Bang / Guns
See other Bang / Guns Articles
Title: The Gun in Atatiana Jefferson’s Hand Will Be Far from Irrelevant
Source:
Dallas Observer
URL Source: https://www.dallasobserver.com/news ... he-cop-who-killed-her-11781823
Published: Oct 20, 2019
Author: Jim Schutze
Post Date: 2019-10-20 08:45:35 by nolu chan
Keywords: atatiana, jefferson
Views: 37496
Comments: 119
The Gun in Atatiana Jefferson’s Hand Will Be Far from Irrelevant
Jim Schutze
Dalas Observer
October 17, 2019 | 4:00am
The mayor of Fort Worth says there is no relevance or importance in the fact that Atatiana Jefferson, killed by a Fort Worth police officer Saturday, had a gun. The mayor is wrong.
According to the murder warrant for the former police officer who killed her, Jefferson, 28, pointed her gun toward the window at the police officer moments before the cop shot her. I am not arguing that the cop was within the law. That will be a very complicated question for courts to resolve. But I know this much right now: The gun is everything.
Read the murder warrant for former Fort Worth Police Officer Aaron Dean, as it talks about an interview of Jefferson’s 8-year-old nephew by a police investigator:
“(The nephew, name redacted) told (the investigator) that he and Jefferson were playing video games in the back bedroom. Jefferson told (the nephew) that she heard noises coming from outside, and she took her handgun from her purse. (The nephew) said Jefferson raised her handgun, pointed it toward the window. Then Jefferson was shot and fell to the ground.”
Sure, Jefferson had every right to keep a gun in her house. We do not know yet if she had legal authority to carry a concealed weapon. But this has nothing to do with gun rights anyway. This is about guns.
Her gun is what got her killed. Does that mean the cop was within his rights in shooting her? No, not necessarily. I’m not talking about rights. Rights are abstract. Atatiana Jefferson is dead. Death is not abstract.
Guns have their own cruel logic, no matter who holds them. If I want to survive a gunfight, I need to be one jump, preferably two jumps ahead of the other guy when it happens. Or I’m dead. It’s all about who gets the jump.
It’s not about who has a right to have a gun. It’s about who shoots first. In and of themselves, guns don’t make anybody safe. All a gun does is take you to a gunfight.
Once you’re there, you’re there. You’re in a gunfight. It’s not a conversation. Firing a gun is a process. The gun is not a button to be pushed. It has to be unholstered or removed from a purse or place of safekeeping.
The gun may have to be manipulated to place a cartridge in the chamber ready for firing. A safety mechanism designed to make it impossible to shoot the gun may have to be switched off. Then the gun is aimed. Then the trigger is pulled.
This will be read, I am sure, as a boot-licking, cop-loving defense of Dean for shooting Jefferson. This will also be read as racist, because Dean is a white cop and Jefferson was African American. But I’m really the last person to offer expertise on either of those questions in this case.
As we learned from the Amber Guyger/Botham Jean tragedy, in which a white Dallas police officer shot and killed a black man in his own apartment, the law can be complex and arcane in these matters. The Fort Worth shooting will be even more complicated than Guyger, because the cop in Fort Worth will have a better argument for self-defense.
This also will be a tougher prosecution because the Fort Worth cop resigned from the force before he could be questioned and before an internal affairs investigation could be launched. We should expect to see more of that.
The Guyger/Jean case reminded me that, quite apart from nominal liberalism and conservatism, white people and black people in this country still view social reality through very different lenses based on very different experiences. I believe that, whatever kind of terrible mistake Guyger’s shooting of Jean may have been, it is possible for it not to have been racial.
I don’t think I know a single black person who agrees with me. The ungodly procession of internet videos in the last few years showing white cops shooting unarmed black citizens rips away the curtain, my black friends say, on what really dwells in the white heart.
What is there, they say, is a superstitious tribal fear of the other. That inner fear is what makes white cops shoot black people quicker than they shoot white people, and the unmistakable pattern is the undeniable proof. For that reason, black people must live in fear that every transaction with a white cop may suddenly explode and cost them their lives.
That may all be true, every word of it, but none of it changes the reality of guns. I own guns. Always have. Grew up with a .22 rifle. Never hunted, just because my dad didn’t. I like hunters. They love the forest.
I worked on ranches and farms as a young man, carried some kind of rifle in the jeep or pickup for varmints. Never shot a varmint. I like varmints.
Shot clay pigeons with shotguns with my son when he was a kid. Keep a few guns in the house for protection. So I understand why people keep guns in their homes. I do it.
But I know this. If a cop comes to my house and I meet him with a gun in my hand, I stand a really good chance of getting shot dead. I don’t want to get killed, so, if I see a cop coming, I’m going to put down my gun and probably put both of my hands on my head.
For Atatiana Jefferson, it wasn’t that simple. She didn’t have that option. It doesn’t look as if either person, Jefferson or Dean, had enough time to perceive who and what the other was. She didn’t have time to see that he was a cop. He didn’t have time to see that she was in her own house.
All of that goes to the dismal algorithm of guns. Things will go wrong. A welfare check gets dispatched wrongly as an “open building.” To the cop, that means break-in, which means bad guy inside, probably armed.
Does the cop announce himself at the door? Of course not. Why would the cop do that? If the bad guy is in there with a gun, the cop who announces himself at the door is just giving the bad guy time to get two jumps ahead of the cop in the process of shooting. The cop, by practice and by instinct, always wants to be at least two jumps ahead. The cop always wants the advantage. It’s not a sport.
Should cops go around fearing that every bad guy they encounter has a gun? Of course they should. Because we have flooded our society with guns.
According to The Washington Post, the United States crossed a line of demarcation in 2008. In that year, the number of guns in the country exceeded the population.
In 1996, there were fewer than 250 million civilian firearms in the United States. By 2017, the number of guns was approaching 400 million.
