Officer kills woman inside her Texas home after welfare call

[SkyFox76]

There is not one good reason to condemn the cop without a trial. Not one. Those who rush to publicly condemn the cop without a trial are encouraging bigots, thugs, and racists to condemn all cops out of unjustified hatred for authority.

So tell us marke, are we suppose to just pretend a young woman wasn't killed inside her home by an intruder in her yard? Should we pretend her family isn't planning a funeral and that an 8 year old boy never saw her shot and killed by that intruder?

You talk about no one considering the defense but you don't seem to realize there has been none offered. Not by the man who killed her and not by his attorney. We've not heard any answers why the officers chose to lurk around her property instead of going to the door and announcing their presence. We've not heard why he thought it was a good idea to open the gate to her yard and creep around outside her windows. Did he consider his actions were placing a nice fat target on him and his partner if an armed citizen were inside?

Until the man comes forward with a statement then people will consider what they've seen in the video. Bodycams have opened a new look into us no longer just taking the words of officers. In many cases it saves them court appearances and false charges and other times it shows a failure on their part. I've always respected law enforcement and will continue to respect them. What I won't do is ignore the ones who probably should have chosen a different career path. They make the job far more difficult for those who are capable and qualified.

 

[Hatuey]

What facts from the defense are you taking into consideration before condemning the cop without a trial?

Okay, so you won't tell us what specific evidence they're ignoring.



Sent from the Matrioshka in the WH Christmas tree.

 

[ttwtt78640]

That's the real problem. Police officers, unlike Monday morning quarterbacks, rarely have time to fully assess the dangers before having to react to defend themselves from what appears to be an immediate legitimate life threating situation.

That "situation" was totally self-created. Why not park the marked police car within sight from the house, knock on the door, identify himself as a FWPD officer and ask if he could be of any assistance? After all, this was a non-emergency "welfare visit" call.

 

[marke]

So tell us marke, are we suppose to just pretend a young woman wasn't killed inside her home by an intruder in her yard? Should we pretend her family isn't planning a funeral and that an 8 year old boy never saw her shot and killed by that intruder?

You talk about no one considering the defense but you don't seem to realize there has been none offered. Not by the man who killed her and not by his attorney. We've not heard any answers why the officers chose to lurk around her property instead of going to the door and announcing their presence. We've not heard why he thought it was a good idea to open the gate to her yard and creep around outside her windows. Did he consider his actions were placing a nice fat target on him and his partner if an armed citizen were inside?

Until the man comes forward with a statement then people will consider what they've seen in the video. Bodycams have opened a new look into us no longer just taking the words of officers. In many cases it saves them court appearances and false charges and other times it shows a failure on their part. I've always respected law enforcement and will continue to respect them. What I won't do is ignore the ones who probably should have chosen a different career path. They make the job far more difficult for those who are capable and qualified.

The proper and just position to take is something like this: "From what I have seen in reports I think the officer may well be guilty of bad judgment and may be found guilty of manslaughter or even murder in a trial, but I do not wish to give support to bad actors by prematurely judging the cop guilty and worthy of serious punishment."

 

[marke]

That "situation" was totally self-created. Why not park the marked police car within sight from the house, knock on the door, identify himself as a FWPD officer and ask if he could be of any assistance? After all, this was a non-emergency "welfare visit" call.

Good points. Maybe these points will also be brought up in a legitimate trial.

 

[SkyFox76]

The proper and just position to take is something like this: "From what I have seen in reports I think the officer may well be guilty of bad judgment and may be found guilty of manslaughter or even murder in a trial, but I do not wish to give support to bad actors by prematurely judging the cop guilty and worthy of serious punishment."

Then you go with that. I see you feel no obligation to bring in the dead woman though. Which I think is on the minds of many people.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

You're using all of the key words. But people aren't agreeing. If only they saw how dangerous some people can be. Right?



Sent from the Matrioshka in the WH Christmas tree.

Actually the correct formulation is "If only they saw how dangerous some of THOSE people can be.".

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Hillary refused to accept the results of the 2016 election because she lost.

Really?

Could you please provide me with a link to some (reasonably) reputable source wherein it is reported that Ms. Clinton is claiming that Mr. Trump WAS NOT elected to the office of President of the United States of America and/or that Mr. Trump IS NOT the President of the United States of America?

It sounds to me like you will reject any jury verdict that does not match your own amateur and premature judgment in the case.

Backatcha.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

It has been pointed out repeatedly that the jury is still out and the verdict still not reached. Why are we still tying this case on a debate site without due process or a court of law?

Good point.

<MONITOR TOWEL READINESS ALERT>​

I presume that you, as an honest, ethical, rational, and consistent person will no longer be posting regarding any alleged financial wrong doings (or any other alleged wrong doings) associated with Ms. Clinton and will refrain from doing so until the jury comes back in with a verdict of "Guilty".

</MONITOR TOWEL READINESS ALERT>​

 

[mike2810]

I read an article that the LEO's were not responding to a welfare check, but more of a possible break-in.

One reason I tend to wait for the investigation to finish, but for this one I jumped in. Still not sure its a good shoot, but it now explains why the LEO's did not go up and ring the door bell.

Cop who fatally shot Atatiana Jefferson wasn’t sent on welfare check

 

[marke]

Then you go with that. I see you feel no obligation to bring in the dead woman though. Which I think is on the minds of many people.

The woman deserves sympathy as does the man.

 

[Master Debator]

I read an article that the LEO's were not responding to a welfare check, but more of a possible break-in.

