MN - Philando Castile, 32, fatally shot by police officer, 6 July 2016 #2

[sds71]

Castile’s final words, Choi said, were “I wasn’t reaching for it.”

“His dying words were in protest that he wasn’t reaching for his gun,” Choi said. “There simply was no objective threat posed to Officer Yanez.”

http://m.startribune.com/ramsey-cou...nnounce-update-in-castile-shooting/401484635/

 

[SweetCaroline]

I'm glad to know a fair investigation was done.

 

[ZooSleuth]

To be honest I was not expecting charges in this case based on what we know. Really curious now to see the dashcam video and hear more about the statements the officers made. I'm also glad they didn't rush the investigation and did it fairly (as far as I can tell).

 

[Tillicum]

Choi began his announcement by saying that after spending 19 weeks "immersed in the facts and law and thinking about what justice requires in the case," he said he decided it would be wrong to ask a grand jury to make a decision regarding the case.

He said although he knows some members of the community may not be pleased with such a decision, he said "in order to achieve justice, we must be willing to do the right thing no matter how hard it may seem."

http://kstp.com/news/philando-casti...harges-police-officer-jeronimo-yanez/4319592/

:thinking:

 

[Jax49]

http://www.twincities.com/2016/11/16/criminal-charges-philando-castile-shooting-final-moments/

summary of the events immediately preceding the shooting, based on squad car audio and video recordings of the stop

 

[al66pine]

http://www.twincities.com/2016/11/16/criminal-charges-philando-castile-shooting-final-moments/

summary of the events immediately preceding the shooting, based on squad car audio and video recordings of the stop

twincities.com link ^, end of article has pdf.
pages 1-2 = 3 crim charges against LEO,
pages 3-6 = Statement of Probable Cause,
pages 3-5 =detailed about sequence of events at scene of shooting*
pages 4-6 = details of interview w shooting LEO & others.

In re-rereading ^ several times, I've found some info which I had not seen before. Anyone else? Thx in adv.

__________________________________________

* at least, as investigators & prosecutor saw in vid & heard in audio.

 

[bluesneakers]

twincities.com link ^, end of article has pdf.
pages 1-2 = 3 crim charges against LEO,
pages 3-6 = Statement of Probable Cause,
pages 3-5 =detailed about sequence of events at scene of shooting*
pages 4-6 = details of interview w shooting LEO & others.

In re-rereading ^ several times, I've found some info which I had not seen before. Anyone else? Thx in adv.

__________________________________________

* at least, as investigators & prosecutor saw in vid & heard in audio.

I noticed one big mistake I never thought about before. But I'm not sure about any info I hadn't seen before. What did you find?

 

[al66pine]

I noticed one big mistake I never thought about before. But I'm not sure about any info I hadn't seen before. What did you find?

Is there gap in aud/vid recordings?
Page 4, 9:06:09 is end of squad car recordings.
Page 4, 9:06:42 begins fiancee Reynolds' aud & vid facebook livestream.
That's a 33 sec gap, or at least, ProbCauseStmt does not {ETA: quote Reynolds or LEO} during that time.
Hard for me to imagine that nobody said anything for 33 sec. Maybe nothing relevant. IDK.
The poss PCStmt gap may or may not be significant. IDK.

I'm curious because I'd like to know what LEO said & Reynolds said during that time, to see whether stmts were consistent or inconsistent w their preceding & subsequent stmts.

 

[jkly]

I really like the DA, John Choi. After watching the press conference, I think there's something so elegant about him.

 

[ZooSleuth]

Is there gap in aud/vid recordings?
Page 4, 9:06:09 is end of squad car recordings.
Page 4, 9:06:42 begins fiancee Reynolds' aud & vid facebook livestream.
That's a 33 sec gap, or at least, ProbCauseStmt does not {ETA: quote Reynolds or LEO} during that time.
Hard for me to imagine that nobody said anything for 33 sec. Maybe nothing relevant. IDK.
The poss PCStmt gap may or may not be significant. IDK.

