Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on September 23, 2016, 08:10:51 AM
-
Video doesn't show a gun by his side. He never raises hands at police as they claimed. He appears to step backwards before they shoot him.
Doesn't look like the "gun in hand pointed at officers" claim the police have been claiming for 3 days now.
Now you have the mayor publicly defying the police chief... holding her own press conference demanding they release the video. Standing with the family of the victims. This lady was standing with the police chief 2 days ago - now she's holding a press conference demanding he release the video.
-
Video doesn't show a gun by his side. He never raises hands at police as they claimed. He appears to step backwards before they shoot him.
Doesn't look like the "gun in hand pointed at officers" claim the police have been claiming for 3 days now.
Now you have the mayor publicly defying the police chief... holding her own press conference demanding they release the video. Standing with the family of the victims. This lady was standing with the police chief 2 days ago - now she's holding a press conference demanding he release the video.
release it right before/after the first debate? false flag?
-
release it right before/after the first debate? false flag?
LOL imagine "the network" cancelling the debate due to rioters haha. Bailing out hilary, that'd be rich.
Nah, I think the nation wants to see how healthy she is. Standing for 90 minutes without a commercial is hillary's super bowl. This is it for her. Do it, and you regain confidence and probably win. Stumble and President Biden's on it.
Also, interesting... Trump's research polling includes a question "Should Trump use the phrase CROOKED HILARY from the debate stage". LOL. classy!
-
LOL @ police chief saying "Remember, the video doesn't tell the whole story"
"If it is proving our case should go in a different direction, we will do that"
LOL this motherfccker told us for 3 days that video PROVED the man was pointing a gun. Media is PISSED at this police chief.
Video evidence didn't give us probable cause in this case"
-
Can't see a gun? No? Well then can you see a book, as his lying daughter, and other black "witnesses," claim?
The cops did find a gun, with his prints on it, on the ground next to him. No book though.
-
Can't see a gun? No? Well then can you see a book, as his lying daughter, and other black "witnesses," claim?
The cops did find a gun, with his prints on it, on the ground next to him. No book though.
They initially claimed he pointed a gun at them, and the video shows it.
now? The shooter's body camera "malfunctioned", the other 3 cops' video shows he didn't point anything at them, and we don't know if it's a gun.
NC is an open carry state. Prints would be on any gun, even one they fished out of the car.
Glad to see the state is taking over this investigation - their simple story "he pointed it at us" was a known lie they knowingly repeated for days. Doesn't that bother you?
-
Doesn't that bother you?
No! They found a gun, not a book, next to him. The "book" is the lie that's been told for several days.
-
No! They found a gun, not a book, next to him. The "book" is the lie that's been told for several days.
The cop said they were justified in shoot him because he POINTED A GUN AT THEM.
Video shows this was a lie - and a lie he told after watching all 3 videos.
So I take everything else he says with a grain of salt - was the gun in the car, and they found it, and put it on the ground for the photograph, or did it land there? We know they will look us in the eye and OUTRIGHT LIE about it being pointed at them.
Maybe you find him to be "partially credible", but I do not.
-
Maybe you find him to be "partially credible", but I do not.
WAIT! The lie is that he didn't have a gun at all! Just ask his lying daughter! So you admit that he did have a gun. Thank You!
-
WAIT! The lie is that he didn't have a gun at all! Just ask his lying daughter! So you admit that he did have a gun. Thank You!
Oh - so we can shoot people just for having guns now?
Are you upset the police lied about him pointing it?
-
I thought guns were legal to possess?
Maybe the 2nd amendment doesn't apply to everyone?
-
Oh - so we can shoot people just for having guns now?
Are you upset the police lied about him pointing it?
I didn't see the video. So I believe the cops. What we know for sure is that he didn't point a book at the cops. That's the lie that all the negroes told.
-
I thought guns were legal to possess?
Maybe the 2nd amendment doesn't apply to everyone?
