a consequence - LE is picking their battles, good luck with that. What are they looking for btw? A raise in pay? Or is the court system frustrating cops to the point they are taking matters into their own hands? Idk.

Under Colorado statute, it doesn't matter whether the officer was hit before or after shoots were fired because the occupants were ALL resisting arrest by not getting out of the car.
Stealing a car is a felony in Colorado and as this case shows, there are serious consequences if one wishes to engage in an act of retaliation against a police officer just doing his job.


If the police officer is injured in through your resisting, you can be charged with a mandatory prison charge of assault in the second degree, C.R.S. 18-3-203.

http://www.omalleylawoffice.com/Pol...sting-Arrest-in-Colorado-C-R-S-18-8-103.shtml

 

[sherlockh]

I disagree.
Shots too perfect? Ok. They are trained to make perfect shots in a high pressure situation.
Didn't you argue that they could have hit innocent people in the car? Now you are saying the shots were perfect? Sounds like they did a good job to me. Perfect shots lesson the possibility of hitting the passengers.

Also, in my opinion, from looking at the pictures, the car did not hit the fence directly. IMO the major impact point was the driver's side front quarter panel/bumper. I believe it hit the brick wall, barely hitting the wood fence.

JMO

I am arguing that their story doesn't checkout and that there are indications that the police wasn't very careful when they decided to start shooting. There is no evidence of a death threatening situation besides the claim of the police who would have claimed self defense either way. No way that car had any high speed and ran into that wall. The evidence is not there. The death threatening situation was long gone by the time the car reached the police man. Therefore the broken leg is not evidence of any death threatening situation. There should be a thorough investigation and if that turns up real evidence that the police actions were justified then so be it, but for now there is none and there is no reason to vilify a dead girl who can't defend herself. JMO.

 

[CoolJ]

I have seen lots of arguments here showing how Jessica was a criminal. How her friends were criminals for not complying. I have seen attacks against her parents for.. "Bad parenting"?

What I haven't seen yet is evidence that this was a justified shooting. My opinion is that it very well could have been. But as of now, we just don't know. IMO

 

[sherlockh]

Who said they were innocent? All the police knew is that they were sitting in a stolen car and refusing repeated requests to get out.

Who said they were guilty? Didn't they have loud music on? There can be innocent reasons for why they did not get out of the car. That is not a reason to start killing them. JMO.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

I am arguing that their story doesn't checkout and that there are indications that the police wasn't very careful when they decided to start shooting. There is no evidence of a death threatening situation besides the claim of the police who would have claimed self defense either way. No way that car had any high speed and ran into that wall. The evidence is not there. The death threatening situation was long gone by the time the car reached the police man. Therefore the broken leg is not evidence of any death threatening situation. There should be a thorough investigation and if that turns up real evidence that the police actions were justified then so be it, but for now there is none and there is no reason to vilify a dead girl who can't defend herself. JMO.

Can you elaborate on what part of the "story" doesn't add up?
Just so we are clear, a car going 20 mph can kill you if it runs over you.
It seems the officer was in a small space. Didn't one witness say he was pinned?
So, I'm not sure what the speed would have to do with it.
How do you know the evidence is not there? Because we haven't seen it?
How do you know the death threatening situation was long gone by the time the car reached the police man?

I've see nobody "vilify a dead girl".

What I have seen is people pointing out her own words, her own pictures, and her own actions.

Perhaps she would be here had she made better choices in life.

JMO