I'm curious because I'd like to know what LEO said & Reynolds said during that time, to see whether stmts were consistent or inconsistent w their preceding & subsequent stmts.

Good eye. I went back and read the doc and I think the difference in time may be that they are going off the times from the squad car camera for the timeline from that video, and then they are going off the facebook video clock for the rest because it captured more audio of what was going on from that point on. The gap could simply be a difference in time between the two video's clocks but they failed to explain that in the doc. The squad car should not have stopped recording so I can't imagine an actual gap exists where there is no video from either recording.

 

[al66pine]

Good eye. I went back and read the doc and I think the difference in time may be that they are going off the times from the squad car camera for the timeline from that video, and then they are going off the facebook video clock for the rest because it captured more audio of what was going on from that point on. The gap could simply be a difference in time between the two video's clocks but they failed to explain that in the doc. The squad car should not have stopped recording so I can't imagine an actual gap exists where there is no video from either recording.

You're right esp. re ^ bbm. I'd still like to see & hear recordings, to look for consistencies or inconsistencies.

pdf of crim charges
http://www.twincities.com/2016/11/16...final-moments/ (same Nov 16 article Jax49 liked)

 

[Jax49]

http://www.startribune.com/dream-te...n-police-shooting-courtroom-battle/402186185/

'Dream team vs. dream team' in police shooting courtroom battle

High-power teams will argue case of Jeronimo Yanez.

The manslaughter charge levied against St. Anthony police officer Jeronimo Yanez in the fatal shooting of Philando Castile will be fought in court by formidable attorneys known for tackling big cases.Ramsey County Attorney John Choi has assembled a team of some of his most seasoned attorneys, while Yanez is being represented by defense lawyers known for courtroom flourish in high-profile cases.
“You’ve got the dream team versus the dream team,” said veteran defense attorney Gary Wolf, who is familiar with the attorneys in the case. “It’s going to be quite a trial.”

 

[K_Z]

Lawyer: Philando Castile 'stoned' before shooting

The attorneys for the Minnesota police officer who fatally shot Philando Castile on Thursday called on a judge to dismiss manslaughter and other charges against their client, arguing Castile was “stoned” and his actions contributed to his death.

“The status of being stoned (in an acute and chronic sense) explains why Mr. Castile, 1) did not follow the repeated directions of Officer Yanez; 2) stared straight ahead and avoided eye-contact; 3) never mentioned that he had a carry permit, but instead said he had a gun; and 4) did not show his hands,” according to a memo supporting the motion to dismiss.

Defense attorney Early Gray noted in the memo that autopsy results indicated that Castile had high levels of THC, the mind-altering ingredient in marijuana, in his blood. Castile’s girlfriend — who broadcast the aftermath of the shooting on Facebook — confirmed to authorities that the two had smoked marijuana before the stop that day, and marijuana was also in the car at the time of the incident.

Gray alleges in the filing that Castile acted negligently by failing to follow protocols that licensed gun owners are instructed to use during their permit-to-carry classes, actions that led to Yanez firing his weapon. The memo also states that Castile falsely claimed on his permit application that he was not a user of an unlawful substance. He was cited three times in 2005, 2006 and 2008 for "marijuana in vehicle" violations.

"This is critical because unlawful narcotics users are not eligible to own, let alone carry, a firearm on their person," the memo says.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/la...-stoned-before-shooting/ar-AAlC3bc?li=BBnbcA1

BBM. As I strongly suspected, there is much more to what happened than what DR live streamed. This filing indicates that PC never said initially that he had a carry permit, but he said he "had a gun" and refused to show his hands. And this is the first confirmation that PC was, in fact, under the influence acutely of an illegal substance (that means he could not lawfully carry the gun, nor drive a car lawfully). The officer stated in his earliest reports that there was MJ smoke visible in the car, and he smelled it when standing there. I think the officer probably never even had the opportunity to ask PC to get out of the car. And there was another officer present, whose statement we do not have yet. A lot happened BEFORE DR whipped out her cellphone to videostream what was going on.

