Another Black Man Killed By Police

Listen, when it was the teenagers throwing a pool party on private property they had no business being on and the video evidence backed that up I was very clear they were in the wrong, and even went head t head with the very people I am in agreement with currently. as evidence about Michael brown came out and it became clear he was in the wrong, I said so... But there has been NO evidence in either of these cases to say the dead men did something wrong, and until there is, I can only go on the evidence we currently have in which the police appear to be wrong. I am adaptable. My mind can and has changed with further evidence but video from days before and past history isn't the evidence that will change my mind. That needs to be info pertaining to the current incident. Period.

You're basing your opinion that the "police appear to be wrong" based on the video taken AFTER the shooting without knowing what led up to the shooting.  

And for the record, with the video I saw of the Baton Rouge incident, I cannot fathom why Alton Sterling was shot.  

But I have a ton of questions about the shooting of Philandro Castile.  

(and while looking for the correct spelling of Castile's name, I found this from USA Today.)

St. Anthony Police Officer Yanez was reacting to "the presence of that gun and the display of that gun" when he opened fire on and killed Philando Castile, Minneapolis attorney Thomas Kelly told the Associated Press in an interview Saturday.

The woman claims he was reaching for his license...but what if he was pulling the gun out?  "Display of that gun" would indicate that the officer saw the gun coming out.  

I'm not even sure what your "insult" means. Rofl!

Good Lord! Haven't I been VERY clear that that was *exactly* what is was doing because that is ALL I have to go on at this point? Haven't I said over and over and over again that *at this point*'anything else is what ifs, maybes and conjuncture and I am more than willing to change my mind if damning evidence about the deceased come out? What I am not willing to do is say the police must be right because they are police. *That is not evidence. What I am not willing to do is say the deceased obviously deserves to die based on no evidence that currently points to that.

Calling you racist and mean aren't insults. They're facts. You ARE racist, and you ARE mean. I'm angry and sad that five police officers are dead, too. Your anger is misdirected at the people on this message board. Perhaps you should seek some help and talk to some people in real life who can help you work through this anger. SaveSave

I didn't realize that. in fact it seems to me that Michael Brown is only trotted out as some kind of proof these two guys were guilty of something. 

In any case, you were responding to my question and my question most certainly had nothing tomdo with Michael Brown.

You know I am just BAFFLED that suggesting the cops in these two incidents *may* (notice the use of MAY) have actually done something wrong, whether it be the result of outright racism, inappropriate profiling or just being too antsy, we are not angry that five other cops are dead, as has been implied here. Or as I have seen on fb, has led to people being labeled cop haters and accused of think "blue lives don't matter"- and more personally the reminded that I "have a cousin who is a cop with a wife and baby" and should think of them. What the heck? How do people make these leaps?

For the record, I am MAD AS HELL five cops are dead. I am pissed. Ok.

We were discussing that this weekend. No one knows what happened before the video started. All that is there is the girlfriend telling the story after the fact. Nothing from the stop to the actual shooting. I've read that the lawyer for the officer stated he was reacting to the statement of having a gun and reaching.


We don't know if he said I have a gun and then reached for his wallet and the police thought he was going to get the gun or what.

In the CCW classes here you are taught, that if you are pulled over and do have your gun on you, that you are to put your hands on the wheel, fingers up and splayed, and to tell the officer that you have a concealed carry license (do not say I have a gun). Then you are to do what the officer asks (sit, get out of car, etc.) so that it is safe for everyone.

In the story I quoted from USA today above, it wasn't just the "mention" of a gun.  It seems there may have been some kind of display.  


St. Anthony Police Officer Yanez was reacting to "the presence of that gun and the display of that gun" when he opened fire on and killed Philando Castile, Minneapolis attorney Thomas Kelly told the Associated Press in an interview Saturday.

When I was snooping around, I found this article which may shed some light on what minority's face.