According to the BBC, America is by far the most gun-owning country in the world, with two and three times more guns per resident than the runner-up countries of Yemen, Serbia and Montenegro. If those other three look like lawless, violent places to you, and if civilian gun ownership is any indicator, then we must be the most lawless, violent society in the world.
Doesn’t feel that way to you? Perhaps you think of this country as a relatively peaceful and secure place. That probably depends a lot on where and who you are.
In 2016, the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation published a study of global disease, injury and risk factors. It found that six nations accounted for half of the world’s total gun deaths that year not related to war or terrorism. The United States was second after Brazil. Mexico was third.
The same study put us much lower on the ladder for gun deaths per capita. We were No. 20 on that list. So that could mean our gun deaths are evenly distributed everywhere, from Minnesota farm country to the nation’s major cities, or our gun deaths are concentrated in places that must be among the most violent and dangerous in the world. I think we know the answer.
When cops go into our cities looking for bad guys, they go looking for bad guys with guns. While that may make police training all the more important, it also pushes training to a certain human limit.
Former Dallas police Chief David Brown, one of the most respected police officials in the country and a lifelong cop himself, told me he believes escalation of force and diversity awareness training are indispensable elements in any effective, responsible police academy curriculum. But he also told me something else.
He said he knows that the minute a freshly minted rookie from the academy climbs into a patrol car with a veteran trainer, that trainer tells him to forget everything he was taught in the academy. Brown told me the trainer will tell the rookie that the academy training will get the rookie killed, which may be OK with the trainer, but it will also get the trainer killed, which is not OK with the trainer.
What does that mean? I think you and I can answer that for ourselves by putting ourselves in the position. We are approaching an open house where we have reason to believe there may be an armed intruder (because in this country intruders must be presumed to be armed).
Do we announce ourselves to the intruder? No. We already have our guns in our hands. The safeties are off. The rounds are chambered.
What happens when we suddenly see the muzzle of a gun looking back at us?
That moment is not about rights. It’s not about training. It’s about guns and basic survival instinct. It’s about staying alive in a world of guns. There’s only one way to change that. Make it a different world.
Jim Schutze has been the city columnist for the Dallas Observer since 1998. He has been a recipient of the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies’ national award for best commentary and Lincoln University’s national Unity Award for writing on civil rights and racial issues. In 2011 he was admitted to the Texas Institute of Letters.
https://www.scribd.com/document/431151697/Aaron-Dean-Arrest-Warrant-ico-Atatiana-Jefferson
(1 image)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-78) not displayed.
.
.
.
As one officer approached a closed first-floor window with a flashlight, he raised his gun and screamed, “Put your hands up! Show me your hands!” The officer, later identified as Dean, apparently never identified himself as police before firing.
He gave her more warning than she gave him.
Why did she point the gun without saying anything? Why did she point the gun if she wasn't going to shoot? Don't tell me she was in fear for her life being inside the house and the suspicious person being outside.
#80. To: Tooconservative (#72)
I thought you kept bleating it was an "open structure" call.
It was a "wellness check" call to the dispatcher and an "open structure" call to the cops. An "open structure" call is handled differently by the cops in that it could mean a burglary.
#81. To: Tooconservative (#74)
When someone is prowling in your yard and does not identify themselves as a cop, the homeowner has every right to defend themselves and their home.
By shooting them without warning? That's what she was about to do.
#82. To: Tooconservative (#74)
A woman protecting her home with a gun from outside predators is "assaulting" the predator by brandishing said weapon,
Nope. But a woman protecting her home with a gun from outside predators is "assaulting" the predator by pointing said weapon at them.
See how easy this is when you stick with the facts rather than making shit up?
#83. To: Deckard (#75)
Officer Who Shot Atatiana Jefferson Wasn't Asked to Do Wellness Check Despite Neighbor's Request
Correct. He was called to an "open structure". Is that his fault?
#84. To: Tooconservative (#76)
The cops made no attempt to see if they were locked from what we see in the video.
Would that be a smart thing to do if there was an armed burglar/murderer inside? Should the police have announced their presence while standing in the front door? Maybe ring the doorbell?
#85. To: misterwhite, nolu chan, Deckard (#80)
It was a "wellness check" call to the dispatcher and an "open structure" call to the cops.
Well, based on the recording of the call, the neighbor was passing along his sister's concern to the non-emergency police operator who worked in the 911 call center. This woman then passed that off that info to an actual 911 dispatcher who dispatched cops, Larch and Dean first and then apparently two more cops, one of which arrived just in time to hear shots fired. I'm not certain if it was the third or the fourth cop who radioed back as he arrived at the scene "shots fired, shots fired".
We don't have the portion of the 911 operator's yet where she dispatched Larch and Dean. We have the audio where the 911 operator was dispatching at least one of the two additional operators to the address (the fourth officer may have been listening to the 911 operator speaking to the third cop) and the 911 operator is apparently explaining to them by radio exactly what they're going to encounter there, a home with doors open in the middle of the night, concerned neighbors reporting this as unusual activity as part of the Neighborhood Watch program, two cars in the driveway, two other officers already on-scene investigating. Then we hear the cop who is just arriving says, "Shots fired, shots fired".
When the 911 dispatcher was describing the scene to the third (and/or fourth) officer arriving on the scene, she did not use the word "burglary" or "open structure" or "wellness check". She provided more or less the situation I described above in conversational English to the third (or fourth) cop who was arriving to support the two already on scene, Larch (a 2.5 year cop) and Dean (a 1.5 year cop).
Anyway, listen to that recording and see if you hear anything different.
The "open structure" term and the mentions of it in the police statements is a summary, a classification of the call for their computers and records. But I didn't hear that word used in the only available 911 recording we have so far. We don't hear the words "wellness check" or "burglary" either.
You have to wonder if the third (and fourth) cops arriving on scene were given more or less info or exactly the same info as the first two (Larch and Dean). So far, I assume they were all given the same info. It seems unlikely that Larch and Dean were told "burglary" or "open structure" and that the third (and fourth) cops were not told that same info.
We will find out much more as they release additional 911 dispatch recordings.
