• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police in Washington state fatally shoot man who threw rocks at them

Caine said:
I don't believe I have claimed that police action should be backed in this incident.

I took issue with your jump to conclusions that if there is mental illness, then police should risk their lives furthur because of it. Even if it can't be known beforehand, and ESPECIALLY if a random person claims there might be something wrong with the guy.

If, or if they do not, have some sort of mental illness, the police should deal with people assaulting them in the same manner regardless of some sort of perceived mental illness.

Everybody today suffers from depression, bi-polar, ADHD, or some other form of mental illness it would seem. We live in a "I want drugs" society...and it is getting worse. Police shouldn't be forced to handle these people in some kind of special manner.
Click to expand...


I think maybe you took it the wrong way but I think they do need to be handled differently, not special, because the reason is that they might not know or understand what they are doing properly in the head so they are actually more of a threat. I can't expect them to diagnose people on spot but I would think sometimes it's easy to spot if someone isn't right in the head.
 
Zoom zoom.

 
americanwoman said:
I think maybe you took it the wrong way but I think they do need to be handled differently, not special, because the reason is that they might not know or understand what they are doing properly in the head so they are actually more of a threat. I can't expect them to diagnose people on spot but I would think sometimes it's easy to spot if someone isn't right in the head.
Click to expand...

When it comes to mentally ill people assaulting the public or police.... The police handle the situation AT THE TIME the same.

Its how to handle them after they are no longer a threat that changes.
 
Do we know if he had any priors? That sort of thing is important in these cases.
 
Caine said:
From that view, his hands were empty.

He put them up in almost a pleading manner...... ALMOST a pleading manner.
Click to expand...



pleading, but brain is telling him to go fetal, it's a motor system defensive position.....
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I disagree, I watched it at full screen he's running away with his hands out as he turns his hands come in and out but there is no grabbing motion now could that have confused the police, maybe. but I don't think he could have done anything to not be shot down at that point except lay on the ground, but clear thinking goes out the window when people are shootinig at you.



edit to add, watching the video again, his hands go into a defensive position, not reaching for anything.
Click to expand...
He very clearly moves both hands to his waistband and then extends both arms outward.

As an observer, I buy that he is mentally ill and that even in a panicked state he thought he could scare them off. Or maybe he wasnt all that crazy and it was a SBC incident. First set of shots in my mind...not justified. Second set...absolutely justified. Overall mishandled. But then...we only see about 22 seconds of the total incident.
 
Hamster Buddha said:
The video only shows 10 seconds of the exchange. At this moment, we have no context of the situation, how long it lasted, or even if the cops told him to halt when bolted. In other words, let's not jump to conclusions like we did with Ferguson...
Click to expand...
Yeah ... maybe the man deserved to be murdered.
 
Last edited:
ReverendHellh0und said:
Charged?
Click to expand...

It had more but was vague on the aftermath of the charge but I did uncover this:

Man shot by Pasco police identified; protestors picket City Hall | Crime & court news | Tri-CityHerald.com

Police had been called to North Eighth Avenue and West Bonneville Street at 10:49 p.m. on Jan. 16, 2014, for reports of a man walking around and hitting cars with a broom. Zambrano-Montes was found “making a commotion” on the front porch of a North Seventh Avenue home, according to court documents.

He picked up a rocking chair and tried to throw it at Officer Adam Brewster, then grabbed a mailbox and post and threw those. Brewster had to duck to avoid being hit in the head.

Zambrano-Montes ran from Brewster and Officer Jeffrey Cobb, then turned around, grabbed onto Brewster’s belt and put his hand around the officer’s service pistol, documents said. Brewster tried head-butting Zambrano-Montes in the right temple to incapacitate him, but it had no visible effect.

Zambrano-Montes was taken to the ground and continued to struggle with the two officers while grabbing onto Brewster’s pistol in an attempt to get it out of the holster, documents said. Cobb then shot him with a Taser and they were able to handcuff him.

He was taken to Lourdes Medical Center, where he reportedly admitted in the emergency room that he’d been using methamphetamines, documents said.

He pleaded guilty in June, acknowledging that his actions were not in self-defense, and was sentenced to six months in county jail. The standard range for the crime is three to nine months.
Click to expand...
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
How do we discuss such events then?
Click to expand...
They should be discussed as a wider concept, on points of principle and policy. They very rarely are though. Most people only want to talk about things like this when there have been specific high-profile incidents. Few people want to get in to the boring details of policy after the adrenaline and emotion has dropped and all the inconvenient facts have been established.

Already in this thread, we've has definitive declarations that the man shot was a mentally ill criminal and that the police officers are guilty of manslaughter. I mean, who needs judges and juries when you have internet forums to declare guilt? It's only a matter of time before it turns in the usual hate fest of slurry.