And before a bunch of marijuana supporters jump all over that-- this is not a debate about whether MJ should be legal or not-- not even in states that have legalized can a user drive a car under the influence of MJ, or carry a gun-- even with a permit.

PC was intoxicated/ impaired, and driving a car, and failing to follow the lawful orders of a police officer-- and reaching for "something" after announcing he had a gun, and refusing to cooperate BEFORE the filming began. Put that together with his resemblance to the convenience store armed robber, and it's logical to see why the officer acted as he did in response to PC's actions.

I think the case will *not* be dismissed after this filing, but the totality of the evidence and circumstances (strongly including what happened before DR began videostreaming) as it comes out little by little will persuade a jury that the officer should not be convicted of manslaughter. I know it's not a popular idea, but IMO, PC is entirely responsible for his own death. He was a SUSPECT, not simply an innocent "victim".

 

[drjones]

[FONT=&quot]9:05:52 – 9:05:55 — Castile calmly informed Yanez: “Sir, I have to tell you that I do have a firearm on me.” Before Castile completed the sentence Yanez interrupted and calmly replied “OK” and placed his right hand on the holster of his own holstered gun.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]9:05:55 – 9:06:02 — Yanez, said “Okay, don’t reach for it, then.” Castile responded: I’m … I’m … [inaudible] reaching …,” before being again interrupted by Yanez, who said “Don’t pull it out.” Castile responded, “I’m not pulling it out,” and Reynolds also said “He’s not pulling it out.” Yanez screamed “Don’t pull it out!” and quickly pulled his own gun with his right hand while he reached inside the driver’s side window with his left hand. Yanez removed his left arm from the car, and then fired seven shots in the direction of Castile in rapid succession. The seventh shot was fired at 9:06:02 p.m. During the incident, Kauser did not touch or remove his gun.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]9:06:03 – 9:06:04 — Reynolds yelled “You just killed my boyfriend!”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]9:06:04 – 9:06:05 — Castile moaned and said “I wasn’t reaching for it.”[/FONT]

 

[drjones]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/17/us/philando-castile-shooting-minnesota.html

“No reasonable officer — knowing, seeing and hearing what Officer Yanez did at the time — would have used deadly force under these circumstances,” the Ramsey County attorney, John J. Choi, said. Officer Yanez, who will appear in court on Friday, was also charged with two felony counts of intentional discharge of a dangerous weapon.

 

[CoolJ]

[FONT="]9:05:52 – 9:05:55 — Castile calmly informed Yanez: “Sir, I have to tell you that I do have a firearm on me.” Before Castile completed the sentence Yanez interrupted and calmly replied “OK” and placed his right hand on the holster of his own holstered gun.[/FONT]
[FONT="]9:05:55 – 9:06:02 — Yanez, said “Okay, don’t reach for it, then.” Castile responded: I’m … I’m … [inaudible] reaching …,” before being again interrupted by Yanez, who said “Don’t pull it out.” Castile responded, “I’m not pulling it out,” and Reynolds also said “He’s not pulling it out.” Yanez screamed “Don’t pull it out!” and quickly pulled his own gun with his right hand while he reached inside the driver’s side window with his left hand. Yanez removed his left arm from the car, and then fired seven shots in the direction of Castile in rapid succession. The seventh shot was fired at 9:06:02 p.m. During the incident, Kauser did not touch or remove his gun.[/FONT]
[FONT="]9:06:03 – 9:06:04 — Reynolds yelled “You just killed my boyfriend!”[/FONT]
[FONT="]9:06:04 – 9:06:05 — Castile moaned and said “I wasn’t reaching for it.”[/FONT]

I think this interaction right here speaks for itself.