At this point, I don't think we should take literally some of these statements by police. Just because the police chief used the words "open structure call" doesn't mean that the 911 operator ever used those exact words to any of the cops. As for whether the 911 operator ever said "burglary", I still don't see any basis to believe that other than an early rumor in a few sources and there has been no further reporting of that as more information has come out. It seems to be unsubstantiated rumormongering, supposedly based on a police log but which is not proven in any way and subsequent police statements contradict that narrative that the 911 dispatcher ever used the word "burglary" to Larch/Dean.
Let me just point out again that even if a 911 dispatcher said "burglary in progress" to Larch/Dean, that does not lessen their responsibility not to harm any innocent bystanders like Atatiana and the boy, Zion. It was for their safety that the officers were dispatched.
There is another truly false dichotomy here, this notion promulgated by nolu and misterwhite that it was somehow inevitable that the homeowner would shoot the cop or the cop would shoot the homeowner. This presumes that the homeowner is as stupid and careless with a gun as the cop. But she wasn't blasting away wildly and there is no factual basis to believe that she would have. He was the reckless dumbass, not her. He killed her and endangered the life of a young boy in the same room.
She was not to blame. And it should not be assumed that if he didn't shoot her first, she would shoot him and therefore he was justified in murdering her because he got all fraidy-cop over the sudden sighting of an armed Negress in her bedroom with her nephew, playing computer games.
He opened fire, not her. No one can know that she would have fired her gun at him. Not him, not you, not a jury. Just because you have a licensed gun for self-defense never justifies a cop coming on your property unannounced and murdering you in your own home in the dead of night.
#86. To: misterwhite (#81)
By shooting them without warning? That's what she was about to do.
Really? Do you shoot someone every single time you get your gun out?
Upon what facts do you assert that she would have fired? How do you know? Why do you believe that she was as criminally reckless as Aaron Dean was when he shot her instead?
He's just a fraidy-cop.
Let me point out that he had a degree in physics. I don't know any conservative physicists. I'm not sure they exist. He was an incompetent, liberal, fraidy-cop with a degree in physics that he never got a job from and who then became a cop and has made his mark in law enforcement by panicking on a call and murdering a black woman in her own home because he was violating PD policy and killed her as a direct result of his own choice to ignore PD policy. He had completed something like 3,000 hours of police instruction, ending only about 1.5 years ago. But how much instruction does it take to learn that a cop isn't supposed to shoot first and ask questions later?
Do we need more police training, post little signs around the stationhouse, "Please don't shoot the voters in their own homes for no good reason"?
What's going to happen is Dean is going to prison, probably for a long time, like 15 years or more. Maybe he should have stayed an unemployed or underemployed physicist and not killed the black biology major with a pre-med minor.
#87. To: misterwhite (#82)
Nope. But a woman protecting her home with a gun from outside predators is "assaulting" the predator by pointing said weapon at them.
Not if she is responding reasonably to suspect events on her property and acting to protect her 8yo nephew and herself. Which is exactly what she was doing.
She had people skulking in her backyard in the dark of night. Her suspicion was reasonable. And the police chief and mayor have both said so repeatedly and denounced Dean for his improper procedure that led him to murder this woman without any cause. This is what they are saying repeatedly in statements and interviews. Instead of bitching about it to me, maybe you should write the chief and the mayor a letter and tell them to shape up because the LF readers are pretty upset. That'll shake 'em up.
If you can't pull out a gun to defend yourself if you hear suspicious noises at night, then what good is a gun? Why bother with the Second Amendment at all? You can never shoot anyone except in a gun duel in broad daylight, Old West style.
But that isn't the law, even if you want to pretend otherwise.
#88. To: misterwhite, Deckard (#83)
Correct. He was called to an "open structure". Is that his fault?
The call was classified later as an "open structure" call. There is no indication that those words were ever used to Dean or Larch. They certainly were not used to the third (and likely fourth) cops who were arriving just in time to radio back "shots fired".
Listen to that recording again. Tell me at what points you think you hear any of these words: "wellness check", "burglary", "open structure".
I don't think you can. All I hear is a general description that cumulatively adds up to a wellness check.
#89. To: misterwhite (#84)
Would that be a smart thing to do if there was an armed burglar/murderer inside? Should the police have announced their presence while standing in the front door? Maybe ring the doorbell?
The police chief seems to have said so in his statements. So did the former assistant chief who retired and now provides expert testimony in trials and who is very familiar with Fort Worth PD policy.
That's all that I've heard mention of so far.
#90. To: misterwhite (#82)
But a woman protecting her home with a gun from outside predators is "assaulting" the predator by pointing said weapon at them.
Un-freaking real!
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#91. To: Tooconservative, misterwhite (#72)
I thought you kept bleating it was an "open structure" call.
Matt, it was classified as an "open structure" call in the supporting affidavit for the arrest warrant of Monday, 14 October 2019. That is the best characterization, but it is not the one made on the call sheet when the call was taken.
I uploaded the combined Warrant of Arrest and the Arrest Warrant Affidavit of Monday, 14 October 2019 to scribd and provided the combined document with the article which began this thread. On page 2 of the combined document, it states:
My belief is based on the following facts and information:1. I, Detective A Rimshas 3554, am and have been a Fort Worth Police Officer for 13 years, and I am currently assigned to the Major Case Unit, and was assigned the investigation involving an officer involved shooting which occurred at the address of 1203 E. Allen Avenue, Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas. I made the scene to begin the investigation.
2. On 10/12/19 at 0223 hours, Fort Worth Police Officers Aaron Dean and C.A. Darch were dispatched to 1203 E. Allen Ave, Fort Worth, Texas 76104, on an open structure call. The details for the call said the front doors to the residence were open, both of the neighbors vehicles are in the driveway and the neighbors are usually home but never have the door open.
3. The officers went to the residence wearing Fort Worth Police uniforms. Officer Dean had his body camera on and it was activated. I reviewed Officer Dean's body camera video. The front and side interior doors were open and the glass storm doors were closed. Officers looked through each of the storm doors into the residence Without seeing anyone 'in the front room. The officers did not announce their presence.