NC is an open carry state. people walk around with AR15s in their hand just to prove a point.
Cops don't usually shoot them, and then repeatedly claim the dead guy poiinted a gun at them.
I guess, I just cannot understand how any person could not be outraged about the cops repeatedly changing this one little detail - POINTING the gun at them. I mean, the entire justification for shooting him wasn't him having it - it was him pointing it.
People excuse police lies. Why?
-
I didn't see the video. So I believe the cops. What we know for sure is that he didn't point a book at the cops. That's the lie that all the negroes told.
Did you see the cops change their story during the press conference last night?
For 2 days, they said he pointed it at them.
Now, it's "inconclusive" what was even in his hand, and all who see the video say he never raised his hand at all.
-
NC is an open carry state. people walk around with AR15s in their hand just to prove a point.
Cops don't usually shoot them, and then repeatedly claim the dead guy poiinted a gun at them.
I guess, I just cannot understand how any person could not be outraged about the cops repeatedly changing this one little detail - POINTING the gun at them. I mean, the entire justification for shooting him wasn't him having it - it was him pointing it.
People excuse police lies. Why?
Because it's not them.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
-
The only real lie that we've heard over and over, is that he didn't have a gun at all, he pointed a book at the cops.
The only thing being called inconclusive is that it's hard to see on the videos what's in his hand, but it damn well wasn't a book.
He had a gun. He pointed it at the cops. They shot him dead. He was a negro criminal POS. Good Riddance!
-
He had a gun. He pointed it at the cops.
If you are shown a video in the next few days, which shows he NEVER pointed it at police, what will you think then?
Cause that is what is going to happen. THey just don't want weekend riots.
-
If you are shown a video in the next few days, which shows he NEVER pointed it at police, what will you think then?
Cause that is what is going to happen. THey just don't want weekend riots.
Let's go to the video! The video of the other negro criminal in Tulsa getting shot has been all over the news reported as "Shot with his hands up." Total lie. Video proves it.
-
Let's go to the video! The video of the other negro criminal in Tulsa getting shot has been all over the news reported as "Shot with his hands up." Total lie. Video proves it.
So you are also saying that shooting was a good shooting?
-
Let's go to the video! The video of the other negro criminal in Tulsa getting shot has been all over the news reported as "Shot with his hands up." Total lie. Video proves it.
The family and mayor now want the video released.
The police chief says the video alone doesn't tell the full story, we need to also include witness statements. He has already said repeatedly that the video showed the man pointing a gun at police.
If the video shows hands to the side, as everyone who has seen the video is saying, it explains why the police didn't want to release it.
Huge lie if they shot him and he wasn't pointing it. It's an open carry state. you literally CAN carry a gun in your hand in that state. most like holsters, but those AR15 cats carry it in their hands all the time. He is LEGAL to hold a gun in his hand, in an open carry state - he just cannot point it
If he points the gun, it goes from legal hand carry, to "reason to cap his ass".
Police claim he pointed it - everyone who has seen the 3 videos say he never raised his hand.
-
So you are also saying that shooting was a good shooting?
Yes!
The police weren't looking for him. The had a tip that some other criminal, with outstanding warrants, was in that area. When they pulled up behind him, he jumped out of his car, knowing that he was guilty of something, and confronted the police. It was his fault, because he was a dumb negro. All he had to do was stay in his car, and they would have ignored him, but his guilty mind, set the whole scenario into play, resulting in his death. Good Riddance!
-
Yes!
The police weren't looking for him. The had a tip that some other criminal, with outstanding warrants, was in that area. When they pulled up behind him, he jumped out of his car, knowing that he was guilty of something, and confronted the police. It was his fault, because he was a dumb negro. All he had to do was stay in his car, and they would have ignored him, but his guilty mind, set the whole scenario into play, resulting in his death. Good Riddance!