ReverendHellh0und said:
I'm not sure I support police shooting fleeing suspects in heavily populated areas
Click to expand...
That's a policy question that doesn't really need to refer to any individual case. If it is a problem, it will have been a problem yesterday, last week, last year. Why wasn't it raised then?

ReverendHellh0und said:
and I question at this point, the "arm raising" claim.
Click to expand...
Frankly whether you or I accept that is irrelevant. It will be part of the investigation(s) and any subsequent disciplinary or court cases which will be based on all of the evidence, not what has been selectively released to the public (or stolen by the media) and put on the internet. There is obviously a valid time for public complaints if such investigations are perceived as flawed (though that needs to be backed by fact and evidence, not emotional bias) but we're a long way from an possibility of that in this case.
 
Hamster Buddha said:
Cops see a man turn and his hands move is going to make them react. It's not murder.
Click to expand...
Murder. Homicide. Whatever. Hand movement is now justifiable reason to kill.

What a wonderful world this could be. So glad we can value human life and justice.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Can someone tell me at what point in the video the man "lifting his right arm as if to throw another object, when they open fire, according to the video."?
Click to expand...

If someone hasn'-t already posted.. Here in slo-motion and zoomed in:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTMGPqUWKJA

This will be justified. If the guy had kept running without turning around.. Then the shooting would have been unjustiified and the cops facing charges.
 
Last edited:
Ockham said:
This definately is a bad deal not only for the guy who was killed but everyone. He was unarmed and using a rock - granted a rock can be weapon but jesus people, just bum rush the guy, get him on his face, knee to the neck and handcuff the guy. Since we're seeing this now so often I have to ask - is this what these officers are taught to do in academy or is that these police are not willing to use physical restrain any longer? I'd hate to think these cops are just too lazy to get these people on their face and cuff them and instead, use tazers and when that doesn't work, just open fire. WTF!
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I have been thinking for a long time now. It seems like it's getting to the point where if there is a chance the officer might suffer a slight contusion to his pinkie toe then it's a-okay to whip out the Glock and start emptying clips.
 
buck said:
If someone hasn'-t already posted.. Here in slo-motion and zoomed in:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTMGPqUWKJA

This will be justified. If the guy had kept running without turning around.. Then the shooting would have been unjustiified and the cops facing charges.
Click to expand...


I just noticed in slow motion when they shot him, the shots went in time with a saying in Spanish, that I probably can't post here but is really offensive. It's the same melody as "shave and a haircut".

Off topic and has nothing to do with it but it stood out when I rewatched it.
 
HonestJoe said:
They should be discussed as a wider concept, on points of principle and policy. They very rarely are though. Most people only want to talk about things like this when there have been specific high-profile incidents. Few people want to get in to the boring details of policy after the adrenaline and emotion has dropped and all the inconvenient facts have been established.

Already in this thread, we've has definitive declarations that the man shot was a mentally ill criminal and that the police officers are guilty of manslaughter. I mean, who needs judges and juries when you have internet forums to declare guilt? It's only a matter of time before it turns in the usual hate fest of slurry.

That's a policy question that doesn't really need to refer to any individual case. If it is a problem, it will have been a problem yesterday, last week, last year. Why wasn't it raised then?

Frankly whether you or I accept that is irrelevant. It will be part of the investigation(s) and any subsequent disciplinary or court cases which will be based on all of the evidence, not what has been selectively released to the public (or stolen by the media) and put on the internet. There is obviously a valid time for public complaints if such investigations are perceived as flawed (though that needs to be backed by fact and evidence, not emotional bias) but we're a long way from an possibility of that in this case.
Click to expand...






This is a debate forum, people have opinions thats kinda how this **** works. *shrug*
 
Hamster Buddha said:
The video only shows 10 seconds of the exchange. At this moment, we have no context of the situation, how long it lasted, or even if the cops told him to halt when bolted. In other words, let's not jump to conclusions like we did with Ferguson...
Click to expand...

10 seconds?

Let us not prejudge the evidence please by exaggerating. We do not see what led up to the what I presume to be the first volley of fire. But that's meaningless as is what they said. Nor does the suspected crime.

They were shooting at him when he had his back turned. There was no "object" at all in evidence in his hand and only a pro-cop would even think to say the man turning to face his attackers with his hands out in defense was an "aggressive gesture". You break this down frame by frame and view with an eye experienced in video and you get a story not consistent with the cops' version.

My first question if on a jury would be about 'use of force' guidelines and whether they were followed and why the heavy artillery came out in the first place with a platoon of cops around. Lethal force seems to have been the first line of response instead of the last
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom