Thread: Seattle Police Release Dashcam Video Of Woodcarver's Shooting

Originally Posted by dmancornell

I'd say both examples would be "professional courtesy". Part of the job is holding the "thin blue line" and all that crap, right?

I think your tv time should be cut from therapy. J/k- don't kill me man. You have to remember the DA is not more a cop's friend than the judge or jury. No DA is going to stick their neck out for a cop and all DA's are lawyers first and politicians next. They don't want to look bad for their constituents when elections come around.

Originally Posted by JohnWayne

I think your tv time should be cut from therapy. J/k- don't kill me man. You have to remember the DA is not more a cop's friend than the judge or jury. No DA is going to stick their neck out for a cop and all DA's are lawyers first and politicians next. They don't want to look bad for their constituents when elections come around.

agreed.. and in big high profile cases like this, the DA decisions are likely to be more influenced by public opinion than facts anyway.

Originally Posted by JohnWayne

I didn't say the trial would be impartial. I said we would have the facts laid out so we can make a better decision.

Exactly!
Just like the OJ trial.
Did you know that the glove didnt fit?
Not until trial you didnt.

Originally Posted by JohnWayne

I think your tv time should be cut from therapy. J/k- don't kill me man. You have to remember the DA is not more a cop's friend than the judge or jury. No DA is going to stick their neck out for a cop and all DA's are lawyers first and politicians next. They don't want to look bad for their constituents when elections come around.

HAHAHAHA that's a good one. The DA and cops work for the same boss, and the cops have all the lobbying power. You think the DA's give a damn about some grassroots campaign to unseat him because he protected a corrupt cop? The police union and their law-and-order sheeple supporters will give him a bunch of cash and run some ads praising DA whatshisname for putting some dangerous pot smokers behind bars. Done deal.

Originally Posted by dmancornell

HAHAHAHA that's a good one. The DA and cops work for the same boss, and the cops have all the lobbying power. You think the DA's give a damn about some grassroots campaign to unseat him because he protected a corrupt cop? The police union and their law-and-order sheeple supporters will give him a bunch of cash and run some ads praising DA whatshisname for putting some dangerous pot smokers behind bars. Done deal.

uh, ok...

don't know what it is about Washington, but the joke in Spokane is they shoot to kill for jay walking. In truth it is not really a joke around here lots of shootings mostly highly questionable and lots of foot dragging and cover up's going on.

YOu cannot just shoot someone for walking down the street with a knife in a non-threatening position. I have seen people cut fruit on the street with a knife. Also, I know some woodcarvers and they are alway carving their wood. I seen some of those hippies at the park just sitting their with a knife and carving all day. Police would walk by and not bat an eyelash. For, all of you who do open-carry, God forbid you ever meet a cop like this, you will be laying on the pavement in a puddle of blood.

This cop has a mental problem. He is totally mentally disturbed. This is a dangerous person who should not be walking the streets, much less having a badge and gun. It was almost like he had some kind of bloodlust. The guy was not even threatening anyone and obviously did not even recognize the officer was talking to him. Not to mention how many shots he unloaded into the guy. Was it about 5? This being on an open street with possible pedestrians being hit in the crossfire.

Originally Posted by bogeycentral

Curious to how this one pan's out, but what amazes me most was the lackadaisical response from the young lady walking past the shooting.

Yes, I felt the same disgust, and also about all of those car drivers who must have seen everything yet opted to move on without giving witness when the supervisors came on scene. Sure, most people live in terror of "getting involved", and fear what the "Police Force" might do to them if they do, but still, a citizen OWES it to society to stand up on their hind legs and TESTIFY!......................elsullo

Originally Posted by 4Freedom

Not to mention how many shots he unloaded into the guy. Was it about 5?

I counted 5 shots, he was hit 4 times, in the BACK!

So far everything we're being told is not helping this officer's case. The fact he had his badge taken away is pretty telling IMO.

Originally Posted by JohnWayne

So, this conspiracy you think so highly of, tell me, how was this guy ever charged?

Originally Posted by JohnWayne

Because you know so much about this case, tell me why the guy is going to trial?

Ian Birk has not been charged with any crime. There will be an inquest into the shooting, not a trial, next month.

Shooting a deaf guy four times in the back, and once somewhere else, especially somebody whose first language is not English, is not good cop performance.