I was inquiring about your thoughts on the Tulsa shooting, but I see where your mindset is.
No reason to ask anything else of you.
-
I was inquiring about your thoughts on the Tulsa shooting, but I see where your mindset is.
No reason to ask anything else of you.
Yes Tulsa was a good shooting too. He refused repeatedly to follow police instructions. He didn't have his hands in the air when he was shot. The video clearly shows that. He reaching behind him, looking to pull something out of his waistband. I would have shot him then too. Again, a case of a dumb negro causing his own death, by his own stupidity. That sort of "person" we can easily afford to lose.
-
Yes Tulsa was a good shooting too. He refused repeatedly to follow police instructions. He didn't have his hands in the air when he was shot. The video clearly shows that. He reaching behind him, looking to pull something out of his waistband. I would have shot him then too. Again, a case of a dumb negro causing his own death, by his own stupidity. That sort of "person" we can easily afford to lose.
Really?
What did he pull from his waistband?
I'm pretty sure they found nothing, but as I said, talking to someone like you about it is obviously pointless.
-
Really?
What did he pull from his waistband?
I'm pretty sure they found nothing, but as I said, talking to someone like you about it is obviously pointless.
Yeah, it was nothing, but you shoot before the perp shoots you. If he had listened, and obeyed the police instructions, he would still be alive.
-
Yeah, it was nothing, but you shoot before the perp shoots you. If he had listened, and obeyed the police instructions, he would still be alive.
I saw him reach for nothing, but then that's me.
No point in continuing this one.
-
LOL @ police chief saying "Remember, the video doesn't tell the whole story"
"If it is proving our case should go in a different direction, we will do that"
LOL this motherfccker told us for 3 days that video PROVED the man was pointing a gun. Media is PISSED at this police chief.
Video evidence didn't give us probable cause in this case"
Typical police reasoning. If case looks bad for them: "This doesn't tell the whole story, let's wait for the facts (so we can slowly investigate ourselves)".
If the case looks good for them "It is a clear cut case".
Usually the cops also employ the "if you have nothing to hide what you are afraid of" tactic on plebs citizens but oddly enough it rarely applies to themselves.
-
I saw him reach for nothing, but then that's me.
No point in continuing this one.
Did you see the video? The reach is clear.
-
Did you see the video? The reach is clear.
Which video are you referring to? Tulsa?
Yes I did... No I didn't see him reach for anything.
-
Which video are you referring to? Tulsa?
Yes I did... No I didn't see him reach for anything.
Sorry, I didn't know you were blind.
-
Sorry, I didn't know you were blind.
Well, it's ok, I just realized what kind of asshole you were, so it evens out.
-
Well, it's ok, I just realized what kind of asshole you were, so it evens out.
Two cops responded to his "reach behind." One shot him, the right thing to do under those circumstances, and one cop tased him at the very same time. Taser is taking a chance that the perp shoots you, if the taser connections don't hit skin.
-
Two cops responded to his "reach behind." One shot him, the right thing to do under those circumstances, and one cop tased him at the very same time. Taser is taking a chance that the perp shoots you, if the taser connections don't hit skin.
I don't see any reach, as I said. No point in discussing further.
-
I thought guns were legal to possess?
Maybe the 2nd amendment doesn't apply to everyone?
It doesn't appear to apply to Californians.
-
I don't see any reach, as I said. No point in discussing further.
Two cops respond to the same "reach," at the same time, and I see that "reach" on the video, but you can't believe your lying eyes. Keep on playing let's pretend. Great way to get along in life.
-
It doesn't appear to apply to Californians.
You KNOW how I feel about that. I have seriously been considering getting the fuck out of here.
I'm thinking 4 years and I'm out.
-
Two cops respond to the same "reach," at the same time, and I see that "reach" on the video, but you can't believe your lying eyes. Keep on playing let's pretend. Great way to get along in life.
one used deadly force, one did not.
-
one used deadly force, one did not.