4. Officer Dean; using his flashlight, checked the vehicles in the driveway and then proceeded to the backyard. Officer Dean used his flashlight and opened a gate and entered the backyard. Officer Dean still had not announced his presence.
5. Officer Dean then shined his light into a back window of a dark room and observed someone inside. Officer Dean gave orders to "Put your hands up, show me your hands" without identifying himself as police and fired his handgun one time through the window. The body camera video does not clearly see through the window due to the reflection from Officer Dean's flashlight.
6. Atatiana Jefferson, who lived at 1203 E. Allen Avenue, was shot, yelled out in pain, and fell to the ground.
- - - - - - - - - -
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/fort-worth/article236163388.html
Officer in shooting acted as if responding to burglary, not welfare check, expert saysBy Nichole Manna
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
October 13, 2019 04:59 PM, Updated October 14, 2019 10:29 AM[excerpt]
The 911 records provided to the public don’t give any indication that dispatchers relayed to officers that the call was a welfare check. A police call sheet on Saturday labeled the call as a “burglary.” A written statement released by police on Saturday afternoon referred to the dispatch as an “open structure” call.Asked on Saturday afternoon what exactly dispatch told the responding officers and what the call was labeled as when officers were sent, Officer Buddy Calzada wrote in an email that more information would be shared during a press conference on Sunday. That question was not answered during the press conference.
It’s important to know what information the officers were given because Benza said officers who are going to a burglary call should react much differently than if they’re checking on someone’s welfare.
https://people.com/crime/officer-shot-atatiana-jefferson-wasnt-doing-wellness-check/
Officer Who Shot Atatiana Jefferson Wasn't Asked to Do Wellness Check Despite Neighbor's Request
Fort Worth Interim Police Chief Ed Kraus told reporters on Tuesday that former officer Aaron Dean was responding to an "open structure call"
By Joelle Goldstein
People Magazine
October 17, 2019 08:50 PM
An “open structure” or “open door call” is much different than a wellness check, Michael “Britt” London, president of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association, told the outlet.With an “open structure” call, officers are typically on higher alert, as reports could vary from a door accidentally being left unlocked to something more serious like a burglary.
In the case of a burglary, officers are trained to look for signs that indicate someone has broken into the home, such as a smashed window or broken-down door.
“You are at a higher sensitivity to what is going on with that house,” London told CNN. “You have to be ready for anything. You are taking more of your environment in consideration to be ready for a surprise if there’s one.”
The responding officers did examine the Fort Worth property, with body-camera footage released by the police and shared by multiple outlets showing them walking around the side of the house.
As one officer approached a closed first-floor window with a flashlight, he raised his gun and screamed, “Put your hands up! Show me your hands!” The officer, later identified as Dean, apparently never identified himself as police before firing.
- - - - - - - - - -
It was reported to police on a non-emergency tip line as a welfare check.
Bullshit. There is no need to wonder about it or continually lie about it. James Smith reported doors open, lights on, and both cars present. The audio is public knowledge.
https://soundcloud.com/tom-cleary-17/atatiana-jefferson-neighbor-police-call
There is no magical bullshit about a welfare check. The nature of the call is not characterized on the call itself. On the call sheet, it was characterized as burglary. On the subsequent affidavit in support of the arrest warrant, it was characterized as an open structure call.
Police protocol for open structure calls is to treat it as a suspected burglary until determined otherwise. It is approached with caution because there may be an armed intruder at the scene.
Where the person who took the call documents it as burglary, only an asshole would insist the officers were told it was a "wellness check." On subsequent review, the police determined the facts relayed were best characterized as an open structure. I agree that the content is best characterized as a report of an open structure. However, the person who took the call and relayed the information had characterized as a burglary.
The officers obviously did not respond using the protocol for a wellness check.
Authorities are looking into what former Fort Worth police officer Aaron Dean and his partner were told before arriving to Jefferson’s home.“The information came from the neighbor to the call-takers and while it was relayed to the dispatch, it was determined to be an open structure call,” Fort Worth interim Police Chief Ed Kraus told reporters on Tuesday.
Experts say that classification escalated things beyond a welfare check and meant the officers would respond differently. It could have been a burglary or other crime
Many times a welfare check involves a medical emergency, an elderly person living alone or a relative who is difficult to get ahold of.
For those calls, police officers usually knock on someone’s door and wait for an answer. But the mindset of a police officer changes when they hear it’s an “open structure” or “open door” call.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/us/aaron-dean-atatiana-jefferson.html
Chief Kraus said the call was relayed to the two officers who responded as a call for an “open structure,” a vague classification that could mean anything from an abandoned house to a burglary in progress. It was not a welfare check, in which case officers would often knock on the house’s doors or call inside.A gun was found on the floor of Ms. Jefferson’s bedroom near the window. When Ms. Jefferson heard noises coming from outside, she had taken a handgun from her purse and pointed it toward the window, her 8-year-old nephew told officials, according to an arrest warrant released on Tuesday.
Although a statement from the Fort Worth Police Department referred to it as an "open structure" call, the police call sheet from Saturday lists it as a burglary call, despite a lack of evidence that there was ever any reason to believe a burglary had taken place. Fort Worth police have not clarified this matter.
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/fort-worth/article236163388.html
When officers were sent to the house, they were given the following information: “(calling party) advised front doors to (address) is open … both of neighbor’s (vehicles) are in driveway: white sedan and (dark) colored sedan. Neighbors are usually home but never has door open,” according to a police log.The 911 records provided to the public don’t give any indication that dispatchers relayed to officers that the call was a welfare check. A police call sheet on Saturday labeled the call as a “burglary.” A written statement released by police on Saturday afternoon referred to the dispatch as an “open structure” call.
- - - - - - - - - -
[Tooconservative #72] You can keep trying to lie and try to call it a "burglary" (based on a few wild initial reports immediately after the murder) but every official document we have seen labels it an "open structure" call.
