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

[ninij9]

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

I totally agree.

 

[ninij9]

The part where the police claims a speeding vehicle put them in a death threatening situation. The question should be where is the evidence. Not the evidence might be there so lets just go ahead and judge. You can easily get away from a slow moving vehicle. That is not a death threatening situation. That the officer got pinned must be his own mistake because he was too busy shooting and didn't notice the fence or wall. Sadly, I see plenty of people vilifying the dead girl. Not based on evidence, but just because she was bad bad bad and therefore deserved to be executed. JMO.

I am more under the impression, attempting to flee And resisting arrest, as well as being in possession of stolen car, together WITH speeding, all contributed to the use of deadly force. Not just a speeding car. A collection of actions by the deceased that caused LE to make some split second decisions to protect themselves. All of these actions chosen willfully by the deceased party, of her own free will which did also jeopardized the well being of ALL of the other occupants of the STOLEN car as well. This is NOT an attempt to vilify the 17 year old driver, or call her bad bad bad. It is an explanation of documented facts and social media leading up to that fateful morning., using her social media to try and understand her mind set toward authority, and the law as it pertained to her.
All of the above as always is JMO. This has been a good and intelligent debate so far. I totally see where all sides are coming from, even if I don't agree with alot of you. Its comforting that there are a bunch of you on here that feel as I do.

 

[katydid23]

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.

"no evidence of a death threatening situation besides the claim of the police who would have claimed self defense either way"

wow. This puts the cops in a bind. You are saying that we should ignore any police testimony because they automatically lie? So what about the criminals they are trying to arrest? Do you accept their version of events?

"No way that car had any high speed and ran into that wall. The evidence is not there. " Who said the car was driving at high speed? No one said that. The problem was that an officer was trapped between the fence, the brick wall and the moving car, which was trying to flee and drive around the patrol SUV that was blocking it.

"The death threatening situation was long gone by the time the car reached the police man." AGREED. That's they they shot the driver BEFORE she hit the cop.

"...there is no reason to vilify a dead girl who can't defend herself." The girl's mother is vilifying the police. I think it is important to show that this was not a little innocent girl on her way to church. She has had several run-ins with the law and she hated the cops.

 

[Minette]

So, when I was a kid I was hit by a car. It wasn't going fast, it was just starting and accelerated to maybe 10 mph before the driver realized there was something being dragged under the wheels (me) and stopped. And yet, I was hospitalized for over a week and almost had to have my spleen removed. Granted, I was a kid and proportionally much smaller than a car, but on the other hand a car typically weighs 3,000-4,000 lbs. and people weigh much less than that, even grown up people, even people wearing a uniform. Why is there even any speculation that anyone should 'allow' a car to hit him or her without taking any action within their power to prevent that, or to prevent the same thing from happening to others? This is reminding me of another recent case in which the argument was made that if the LEO didn't have any bones broken then deadly force wasn't justified. Well, this LEO did have a fractured leg, so what now? If he didn't have TWO fractures deadly force wasn't justified? What WOULD justify it? His dying breath as he was pinned between car & fence? Witnessing the death of a bystander or passenger in the car due to the attempts to escape by the driver? Granted, LE didn't necessarily know that this was a 2x car thief with a history of resisting when they attempted to stop her--but they did know that she was driving a stolen car and refused to stop or exit the vehicle. So if she starts moving at *any* speed, and you are a (let's be generous) 200 lb. person going us against a 3,000 lb. vehicle, who do YOU think would come out unharmed in that encounter? You can argue with the laws of physics all you want, but you won't win.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

So, when I was a kid I was hit by a car. It wasn't going fast, it was just starting and accelerated to maybe 10 mph before the driver realized there was something being dragged under the wheels (me) and stopped. And yet, I was hospitalized for over a week and almost had to have my spleen removed. Granted, I was a kid and proportionally much smaller than a car, but on the other hand a car typically weighs 3,000-4,000 lbs. and people weigh much less than that, even grown up people, even people wearing a uniform. Why is there even any speculation that anyone should 'allow' a car to hit him or her without taking any action within their power to prevent that, or to prevent the same thing from happening to others? This is reminding me of another recent case in which the argument was made that if the LEO didn't have any bones broken then deadly force wasn't justified. Well, this LEO did have a fractured leg, so what now? If he didn't have TWO fractures deadly force wasn't justified? What WOULD justify it? His dying breath as he was pinned between car & fence? Witnessing the death of a bystander or passenger in the car due to the attempts to escape by the driver? Granted, LE didn't necessarily know that this was a 2x car thief with a history of resisting when they attempted to stop her--but they did know that she was driving a stolen car and refused to stop or exit the vehicle. So if she starts moving at *any* speed, and you are a (let's be generous) 200 lb. person going us against a 3,000 lb. vehicle, who do YOU think would come out unharmed in that encounter? You can argue with the laws of physics all you want, but you won't win.

Excellent post!

 

[Minette]

I could be biased, due to, you know, being hit and dragged by a car, but still. Thank you!

 

[Kimberlyd125]

The more I ponder, the more my mind goes to "fight or flight".
Has anybody ever felt that feeling? I have. Be it from very different circumstances. I've never stolen a quarter.
But anyway, if she was desperate because of all the trouble she was already in, she would NOT have wanted to get caught in that stolen vehicle.

So, IMO she was not going to stop. No matter what. IMO she was willing to risk her life, her sister's life, her girlfriend's life, the other passengers' lives and the lives of those two LE officers to get away.

JMO

 

[Kimberlyd125]

I could be biased, due to, you know, being hit and dragged by a car, but still. Thank you!