Deadly force was warranted, for reasons that I stated above.
-
Deadly force was warranted, for reasons that I stated above.
why do you think she was charged with manslaughter?
why do you think the other 2 cops didn't even draw their guns?
-
why do you think she was charged with manslaughter?
why do you think the other 2 cops didn't even draw their guns?
This is a good question.
-
why do you think she was charged with manslaughter?
why do you think the other 2 cops didn't even draw their guns?
She was charged, as a sacrifice to political correctness.
The other two cops were behind the other two that caught the "reach" movement and responded, correctly in the case of the woman cop who shot the POS.
-
Keith Scott's wife released a cell phone video, that she took of the part of the incident. You hear at least 3 cops yelling, "Put down the gun, put down the gun." She keeps saying, "He don't have no gun." Her video doesn't show anything that happened, just the cars, then you hear the shots.
I ask you, do three cops yell put down the gun, when someone doesn't have a gun, that they can clearly see? And, again, they recovered the gun with Scott's fingerprints on it. They did not recover any books at the scene, that Scott was supposed to be "aiming" at the cops, as the black "witnesses" lied about.
-
Keith Scott's wife released a cell phone video, that she took of the part of the incident. You hear at least 3 cops yelling, "Put down the gun, put down the gun." She keeps saying, "He don't have no gun." Her video doesn't show anything that happened, just the cars, then you hear the shots.
I ask you, do three cops yell put down the gun, when someone doesn't have a gun, that they can clearly see? And, again, they recovered the gun with Scott's fingerprints on it. They did not recover any books at the scene, that Scott was supposed to be "aiming" at the cops, as the black "witnesses" lied about.
Does he raise his hands at the cop, pointing the object at them, as they repeatedly claimed?
-
WTF,
they showed on news what is going on in USA. Total mayhem, heavily armed soldiers on streets, crack down of protests with tear gas etc.
That is honestly more than what ripped Ukraine apart.
Goes show you how much the outside support matters.
No one is supplying blacks in USA with heavy weaponry, atgm's, advisers and political support.
-
Keith Scott's wife released a cell phone video, that she took of the part of the incident. You hear at least 3 cops yelling, "Put down the gun, put down the gun." She keeps saying, "He don't have no gun." Her video doesn't show anything that happened, just the cars, then you hear the shots.
I ask you, do three cops yell put down the gun, when someone doesn't have a gun, that they can clearly see? And, again, they recovered the gun with Scott's fingerprints on it. They did not recover any books at the scene, that Scott was supposed to be "aiming" at the cops, as the black "witnesses" lied about.
If it's the same video I'm thinking, from the angle shown, there didn't appear to be a gun at the spot it was later shown by police. However there have been many instances where for example cops will yell "stop resisting" to a non resisting or complying person to justify their actions so it would not be beyond them to use such a tactic here as well. Maybe he was holding a gun, maybe he didn't.
-
If it's the same video I'm thinking, from the angle shown, there didn't appear to be a gun at the spot it was later shown by police. However there have been many instances where for example cops will yell "stop resisting" to a non resisting or complying person to justify their actions so it would not be beyond them to use such a tactic here as well. Maybe he was holding a gun, maybe he didn't.
they could have found it in the car. He could have been saying "I dont have a gun" or whatever. They're all screaming, are sirens going too?
It's legal in NC to hold a gun. Open carry means just that. Just don't point it. (one of the reasons I HATE open carry states).
Of course - You, I, ANY of us, if we were a cop - would LIE in a minute if we shot someone we shouldn't have shot. Sorry, but that's what all people do. They lie, they keep what they have. They admit they killed someone, and they're going to jail. They're losing their house. Their wife is banging their buddies. Their kids forget who they are. .... and none of that bring back the person they shot.
So all cops have a VERY good motive to lie. I'm not even hating on them for that - it's human nature.
-
Does he raise his hands at the cop, pointing the object at them, as they repeatedly claimed?
You can't see him on her video, until after the shooting, when he's lying on the ground.
Seems to me, if she wanted to show the world what really went on, she could have gotten a better viewing angle, so we could all see that he didn't have a gun, but she was just saying that, hoping to win the ghetto lottery, collecting big bucks for her worthless dead husband, who wasn't worth $1.98 in real life.
-
You can't see him on her video, until after the shooting, when he's lying on the ground.
Seems to me, if she wanted to show the world what really went on, she could have gotten a better viewing angle, so we could all see that he didn't have a gun, but she was just saying that, hoping to win the ghetto lottery, collecting big bucks for her worthless dead husband, who wasn't worth $1.98 in real life.
Yeah - that dude seems to have ample time to get his shit together to show he wasnt holding anything
-
The gun that the police found next to Keith Scott's body, had Scott's fingerprints, DNA, and his blood on it. His lying wife saying, "He don't have no gun," but deliberately not videoing her husband as the police are confronting him, so we couldn't see that he did indeed have a gun, was just part of her plan to win the "ghetto lottery" by suing the city because the cops killed her POS husband. Negroes are disgusting excuses for human beings.
-
You KNOW how I feel about that. I have seriously been considering getting the fuck out of here.
I'm thinking 4 years and I'm out.
I'm close to being on the same path. Although I will be placing an order tonight for a Spikes Tactical that I found on sale........LOL
-
The gun that the police found next to Keith Scott's body, had Scott's fingerprints, DNA, and his blood on it. His lying wife saying, "He don't have no gun," but deliberately not videoing her husband as the police are confronting him, so we couldn't see that he did indeed have a gun, was just part of her plan to win the "ghetto lottery" by suing the city because the cops killed her POS husband. Negroes are disgusting excuses for human beings.
Did he have it in his hand, or did he POINT IT as they claimed?
Police cannot shoot someone for holding a gun pointed at the ground. If they do, it's more of a punishment thing for him being a punkass.
My own guess is that we'll find out he didn't point it - they just got tired of his shit and popped him for not dropping the gun. If they want to do it, fine, but we will see if it's legal. My big problem is them fcking lying about it. If that's the case.
-
Did he have it in his hand, or did he POINT IT as they claimed?
Police cannot shoot someone for holding a gun pointed at the ground. If they do, it's more of a punishment thing for him being a punkass.
My own guess is that we'll find out he didn't point it - they just got tired of his shit and popped him for not dropping the gun. If they want to do it, fine, but we will see if it's legal. My big problem is them fcking lying about it. If that's the case.
There is no evidence that the cops are lying. The evidence says he had a gun. His gun, with his finger prints, his DNA, and his blood on it. The liars are the negro witnesses, who said he was holding a book. No book was found. And what would an illiterate, brain injured negro be doing with a book anyway.
-
There is no evidence that the cops are lying. The evidence says he had a gun. His gun, with his finger prints, his DNA, and his blood on it. The liars are the negro witnesses, who said he was holding a book. No book was found. And what would an illiterate, brain injured negro be doing with a book anyway.
Truth.
As soon as the media narrative centered around the "victim" holding a book, I knew it was bullshit.
-
There is no evidence that the cops are lying. The evidence says he had a gun. His gun, with his finger prints, his DNA, and his blood on it. The liars are the negro witnesses, who said he was holding a book. No book was found. And what would an illiterate, brain injured negro be doing with a book anyway.
Did he POINT the gun as the police claimed?
That seems to be the big deal here. They claimed he pointed. All signs are that he was just holding it.
-
Did he POINT the gun as the police claimed?
That seems to be the big deal here. They claimed he pointed. All signs are that he was just holding it.
The standoff with the stupid negro, lasted many minutes. It wasn't a matter of seconds. The cops tried to talk to him, "Put down the gun!"