One reason I tend to wait for the investigation to finish, but for this one I jumped in. Still not sure its a good shoot, but it now explains why the LEO's did not go up and ring the door bell.

Cop who fatally shot Atatiana Jefferson wasn’t sent on welfare check

We already knew this. Police Chief Ed Kraus in his press conference on Monday said they were responding to an open structure call, not a possible break-in. I don't know how anyone can still be on the fence on whether or not this was a good shoot when a homeowner minding their own business ends up dead for leaving their front door open.

 

[marke]

Good point.

<MONITOR TOWEL READINESS ALERT>​

I presume that you, as an honest, ethical, rational, and consistent person will no longer be posting regarding any alleged financial wrong doings (or any other alleged wrong doings) associated with Ms. Clinton and will refrain from doing so until the jury comes back in with a verdict of "Guilty".

</MONITOR TOWEL READINESS ALERT>​

I think both individuals, the cop and Mrs. Clinton, should answer valid concerns and charges in court.

 

[AGENT J]

I see evidence that the cop reasonably thought the woman raised her gun at him after he ordered her to show her empty hands. But it doesn't matter what I think. The facts will come out in the trial.

Where is that evidence please provided it now, thanks lol

opcorn2:

Still Waiting on this, thanks

 

[mike2810]

We already knew this. Police Chief Ed Kraus in his press conference on Monday said they were responding to an open structure call, not a possible break-in. I don't know how anyone can still be on the fence on whether or not this was a good shoot when a homeowner minding their own business ends up dead for leaving their front door open.

I am not on the fence. I am saying the "open structure" call could explain why the LEO's did not go to the door.

I have stated that imo the murder or manslaughter is appropriate.

 

[Master Debator]

I am not on the fence. I am saying the "open structure" call could explain why the LEO's did not go to the door.

I have stated that imo the murder or manslaughter is appropriate.

Still not sure its a good shoot, but it now explains why the LEO's did not go up and ring the door bell.

:shrug:

 

[marke]

Still Waiting on this, thanks

We are all still waiting for the evidence to be presented for the defense at the trial. That is the whole point.

 

[AGENT J]

We are all still waiting for the evidence to be presented for the defense at the trial. That is the whole point.

Who is we, i ask YOU aboud what YOU said . .

I see evidence that the cop reasonably thought the woman raised her gun at him after he ordered her to show her empty hands. But it doesn't matter what I think. The facts will come out in the trial.

Ill ask you again, where do YOU "see" that evidence

thanks!


opcorn2:

 

[SkyFox76]

We are all still waiting for the evidence to be presented for the defense at the trial. That is the whole point.

I'd be happy to just hear a possible defense statement from the man who fired his weapon. Or even his attorney.

 

[marke]

I'd be happy to just hear a possible defense statement from the man who fired his weapon. Or even his attorney.

You should have your chance once the trial starts. However, if one of Mueller's democrat prosecutors is assigned to the case you should expect to possibly have to wait for years for him to prepare his case as he drags his feet so his high salary, benefits and retirement package can amass a greater fortune in the process.

 

[SkyFox76]

You should have your chance once the trial starts. However, if one of Mueller's democrat prosecutors is assigned to the case you should expect to possibly have to wait for years for him to prepare his case as he drags his feet so his high salary, benefits and retirement package can amass a greater fortune in the process.

You seem hung up on trying to drag other topics and false circumstances into this thread. Why is that?

 

[mike2810]

:shrug:

"I have stated that imo the murder or manslaughter is appropriate." , Where are you confused.?

The statement I made regarding the charges against the resigned LEO was made before the fact it was not a welfare check that was being done. It also was made prior to the release of what the nephew told the investigator about the gun and what the aunt did.

One reason I generally hold back with opinions till the investigation is done. Most posters make posts just on news releases. The discussions start way early in the investigation process. From what I have read so far the LEO at best should be charged with manslaughter. The investigation should look into what did the neighbor report to the dispatcher. What did the dispatcher say to the LEO's upon dispatching them to the house.

imo, the LEO did not respond appropriately. Not identifying himself as a police officer. The quick response from show me your hands to firing.
Clear enough for you. :shrug:

 

[marke]

Who is we, i ask YOU aboud what YOU said . .
Ill ask you again, where do YOU "see" that evidence
thanks!
popcorn2:

I either heard or read that she pointed a gun at the officer. I don't know whether that was true or not but what difference does it make anyway? Hearsay evidence is not allowed in trials, except for fake dummass democrat sham impeachment hearings.

 

[Aberration]

There is not one good reason to condemn the cop without a trial. Not one. Those who rush to publicly condemn the cop without a trial are encouraging bigots, thugs, and racists to condemn all cops out of unjustified hatred for authority.

Bull****. I am what most would consider in every other circumstance a right wing nut job ammosexual. There is absolutely no way you can justify what happened. And that includes IF the occupant was armed and pointed the firearm at the officer.

The fact anyone thinks it’s OK for an officer of the government to enter someone’s property guns blazing with such little intel is the exact fascism the dumb ****s Antifa think perpetuates the ‘right wing’.

 

[AGENT J]

I either heard or read that she pointed a gun at the officer. I don't know whether that was true or not but what difference does it make anyway? Hearsay evidence is not allowed in trials, except for fake dummass democrat sham impeachment hearings.

translation: you have ZERO evidence and your hypocritical posts are totally exposed :laughat:

LMAO your BS posts fail and go down in flames again!