[Tooconservative #72] As for your endless bleating of "burglary", I don't hear it in the audio that has been released. This was apparently the audio from the 3rd or 4th cops just arriving at the house. No one said "burglary" or "open structure". The cop being dispatched responded seconds later with "shots fired, shots fired", meaning he was close enough to hear the shot but was not yet on-scene.Listen for yourself. Where does anyone tell this cop that it is a burglary or an open structure?
- - - - - - - - - -
These are not wild, speculative reports. They cite directly to the police call sheet.
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/fort-worth/article236163388.html
Officer in shooting acted as if responding to burglary, not welfare check, expert saysBy Nichole Manna
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
October 13, 2019 04:59 PM, Updated October 14, 2019 10:29 AM[excerpt]
The 911 records provided to the public don’t give any indication that dispatchers relayed to officers that the call was a welfare check. A police call sheet on Saturday labeled the call as a “burglary.” A written statement released by police on Saturday afternoon referred to the dispatch as an “open structure” call.Asked on Saturday afternoon what exactly dispatch told the responding officers and what the call was labeled as when officers were sent, Officer Buddy Calzada wrote in an email that more information would be shared during a press conference on Sunday. That question was not answered during the press conference.
It’s important to know what information the officers were given because Benza said officers who are going to a burglary call should react much differently than if they’re checking on someone’s welfare.
Matt, that is not a wild, speculative report.
Matt, absolutely NO police document cites anything about a welfare check.
Matt, get a grip.
#92. To: Tooconservative, misterwhite (#72)
As for your ridiculous time estimate of the verbal warning and the shot, I downloaded the video to check it closely playing at slow speed.The killer cop shouted "Put your hands up, show me your hands".
He began to open his mouth to yell at 00:01:34:28 (28 thirtieths of a second after the 1 minute 34 second point in the video).
He started to yell the 'P' in "Put" at 00:01:35:00, .0666 seconds after he started to open his mouth.
His voiced trailed off after yelling "hands", going quiet at 00:01:36:06
The initial sound of the gunshot began at 00:01:36:11 when the sound spiked and distorted sharply.
From the beginning of the 'P' in "Put" (00:01:34:28) to the beginning of the gunshot sound (00:01:36:11) is 1 and 13/30ths seconds. Or 1.43333 seconds. And I am actually being generous in that measurement by a few thirthieths (sic) of a second.
Damn Matt. Only an asshole of gigantic proportions could claim to have worked out the time to the one hundred thousandth of a second. This claim features the inescapable illogic of the jackass who fantasized about the distance of the Las Vegas shooting using Google Sketch.
The camera shoots 30 frames per second. Your calculation of 1.43333 seconds is bullshit, just as the Las Vegas numbers were bullshit. Using sampling every 1/30th of a second, and calculating to the hundred thousandth of a second is scientific bullshit. The variance of the camera between frames would be greater than 1/100000 of a second. Moreover, the sampling rate does not permit your fantastic calculation. You wasted your time. Don't waste my time, and every else's time with your bullshit.
A purported claim of a time interval calculated down to the 1/100,000th of a second qualifies as ridiculous, make believe bullshit.
As for your ridiculous time estimate of the verbal warning and the shot,
Of course, I made NO ESTIMATE of the time between the verbal warning and the shot. I linked, cited and quoted a news report from the Dallas News.
Questions and outrage after Fort Worth officer fatally shoots 28-year-old woman in her home
By Dana Branham
DallasNews.com
7:52 PM on Oct 13, 2019
[excerpt]
In body-camera footage released Saturday, the officer who shot Jefferson is seen walking around the backyard of the home.About a minute-and-a-half into the video, he swivels toward a window, then yells, “Put your hands up! Show me your hands!” and fires into the window within about three seconds.
I recall seeing a four-second estimate, but I went with the shorter one.
It is a non-specific estimate qualified with the word about. It does not make believe it is accurate to the 1/100,000th of a second.
#93. To: Tooconservative, misterwhite (#72)
Let me just remind you that police are not free to blast away at anyone, even a burglar, just because they're received a burglary call. It is their responsibility to determine if a crime is in progress. And it is their responsibility not to shoot anyone if it can be avoided. In particular, not to shoot a lawful resident who was defending her 8yo nephew from people who had opened a gate to enter her backyard.
Let me remind you again about the gun. You again "forgot" about the gun. It was pointed out the window at Officer Dean when he pointed his flashlight at Jefferson. Officer Dean did not shoot because he had received a burglary call or even an open structure call. He shot because he perceived a deadly threat aimed at him.
BTW, opening a closed gate contributes to trespassing culpability under Texas statutes.
BTW Matt, you are still full of shit. The officers were on duty responding to a call. There was no "trespassing" involved, other than in your spider infested mind.
Matt, cite your imaginary Texas statute. Or are you just too dumb, stupid and lazy to look up the Texas statutes?
This is as bad as your absurd bullshit about assault.
#94. To: Tooconservative, misterwhite (#72)
The other officer was Carol Darch who passed her police trainee eligibility test on 3/7/2018 with a rank of 65 out of 100 applicants. Yet she did not take lead in the backyard. Because she was following PD policy and not murdering the black voters. She had one more year of experience over the killer cop.
The senior officer did NOT announce her presence or knock on the door.
Matt, Obviously, you are a race-mongering asshole.
#95. To: Tooconservative (#72)
The whole thing started with a call from a neighbor who lives in a house that does not exist. Is that your story, and are you sticking with it? The initial information called into police was complete crap?I'm saying that the locations of the brother/sister are not what the public has been led to believe by press reports.
Matt, you stupid shit, yo are as dumb as a box of rocks. What was the purported significance of your observation of no house next to Jefferson's on the same side of the street? What message were you trying to convey?
The public was not led to believe anything. Some members of the public are just too dumb and stupid to understand what was said. The actual words of James Smith were given but, for you, a translation was needed, as with your fantastic claim that the cops had admitted to faking a recording of a gun at the scene (#37, #62).