You can hear them on the negro's merry widow's phone video. Obviously, he pointed the gun at them, as that's when they shot him. Why is it that whenever one these stupid negroes refuse to obey the cop's orders, and do something stupid, getting themselves killed, it is always the cops fault. This was a clean kill.
-
Obviously, he pointed the gun at them, as that's when they shot him.
Why is that obvious? Because that was in their report?
The suspicion of many is that we're not seeing the other 2 body camera angles (from the 2 closer cops) because it matches what the witnesses say - he held the gun but never pointed it.
-
Why is that obvious? Because that was in their report?
The suspicion of many is that we're not seeing the other 2 body camera angles (from the 2 closer cops) because it matches what the witnesses say - he held the gun but never pointed it.
The cops said he had a gun. The negro "witnesses" lied and said he had a BOOK! The "witnesses' " story/lie fell apart, once you admit that he did indeed have a gun. And, the evidence is that his merry widow, who planned on cashing in on "The Ghetto Lottery" never put her husband on camera, until he was shot and on the ground, because she could clearly see that he was holding a gun, yet she said, " he don't have no gun." She had a clear view of her husband, holding the gun, but never put him on camera, because, if she did, then her lie that "he don't have no gun." wouldn't have worked for her to sue the city. She knew her POS , brain dead husband would do something stupid, and get himself killed, and she couldn't of cared less, as she'd be sitting pretty once she won the law suit.
If it were your friend or relative, in that situation with the cops, what would you be videoing, to prove your case, that he dindu nuffin? Wouldn't you put the camera on him, the whole time? She could've, yet she didn't because it didn't prove her narrative/Lie.
-
The cops said he had a gun. The negro "witnesses" lied and said he had a BOOK! The "witnesses' " story/lie fell apart, once you admit that he did indeed have a gun. And, the evidence is that his merry widow, who planned on cashing in on "The Ghetto Lottery" never put her husband on camera, until he was shot and on the ground, because she could clearly see that he was holding a gun, yet she said, " he don't have no gun." She had a clear view of her husband, holding the gun, but never put him on camera, because, if she did, then her lie that "he don't have no gun." wouldn't have worked for her to sue the city. She knew her POS , brain dead husband would do something stupid, and get himself killed, and she couldn't of cared less, as she'd be sitting pretty once she won the law suit.
If it were your friend or relative, in that situation with the cops, what would you be videoing, to prove your case, that he dindu nuffin? Wouldn't you put the camera on him, the whole time? She could've, yet she didn't because it didn't prove her narrative/Lie.
You're changing the subject from "did he have a gun". The point is actually DID HE POINT THE GUN.
Having a gun isn't illegal. Disobeying a police command is. But they claimed he POINTED it, and well, it's looking like that isn't the case.
-
You're changing the subject from "did he have a gun". The point is actually DID HE POINT THE GUN.
Having a gun isn't illegal. Disobeying a police command is. But they claimed he POINTED it, and well, it's looking like that isn't the case.
He did point the gun! Didn't you read my post? The negro's wife could easily have put the perp on camera, and we could have seen that. She didn't, exactly because he had a gun and pointed it, which is why he was justifiably shot dead.
-
He did point the gun! Didn't you read my post?
Police claim that. Then they refuse to release the video showing that.
I guess we shall see. That seems to be the big issue now.
-
Police claim that. Then they refuse to release the video showing that.
I guess we shall see. That seems to be the big issue now.
It's not the police, it's some stupid NC law. Some libtards don't want videos of police killing some worthless, criminal POS, viewed by the general public, because it might be offensive to family and friends of the perp!
-
It's not the police, it's some stupid NC law. Some libtards don't want videos of police killing some worthless, criminal POS, viewed by the general public, because it might be offensive to family and friends of the perp!
Are you sure about that? Link to that law? Because according to the mayor, it's up to the police discretion.