I await the results of the examination of the other cameras at the scene.

tac
Supporter of the Cape Meares Lightouse Restoration Fund

A neck-stretching would be too good for this festering turd Ian Birk...

Its always easier to sit and look at everything after the fact and pass judgement.

The guy had a knife and did not comply to the officers commands. He had a knife and would not drop it, bottom line. So should the officer have sat around waiting for the guy who did not comply to his commands rush him and have a bad tie?

Heaven forbid the officer made the choice to go home at the end of his shift.

Lets flip the situation around, since this a poor partially deaf DRUNK non english speaking man IS SO INNOCENT. Lets say he was drunk on your porch with the knife and a piece of wood and you're walking up to your porch saw the knife and started issuing commands to drop the knife, leave and or get on the ground and he turned toward you with knife in hand WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

Someone wrote "Why did the officer not maintain a safe distance if he felt the man was a threat? And so on..." You dont win a fight backing up and I think training has been switched up a little and you go to the fight. Not sit back and wait for some idiot to start killing more people.

Originally Posted by JRV

Its always easier to sit and look at everything after the fact and pass judgement.

The guy had a knife and did not comply to the officers commands. He had a knife and would not drop it, bottom line. So should the officer have sat around waiting for the guy who did not comply to his commands rush him and have a bad tie?

Heaven forbid the officer made the choice to go home at the end of his shift.

Lets flip the situation around, since this a poor partially deaf DRUNK non english speaking man IS SO INNOCENT. Lets say he was drunk on your porch with the knife and a piece of wood and you're walking up to your porch saw the knife and started issuing commands to drop the knife, leave and or get on the ground and he turned toward you with knife in hand WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

Someone wrote "Why did the officer not maintain a safe distance if he felt the man was a threat? And so on..." You dont win a fight backing up and I think training has been switched up a little and you go to the fight. Not sit back and wait for some idiot to start killing more people.

ummmm did we watch the same vid?
guy crossing the st whittling on a peice of wood AS recounted by said officer
said officer says "hey drop the knife" a few times
as recounted by the officer "he would not drop it
he turned around and it was open" BANG X5 times

while alot is off cam what was the intent or reason for the stop to begin with??? just because he had a pocket knife and he was WHITTLING aoeice of wood?

then yes while the police officer might not need to be hung
manslaughter sounds good

Originally Posted by saxon

ummmm did we watch the same vid?
guy crossing the st whittling on a peice of wood AS recounted by said officer
said officer says "hey drop the knife" a few times
as recounted by the officer "he would not drop it
he turned around and it was open" BANG X5 times

while alot is off cam what was the intent or reason for the stop to begin with??? just because he had a pocket knife and he was WHITTLING aoeice of wood?

then yes while the police officer might not need to be hung
manslaughter sounds good

The officer did what he was trained. Why did he stop him? The guy was walking down the street with a knife.

You wrote "AS recounted by said officer
said officer says "hey drop the knife" a few times
as recounted by the officer "he would not drop it
he turned around and it was open" BANG X5 times"

He was told a FEW times to drop the knife, he did not comply. Training kicks in, what is the officers learned response to a subject not willing to comply holding a knife? To hit the bad guy get off me button repeatedly.

It seems pretty simple COMPLY with the officers commands or reap the consequences.

Originally Posted by JRV

It seems pretty simple COMPLY with the officers commands or reap the consequences.

Citizens should never have to submit to some state-employed thug parking commands if they're minding their own business.

Originally Posted by dmancornell

Citizens should not have to submit to some state-employed thug if they're minding their own business.

So as a society we don't give LEO's the authority to stop people when they see fit.

So next time you get pulled over if you don't think you did anything don't pull over, you don't have to submit

Originally Posted by JRV

So as a society we don't give LEO's the authority to stop people when they see fit.

No, LEO's shouldn't harass and kill people who are minding their own business. "As they see fit" is completely subjective and today's police state society has given far too much power to state and their enforcers.

So next time you get pulled over if you don't think you did anything don't pull over, you don't have to submit

That'd be nice, but again, he will shoot me for minding my own business. Typical Beaverton cop will pull someone over for doing 1mph over the bureaucratic money-generating "speed limit".

Originally Posted by JRV

So as a society we don't give LEO's the authority to stop people when they see fit.

So next time you get pulled over if you don't think you did anything don't pull over, you don't have to submit

Sounds like a good idea to me.

Cops Kill Man, Raid Wrong House


yes even in the middle of the night submit or get killed