Just for you Matt, I will try to explain it in terms simple enough for you to understand. Just to help a brother out, mind you.
https://people.com/crime/officer-shot-atatiana-jefferson-wasnt-doing-wellness-check/
“Well, the front doors have been open since 10 o’clock. I haven’t seen anybody moving around. It’s not normal for them to have both of the doors open this time of night,” the neighbor said, later adding that he wasn’t sure if anyone was home but noted that both cars were there.“Are they usually home at this time?” the dispatcher asked the neighbor.
“They’re usually home but they never have both doors open,” the neighbor responded. “The lights are on, I can see through the house. My sister woke me up, she lives across the street from them. I live on the opposite side of my sister.”
There is no house next to Jefferson. You conclude James Smith misled the public.
There are two houses on the other side of the street. James Smith was imprecise in his phrasing. His sister's house is on the opposite side of the street as in across the street from Jefferson.
Smith's house is also across the street from Jefferson, but on the "opposite side of [his] sister." Smith's house is on the opposite side of the street, and on the opposite side of his sister's house, as in more distant from Jefferson's house than is his sister's house.
No charge for saving you from yourself.
#96. To: Tooconservative, misterwhite, A K A Stone (#73)
[nolu chan #65]
[misterwhite #48] You point a gun at someone walking outside your window it's not self-defense. It's assault. Which is a crime.[Tooconservative #49] It is not.
You're a piss-poor armchair lawyer. Maybe you should leave that end of it to nolu.
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
Any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another, when coupled with an aparent present ability so to do, and any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm, constitutes an assault. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, of doing bodily harm to the person of another.Quote your imaginary lawbook.
- - - - - - - - - -
[Tooconservative #73]
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
Any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another, when coupled with an aparent present ability so to do, and any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm, constitutes an assault. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, of doing bodily harm to the person of another.Quote your imaginary lawbook.
Dear God, are you under the impression that Black's Law Dictionary constitutes the statutes of the state of Texas or the city of Fort Worth or the official policies of the Fort Worth PD?
My opinion of your credibility on laws is plummeting.
Matt, you are a unmitigated asshole.
First, you were too dumb, stupid, or lazy to check or quote whatever imaginary Texas Statute that you fantacize is in support of your bullshit at #49.
You huff and puff, but you offer nothing to support your bullshit at #49 with more bullshit at #73, which descended lower at #74.
[Tooconservative #74] The police receive deference to their authority only if they identify themselves and present credentials. This is buttressed by making certain that the public can see their uniform as well as their badge.
As with #49 and #73, you pulled that out of your ass, not out of a lawbook or statute.
The Texas criminal statute on assault provides:
ASSAULT.(a) A person commits an offense if the person:
[...]
(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse; or
[...]
(b) An offense under Subsection (a)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the offense is committed against:
(1) a person the actor knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully discharging an official duty, or in retaliation or on account of an exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a public servant;
[...]
(d) For purposes of Subsection (b), the actor is presumed to have known the person assaulted was a public servant, a security officer, or emergency services personnel if the person was wearing a distinctive uniform or badge indicating the person's employment as a public servant or status as a security officer or emergency services personnel.
[...]
Matt, what is the source of your bullshit? Your ass?
#97. To: Deckard, Matt Agorist (#75)
On Thursday, the 17th, the narrative surrounding the initial call to police was changed from that of a “wellness check,” to one of a “potential burglary.”
Matt. This is just bullshit.
There was never any mention of a wellness check.
On Saturday, 12 Oct 2019, the charge sheet reflected burglary.
On Monday, 14 Oct 2019, the affidavit in support of the arrest warrant reflected open structure.
Matt, I have the arrest warrant and affidavit posted with the article.
Police statements indicate they started calling it an open structure call on Saturday, 12 Oct 2019. They definitely documented it as an open structure call by Monday, 14 Oct 2019.
The TFTP incompetent bullshit is strong with this one. Two.
Matt and Matt, is this your impersonation of Mr. ROBOT?
#98. To: misterwhite (#78)
And here I thought she was killed because she pointed a gun at a cop.
Silly you. The gun pointed at Officer Dean obviously had nothing to do with why he shot Jefferson.
What distinguished Dean from his partner was her seniority and that "she did not take lead in the backyard. Because she was following PD policy and not murdering the black voters." See Tooconservative #72.
Matt is so smart. He makes it obvious that Officer Dean was engaged in murdering black voters. We can only aspire to rise to his level of insight. /s
#99. To: Tooconservative, misterwhite (#85)
There is another truly false dichotomy here, this notion promulgated by nolu and misterwhite that it was somehow inevitable that the homeowner would shoot the cop or the cop would shoot the homeowner. This presumes that the homeowner is as stupid and careless with a gun as the cop. But she wasn't blasting away wildly and there is no factual basis to believe that she would have. He was the reckless dumbass, not her. He killed her and endangered the life of a young boy in the same room.
This fantasy false dichotomy emerges only from your fantastic imagination. There was little chance that Officer Dean would shoot anyone until he trained his flashlight on the window and observed a gun pointed at him.
You "forgot" the gun. Again.
But then, you maintain (#72) that,
The other officer was Carol Darch who passed her police trainee eligibility test on 3/7/2018 with a rank of 65 out of 100 applicants. Yet she did not take lead in the backyard. Because she was following PD policy and not murdering the black voters.
At #37 you fantasized, (Destroyed at #62, which has gone without reply. How typical of you to just continue with a new stream of bullshit.)
It's #FakeVideo. They edited it.[...]
The PD tried to fake a cop-cam video and put a weapon in it. Gee, I wonder what the jury will think of that. You can expect the defense will call expert witnesses and also call the PD employees tasked with inserting that bogus footage of the gun.
I thought it looked hokey the moment I saw it. It looks wrong, like an amateurish fake video made by teens on YouBoob.
Matt, do you ever post anything related to reality, rather than just sling shit?