-
It's not the police, it's some stupid NC law. Some libtards don't want videos of police killing some worthless, criminal POS, viewed by the general public, because it might be offensive to family and friends of the perp!
The law doesn't go into effect until Oct. 1.
It is the police. Also. NC lawmakers are mostly conservative.
This wasn't a law some liberal signed. Look at the governor. A staunch Republican.
-
It's not the police, it's some stupid NC law. Some libtards don't want videos of police killing some worthless, criminal POS, viewed by the general public, because it might be offensive to family and friends of the perp!
They are going to release it. Let's see if he pointed it.
-
They are going to release it. Let's see if he pointed it.
No problem! It will show that the perp had a gun, and pulled it on the police. Clean kill!
-
Charlotte police release video of shooting of Keith Lamont Scott
Charlotte police released Saturday dashboard and body camera footage of the shooting of Keith Lamont Scott, who was shot and killed by police.
The video shows officers surrounding Scott, who has his hands at his side, before shots are fired and he falls to the ground. It is not clear if there is anything in his hands as he backs away from his SUV before being shot.
The dash cam footage shows two officers pointing their weapons at Scott, who is inside the SUV. It is when he gets out and begins walking backwards when he is shot.
The body camera footage, meanwhile, shows officers with guns drawn and pointing their weapons at Scott. That footage does not show when shots are fired, and Scott is already on the ground.
Police also released photos showing what they say showed a handgun and marijuana that were in Scott's possession.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/09/24/charlotte-police-release-video-shooting-keith-lamont-scott.html
-
The videos released, are censored, to protect the "feelings" of the perp's family and friends, instead of showing what really happened, when the POS got shot.
The stupid NC law, protects the perps, instead of the cops.
-
He's walking backwards. Where was he shot? Was he shot in the back?
-
He's walking backwards. Where was he shot? Was he shot in the back?
Fine, show the moment he was shot, and end of story. We already have his lying bitch wife, deliberately not videoing his last moments, because it wouldn't support the lie that she was telling.
He lifted his gun and that's when he was shot dead. We don't see it because NC law says that we can't make the POS' relatives and friends, see the last moments of his life, when he was most deservatively shot dead, for the sake of humanity.
-
Fine, show the moment he was shot, and end of story. We already have his lying bitch wife, deliberately not videoing his last moments, because it wouldn't support the lie that she was telling.
He lifted his gun and that's when he was shot dead. We don't see it because NC law says that we can't make the POS' relatives and friends, see the last moments of his life, when he was most deservatively shot dead, for the sake of humanity.
I am fine with them showing the moment. It wouldn't be the first time we saw that.
You keep saying it's because of the relatives, but last I heard, the relatives were the ones who wanted to see it.
The law isn't even in effect. It doesn't take effect until Oct. 1.
So right NOW, there is no law prohibiting them showing any and all footage anyway.
So what law is stopping this?
-
I am fine with them showing the moment. It wouldn't be the first time we saw that.
You keep saying it's because of the relatives, but last I heard, the relatives were the ones who wanted to see it.
The law isn't even in effect. It doesn't take effect until Oct. 1.
So right NOW, there is no law prohibiting them showing any and all footage anyway.
So what law is stopping this?
The relatives wanted to see it, and they did. I don't hear any outcry from them, anymore, to make his last moments public. Obviously it won't help their law suit against the city.
-
The relatives wanted to see it, and they did. I don't hear any outcry from them, anymore, to make his last moments public. Obviously it won't help their law suit against the city.
I thought you said the law is keeping them from showing the moment?
-
I thought you said the law is keeping them from showing the moment?
It is, and the "law" is favoring, the perp's heirs. Again, where is the outrage from the heirs about, the general public not seeing the videos?
They saw the videos, and know full well that the videos do not support their case, so let the stupid laws, run interference for them, in the pursuit of an unjustified law suit.
-
No problem! It will show that the perp had a gun, and pulled it on the police. Clean kill!
when?