 

[jkly]

Lawyer: Philando Castile 'stoned' before shooting


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/la...-stoned-before-shooting/ar-AAlC3bc?li=BBnbcA1

BBM. As I strongly suspected, there is much more to what happened than what DR live streamed. This filing indicates that PC never said initially that he had a carry permit, but he said he "had a gun" and refused to show his hands. And this is the first confirmation that PC was, in fact, under the influence acutely of an illegal substance (that means he could not lawfully carry the gun, nor drive a car lawfully). The officer stated in his earliest reports that there was MJ smoke visible in the car, and he smelled it when standing there. I think the officer probably never even had the opportunity to ask PC to get out of the car. And there was another officer present, whose statement we do not have yet. A lot happened BEFORE DR whipped out her cellphone to videostream what was going on.

And before a bunch of marijuana supporters jump all over that-- this is not a debate about whether MJ should be legal or not-- not even in states that have legalized can a user drive a car under the influence of MJ, or carry a gun-- even with a permit.

PC was intoxicated/ impaired, and driving a car, and failing to follow the lawful orders of a police officer-- and reaching for "something" after announcing he had a gun, and refusing to cooperate BEFORE the filming began. Put that together with his resemblance to the convenience store armed robber, and it's logical to see why the officer acted as he did in response to PC's actions.

I think the case will *not* be dismissed after this filing, but the totality of the evidence and circumstances (strongly including what happened before DR began videostreaming) as it comes out little by little will persuade a jury that the officer should not be convicted of manslaughter. I know it's not a popular idea, but IMO, PC is entirely responsible for his own death. He was a SUSPECT, not simply an innocent "victim".

He had marijuana in his system? What a shocker. I think most of us already expected that.

While I'm sure he was aware that smoking marijuana is illegal (and even if he had been smoking it right before being pulled over), he made no effort to hide the fact that he had a weapon. He did in fact, inform the officer of it and the officer said "okay."

How does that absolve the officer of firing seven times into the car? Mr. Castile deserved to be ARRESTED if they found evidence of marijuana in the car, not shot and killed.

Mr. Castile was also in no way responsible for Officer Yanez's assumption that he was dealing with an armed robber. There's no way he could have anticipated that the officer pulling him over was on edge and strongly biased against anything he may or may not do. Or should Mr. Castile be held responsible for daring to go outside wearing the wrong face that morning?

As you anticipated, I strongly disagree that PC is "entirely responsible for his own death." Officer Yanez is at least, partly, if not more, responsible for Castile's death.

One thing I do agree with you on is that officer Yanez will be acquitted of all charges after one or more mistrials.The reason being that our nation is too divided right now and juries enter the courtroom already biased.

A jury couldn't convict Dalia Dippolito, who was on video committing the crime she was accused of (hiring a hit man to kill her husband.) Too many jurors wanted to stick it to the police, I guess. Now the State has to waste more resources retrying this dangerous sociopath.

I have no doubt that some of the jurors who sit on this case wlll base their verdict on wanting to stick it to BLM, not in the interest of justice.

It's a vicious cycle.

 

[K_Z]

I don't remember reading before exactly "when" the armed convenience store robbery occurred, related to the PC stop-- just that it happened previously. I had interpreted that to mean it could have happened days earlier. Officer Yanez was the lead investigator in that armed robbery, according to numerous articles. And there were security video that had already been reviewed to identify the suspects-- so I didn't realize how close the robbery was to the traffic stop. But it appears it all happened VERY quickly, that the security video was available so soon after the armed robbery.

This (below) indicates that the armed robbery happened in very close time proximity to when the officer identified PC as a possible suspect. (And in close geographic proximity-- elsewhere I previously read that the robbery was within a half mile of where PC was pulled over). So, the robbery happened earlier in the evening. I do think that is quite significant as to the timeline of when exactly the robbery happened, when he radioed that PC resembled the armed robbery suspect, and the mindset of Officer Yanez.