Yeah. I think that'll do it.


But you made great points. Very well said.

 

[katydid23]

Sorry for confusing by using the word 'speeding'. I meant a high enough speed to put them in a death threatening situation. Yes, there is no evidence of the speed. No evidence of the death threatening siuation. No evidence if the police actions were justified. Glad we agree

A witness from inside the car said that the driver was attempting to flee, by driving around the police car that was blocking them. To do so, she had to drive between the police vehicle and the fence. The witness said there was a cop, on foot, pinned between the fence and the fleeing car. That's when they shot the driver, because she ignored their orders to stop.

This info was from the witnesses in the car, not from the cops.

 

[Rhino-Esq]

Not to make anyone mad... Would it be possible to change the title of this thread to "Police shoot and kill teen ...." Jessie was only 17 and not yet an adult. I am not sure if "woman" is correct? JMO

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Not to make anyone mad... Would it be possible to change the title of this thread to "Police shoot and kill teen ...." Jessie was only 17 and not yet an adult. I am not sure if "woman" is correct? JMO

A MOD should be able to do that. I'm not sure who is handling this thread. I can't tell in tapatalk.

 

[bessie]

Not to make anyone mad... Would it be possible to change the title of this thread to "Police shoot and kill teen ...." Jessie was only 17 and not yet an adult. I am not sure if "woman" is correct? JMO

Done. Thank you.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Ahhhh Bessie to the rescue.


Thanks Bessie.

 

[Yoda]

Thanks Bessie- although I would prefer the title to read: Officer stuck by driver of stolen car JMO

 

[al66pine]

.... noevidence of the speed. No evidence of the death threatening siuation.….
if the police actions were justified….

sbm bbm

Are you saying what DPD’s policy re LEO-shooting-at-moving-vehicles -
--- is,
or
--- should be, in your view/belief/opinion?

Have you read DPD policy itself to help decide whether this LEO violated policy and whether it was or was not justified?
If you haven’t yet, here is relevant part:

"...threatened by an oncoming vehicleshall, if feasible, move out of the way rather than discharging a firearm.
Officer(s) shall not discharge a firearm at a moving vehicle or its occupant(s) in response to a threat posedsolely by the vehicle
unless the officer has an objectively reasonable belief that:
1. The vehicle or suspect poses an immediate threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or another person and
2. The officer has no reasonable alternative course of action to prevent death or serious physical injury."
Per http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27...g-unarmed-teen.bbm and more of policy there

IOW, threat of either serious physical injury or death can justify shooting at moving vehicle.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

sbm bbm

Are you saying what DPD’s policy re LEO-shooting-at-moving-vehicles -
--- is,
or
--- should be, in your view/belief/opinion?

Have you read DPD policy itself to help decide whether this LEO violated policy and whether it was or was not justified?
If you haven’t yet, here is relevant part:

"...threatened by an oncoming vehicleshall, if feasible, move out of the way rather than discharging a firearm.
Officer(s) shall not discharge a firearm at a moving vehicle or its occupant(s) in response to a threat posedsolely by the vehicle
unless the officer has an objectively reasonable belief that:
1. The vehicle or suspect poses an immediate threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or another person and
2. The officer has no reasonable alternative course of action to prevent death or serious physical injury."
Per http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27...g-unarmed-teen.bbm and more of policy there

IOW, threat of either serious physical injury or death can justify shooting at moving vehicle.

And if she was so close to him that he eventually was pinned between that car and that wall/fence, I would say that shows threat of either serious physical injury or death.

JMO

 

[sherlockh]

A witness from inside the car said that the driver was attempting to flee, by driving around the police car that was blocking them. To do so, she had to drive between the police vehicle and the fence. The witness said there was a cop, on foot, pinned between the fence and the fleeing car. That's when they shot the driver, because she ignored their orders to stop.

This info was from the witnesses in the car, not from the cops.

Thanks. I can imagine that would be a life threatening situation and justified lethal force. Just like everyone else I see a picture where a car is turned left against a wall/fence. That is not exactly getting around a police car. So maybe she just aimed for the policeman just for the heck of it, or she made a steering error and the 'pinning situation' was accidental or maybe she was already shot. I simply don't have the facts that prove which of the multiple stories is the correct one. It is all just speculations. Therefore I choose to withhold my judgement one way or the other until the facts of this case are known.

"When the cops walked up, they were on [Jessica's] side of the car, and they shot the window and they shot her. That's when she wrecked, and that's when the cop got hit."

The eyewitness said, due to the shooting, Jessica was not in control of the car when it hit the officer.

http://www.9news.com/story/news/loc...ess-to-cop-shooting-tells-her-story/22449579/

 

[Kimberlyd125]

But it doesn't even matter. She chose to put the vehicle in motion after she saw the cops.
So, IMO, it doesn't matter if she aimed the car at him or hit him while trying to go around the cop car... Her actions by putting that car in drive and pressing the accelerator caused his injury and could have very easily caused his death.

IMO that is a justifiable reason for the officers to try to stop the threat. Stopping the threat in that narrow alley, IMO, was to stop her. Period. She was the threat.

JMO

 

[al66pine]

Not to make anyone mad... Would it be possible to change the title of this thread to "Police shoot and kill teen ...." Jessie was only 17 and not yet an adult. I am not sure if "woman" is correct? JMO

or how about 'Police shoot and kill 17 y/o in stolen car' etc?

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Had she not put the car in drive and accelerated, she would likely be alive today. In a lot of trouble but alive.

From what I understand, when LE got there the car was parked. It wasn't until Jessica saw the cops coming did she start moving.

Again, her actions.

JMO