MINNEAPOLIS -- Court records examined by KARE 11 show that before he was fatally shot during a traffic stop, Philando Castile had been stopped while behind the wheel an astonishing number of times.

“They often talk about the crime of driving while black, and this certainly reflects a pattern of lots of traffic stops,” said University of Minnesota Professor Myron Orfield when KARE 11 showed him a copy of Castile’s court records.

Those records show Castile had 79 different charges – all of them vehicle and traffic stop related. More than half of them – 48 – eventually were dismissed.

Castile was found guilty 31 times of misdemeanors or petty misdemeanors. The charges included driving on a suspended license, no proof of insurance, and seatbelt and parking violations.

None of Castile’s charges or convictions involve guns, violence, threats against or fleeing police.

Since he didn’t have any felony convictions, he was eligible to apply for a permit to carry a weapon. Sources confirm that Castile had received a valid permit in Hennepin County.

Orfield said the long list of traffic stops seems to mirror a pattern he found when he co-authored a 2003 study requested by state lawmakers of racial profiling in traffic stops by police in Minnesota.

In suburban Twin Cities, the study found that “Blacks were stopped 310 percent more often than expected.”

“Which is a very high number - even nationally,” Orfield said.

Orfield’s research group wrote “these patterns warrant serious examination.” In spite of that recommendation, Orfield thinks the 2003 study was largely ignored. “It doesn’t feel like there was much examination done,” he said.

Orfield believes the patterns identified in the 2003 study suggest a strong likelihood that racial and ethnic bias plays a role in traffic stops in Minnesota.

”There’s lots of disparities in the Twin Cities and a lot of them merit serious examination and we don’t seem to examine any of them very much,” Orfield told KARE 11.

You know, I keep hearing this... Put yourself in her shoes. You just witnessed your boyfriend getting killed, your child is in the back seat screaming... At some point she had the presence of mind to start recording BUT I find it really hard to believe she also, in her panic, her fear, her grief, her confusion, had the presence of mind to think, "hey, I better concoct a story to make him look innocent and record it and for bonus points whip the country Into a frenzy". No way. I'd buy it he'd been arrested for stealing a candy bar or something and she was hoping to keep his mama from spanking his behind... But not after witnessing him being shot, smack dab in a tense situation, while he died in front of her eyes, her child screaming in the back, officers yelling at her. it would take a true psychopath to think that quick. Did you see the video of her smoking weed? I don't see *that girl being able to pull that off.

I wasn't suggesting that she made up anything.

Putting myself in her shoes, I'd probably be screaming and trying to help my BF or trying to get to my child. I can honestly say that my phone would be the last thing I would think of!

I just meant that we don't know if he pulled up the gun to show the officer ( apparently there was a report that the police saw the gun before the shooting). I'd like to hear both sides before making a conclusion.

They are objective.

Something went fatally wrong in what began as a pullover for a bad tail light.

The police officer may have been racially biased, or he may not have been. I have no idea.

LEO have a particularly high pullover rate for people of color in that area. That's allowed to influence what we post on this thread, but pointing out the obvious lingering smell of marijuana is not? Ridiculous.

*IF*, and that is an enormous if that is probably of very little actually significance here, but IF the smell had something to do with the officer's reaction in any way, that is something concrete that LEO can train their officers to recognize so that they may increase their alertness without overreacting.

Bad tail lights are going to get you pulled over no matter what color you are. But *IF* cops are disproportionately pulling people of color over for no apparent reason, then that is also something concrete that can be addressed.


Those ideas are a whole lot more objective than deciding that a poster on a message board just doesn't get it and so their posts should be taken out of context and mentioned again and again as wrong. 

 Creating a wildass assertion as a reason to dismiss the fact that we don't know what actually happened before the recording started, doesn't really work. The fact remains, we still don't know what actually happened before the recording.

Disclaimer: Acknowledging this fact does not mean that I believe the victim deserved it.