#100. To: Deckard, misterwhite (#75)
On Thursday, the 17th, the narrative surrounding the initial call to police was changed from that of a “wellness check,” to one of a “potential burglary.” Once again, anyone who has examined cases as such recognizes that this is often done in officer-involved shootings.
Matt, It was a burglary on the Oct. 12 call log, and it was an open structure on the subsequent press release of 12 Oct.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EGsbrSzXUAMdNna.jpg
Fort Worth Texas PolicePRESS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
Oct. 12, 2019
FORT WORTH, Texas — Serving the public transparently and openly during good events and difficult events is a prerequisite to any professional police department. The Fort Worth Police Department is committed to ensuring the public is aware of major police incidents, especially officer involved shootings, and that details available arc released as quickly as possible given the gravity of the circumstances. On Saturday. Oct. 12, 2019, the Fort Worth Police Department responded to a call for service that resulted in the loss of a life and all evidence, witness statements, body camera footage, and any other available evidence is being collected and collated to ultimately be presented to the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office to determine the final outcome.
Near 02:25 a.m.. Fort Worth Police Central Division officers responded to an Open Structure call for service in the 1200 block of E. Allen Ave. Details stated the front door to the residence was open. Responding officers searched the perimeter of the house and observed a person standing inside the residence near a window. Perceiving a threat the officer drew his duty weapon and fired one shot striking the person inside the residence. Officers entered the residence locating the individual and a firearm and began providing emergency medical care.
The individual, a black female, who resides at the residence succumbed to her injuries and was pronounced deceased on the scene. The officer, a white male who has been with the department since April of 2018. has been placed on administrative leave pending the outcome the critical police incident investigation. The Fort Worth Police Major Case unit. Internal Affairs unit and the Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney’s Law Enforcement Incident Team were notified and made lhe scene to conduct their aspect of the investigation to ensure all information and evidence was captured and preserved.
The Fort Worth Police Department is releasing available body camera footage to provide transparent and relevant information to the public as we arc allowed within the confines of the Public Information Act and forthcoming investigation. Camera footage inside the residence is not able to be released based on Public Information laws. The Fort Worth Police Department shares the deep concerns of the public and is committed to completing an extremely thorough investigation of this critical police incident to its resolution. As this investigation continues, information will be forthcoming in as timely a manner as possible.
@fortworthpd
#101. To: nolu chan (#97)
On Thursday, the 17th, the narrative surrounding the initial call to police was changed from that of a “wellness check,” to one of a “potential burglary.”
Officer Who Shot Atatiana Jefferson Wasn't Asked to Do Wellness Check Despite Neighbor's Request
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#102. To: nolu chan, Tooconservative (#91)
3. The officers went to the residence wearing Fort Worth Police uniforms. Officer Dean had his body camera on and it was activated. I reviewed Officer Dean's body camera video. The front and side interior doors were open and the glass storm doors were closed. Officers looked through each of the storm doors into the residence Without seeing anyone 'in the front room. The officers did not announce their presence.4. Officer Dean; using his flashlight, checked the vehicles in the driveway and then proceeded to the backyard. Officer Dean used his flashlight and opened a gate and entered the backyard. Officer Dean still had not announced his presence.
5. Officer Dean then shined his light into a back window of a dark room and observed someone inside. Officer Dean still had not announced his presence.
Officer Dean gave orders to "Put your hands up, show me your hands" without identifying himself as police and fired his handgun (a split second later) one time through the window.
What if the Police Don’t Identify Themselves?
Tooconservative has already proven that the fatal shot came as Dean was still barking orders - and he still had not announced his presence as a law enforcement officer.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#103. To: Deckard (#101)
Officer Who Shot Atatiana Jefferson Wasn't Asked to Do Wellness Check Despite Neighbor's Request
And your solution is to throw the officer in jail.
#104. To: Tooconservative (#85)
But she wasn't blasting away wildly and there is no factual basis to believe that she would have.
I see. So when she pointed the gun at the cop, he was supposed to do a study, interview friends and family, neighbors, and co-workers as to her mental and emotional health, determine the facts, then make a decision on how to react.
Geez Louise. She went to her purse, got the gun, went to the window and pointed the gun at the cop. But there's no factual basis to believe she would have shot. That would make for a fitting epitaph.
#105. To: nolu chan (#96)
ASSAULT.(a) A person commits an offense if the person:
(1) a person the actor knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully discharging an official duty, or in retaliation or on account of an exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a public servant;
Former officer Dean DID NOT identify himself as a cop.
You seem to keep ignoring that fact.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#106. To: Deckard (#101)
Officer Who Shot Atatiana Jefferson Wasn't Asked to Do Wellness Check Despite Neighbor's Request
"Wasn't asked to do a Wellness Check," Was NOT asked to do a wellness check.
The call log characterized the incoming call as a report of burglary. The FWPD later characterized as a call of an open structure.
No authority classified the call as a Wellness Check, and the police followed the protocol for a report of burglary in progress or open structure, wehre an armed intruder may be present.
There was no request for a wellness check.
James Smith reported doors open, lights on, and both cars present. The audio is public knowledge.
https://soundcloud.com/tom-cleary-17/atatiana-jefferson-neighbor-police-call
There is no magical bullshit about a welfare or wellness check. The nature of the call is not characterized on the call itself. On the call sheet, it was characterized as burglary. On the subsequent affidavit in support of the arrest warrant, it was characterized as an open structure call.
Police protocol for open structure calls is to treat it as a suspected burglary until determined otherwise. It is approached with caution because there may be an armed intruder at the scene.
Where the person who took the call documents it as burglary, only an asshole would insist the officers were told it was a "wellness check." On subsequent review, the police determined the facts relayed were best characterized as an open structure. I agree that the content is best characterized as a report of an open structure. However, the person who took the call and relayed the information had characterized as a burglary.