Castile was pulled over while driving in the nearby suburb of Falcon Heights because he resembled a suspect in a gas station robbery that had taken place earlier in the evening, according to prosecutors.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...le-stoned-negligent-before-shooting/95471712/

The office reported that Castile died at 9:37 p.m. CDT in the emergency room of the Hennepin County Medical Center, about 20 minutes after being shot.[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Philando_Castile

Yes, I know PC would have had no knowledge of that robbery, but as someone who had been pulled over 56 or more times, and had numerous encounters with police (including no license/ no insurance situations in his past, etc), he knew how to respond to an officer during a traffic stop, AND he knew he was an impaired driver, AND he knew he was an impaired driver with a child in the car, AND he knew he was in possession of a gun he WAS NOT authorized to have (by virtue of him knowing that he WAS actively impaired), he absolutely did CAUSE the situation that occurred, IMO.

Had he cooperated with the officer, he would have been arrested for numerous charges (including child endangerment), had his car impounded, and likely would have lost his job at the school, in addition to facing felonies and misdemeanors. IMO, his behavior (and his actions, as an impaired driver with a child and a loaded gun in the car) created the situation.

IMO, he knew he was about to be arrested, but not for the reasons that Officer Yanez anticipated. My guess is that PC absolutely knew he was busted for the impaired driving and pot possession and smoking, and the gun possession while driving impaired, and the child in the car, and thought somehow he could "mitigate" the situation by digging out his carry permit INSTEAD of complying with the officer's instructions and keeping still.

IMO, being acutely under the influence, his ability to make sound legal judgments was severely impaired. Executive function, actions/ consequences, and all that. He just started digging around in his pockets, instead of carefully considering the totality of his own predicament, and that of the child in the car (and the GF). And if that child had been taken into child protective custody and tested for drugs, I guarantee she would have tested positive for the "hot boxing" second hand smoke she breathed in that car (and was chronically exposed to). But that's a whole other discussion on its own.

These were not just some random "virtuous, law abiding innocent" people driving home from an outing. They were 2 adults smoking drugs in a car with a child, driving around under the influence, with a child in the car, and carrying a loaded gun. Let's not forget that. All of that is extremely significant to understanding what happened. Both of these adults committed numerous crimes-- that the police and prosecutor chose not to charge the girlfriend is immaterial-- she still engaged in criminal activity. (And politics had a lot to do with her not being charged, IMO.) This wasn't a "simple misunderstanding" that went awry.

 

[K_Z]

One thing I do agree with you on is that officer Yanez will be acquitted of all charges after one or more mistrials.The reason being that our nation is too divided right now and juries enter the courtroom already biased.

A jury couldn't convict Dalia Dippolito, who was on video committing the crime she was accused of (hiring a hit man to kill her husband.) Too many jurors wanted to stick it to the police, I guess. Now the State has to waste more resources retrying this dangerous sociopath.

I have no doubt that some of the jurors who sit on this case wlll base their verdict on wanting to stick it to BLM, not in the interest of justice.

It's a vicious cycle.

Respectfully snipped, and BBM.

I'm not entirely sure OGY will be acquitted. I think he "should" be, but with the extremist politics of the geographic area and the situation, I think it's entirely possible OGY will be convicted. And a conviction, if it happens, may simply be a backlash to the politics that is playing out nationally-- not a conviction based on the evidence and merits of the case.

Because a sitting senator, a congressional representative, and the governor, all became involved with this in a VERY public way, before ANY of the evidence and details became public, these 3 individuals inappropriately influenced the investigation, the public perception, and the media coverage of this case. Their public involvement was HUGELY inappropriate, and has prejudiced the officer's defense in a very material way, IMO. They should have said nothing at all, and said it is a police and BCA matter to investigate. We cannot have elected officials inserting themselves into these kind of emotionally charged situations, and "taking sides" in policing and criminal investigations--it is not fair or just, and is immensely destructive to the ideals of a democracy. IMO.

 

[drjones]

"Had he cooperated with the officer, he would have been arrested for numerous charges"

How did he not cooperate with the officer?