#107. To: Deckard, Pierre Delecto (#102)
What if the Police Don’t Identify Themselves?
https://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=60338&Disp=96#C96
#96. To: Tooconservative, misterwhite, A K A Stone (#73)[nolu chan #65]
[misterwhite #48] You point a gun at someone walking outside your window it's not self-defense. It's assault. Which is a crime.[Tooconservative #49] It is not.
You're a piss-poor armchair lawyer. Maybe you should leave that end of it to nolu.
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
Any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another, when coupled with an aparent present ability so to do, and any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm, constitutes an assault. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, of doing bodily harm to the person of another.Quote your imaginary lawbook.
- - - - - - - - - -
[Tooconservative #73]
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
Any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another, when coupled with an aparent present ability so to do, and any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm, constitutes an assault. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, of doing bodily harm to the person of another.Quote your imaginary lawbook.
Dear God, are you under the impression that Black's Law Dictionary constitutes the statutes of the state of Texas or the city of Fort Worth or the official policies of the Fort Worth PD?
My opinion of your credibility on laws is plummeting.
Matt, you are a unmitigated asshole.
First, you were too dumb, stupid, or lazy to check or quote whatever imaginary Texas Statute that you fantacize is in support of your bullshit at #49.
You huff and puff, but you offer nothing to support your bullshit at #49 with more bullshit at #73, which descended lower at #74.
[Tooconservative #74] The police receive deference to their authority only if they identify themselves and present credentials. This is buttressed by making certain that the public can see their uniform as well as their badge.As with #49 and #73, you pulled that out of your ass, not out of a lawbook or statute.
The Texas criminal statute on assault provides:
ASSAULT.(a) A person commits an offense if the person:
[...]
(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse; or
[...]
(b) An offense under Subsection (a)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the offense is committed against:
(1) a person the actor knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully discharging an official duty, or in retaliation or on account of an exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a public servant;
[...]
(d) For purposes of Subsection (b), the actor is presumed to have known the person assaulted was a public servant, a security officer, or emergency services personnel if the person was wearing a distinctive uniform or badge indicating the person's employment as a public servant or status as a security officer or emergency services personnel.
[...]
Matt, what is the source of your bullshit? Your ass?
#108. To: misterwhite (#104)
Geez Louise. She went to her purse, got the gun, went to the window and pointed the gun at the cop.
Former officer Dean, who is being charged with murder, did NOT identify himself as a cop.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#109. To: Deckard, Pierre Delecto (#105)
Former officer Dean DID NOT identify himself as a cop.You seem to keep ignoring that fact.
No. You are full of shit. "The actor is presumed to have known the person assaulted was a public servant, a security officer, or emergency services personnel if the person was wearing a distinctive uniform or badge indicating the person's employment as a public servant or status as a security officer or emergency services personnel."
https://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=60338&Disp=96#C96
#96. To: Tooconservative, misterwhite, A K A Stone (#73)[nolu chan #65]
[misterwhite #48] You point a gun at someone walking outside your window it's not self-defense. It's assault. Which is a crime.[Tooconservative #49] It is not.
You're a piss-poor armchair lawyer. Maybe you should leave that end of it to nolu.
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
Any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another, when coupled with an aparent present ability so to do, and any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm, constitutes an assault. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, of doing bodily harm to the person of another.Quote your imaginary lawbook.
- - - - - - - - - -
[Tooconservative #73]
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
Any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another, when coupled with an aparent present ability so to do, and any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm, constitutes an assault. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, of doing bodily harm to the person of another.Quote your imaginary lawbook.
Dear God, are you under the impression that Black's Law Dictionary constitutes the statutes of the state of Texas or the city of Fort Worth or the official policies of the Fort Worth PD?
My opinion of your credibility on laws is plummeting.
Matt, you are a unmitigated asshole.
First, you were too dumb, stupid, or lazy to check or quote whatever imaginary Texas Statute that you fantacize is in support of your bullshit at #49.
You huff and puff, but you offer nothing to support your bullshit at #49 with more bullshit at #73, which descended lower at #74.
[Tooconservative #74] The police receive deference to their authority only if they identify themselves and present credentials. This is buttressed by making certain that the public can see their uniform as well as their badge.As with #49 and #73, you pulled that out of your ass, not out of a lawbook or statute.
The Texas criminal statute on assault provides:
ASSAULT.(a) A person commits an offense if the person:
[...]
(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse; or
[...]
(b) An offense under Subsection (a)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the offense is committed against:
(1) a person the actor knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully discharging an official duty, or in retaliation or on account of an exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a public servant;
[...]
(d) For purposes of Subsection (b), the actor is presumed to have known the person assaulted was a public servant, a security officer, or emergency services personnel if the person was wearing a distinctive uniform or badge indicating the person's employment as a public servant or status as a security officer or emergency services personnel.
[...]
Matt, what is the source of your bullshit? Your ass?
Damn. It was boldfaced and underlined and you still "missed" it.
#110. To: Deckard, misterwhite, PIerre Delecto (#108)
Former officer Dean, who is being charged with murder, did NOT identify himself as a cop.
You are just bullshitting. "The actor is presumed to have known the person assaulted was a public servant, a security officer, or emergency services personnel if the person was wearing a distinctive uniform or badge indicating the person's employment as a public servant or status as a security officer or emergency services personnel."
https://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=60338&Disp=96#C96
#96. To: Tooconservative, misterwhite, A K A Stone (#73)[nolu chan #65]
[misterwhite #48] You point a gun at someone walking outside your window it's not self-defense. It's assault. Which is a crime.[Tooconservative #49] It is not.
You're a piss-poor armchair lawyer. Maybe you should leave that end of it to nolu.
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
Any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another, when coupled with an aparent present ability so to do, and any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm, constitutes an assault. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, of doing bodily harm to the person of another.Quote your imaginary lawbook.
- - - - - - - - - -
[Tooconservative #73]
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
Any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another, when coupled with an aparent present ability so to do, and any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm, constitutes an assault. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, of doing bodily harm to the person of another.Quote your imaginary lawbook.
Dear God, are you under the impression that Black's Law Dictionary constitutes the statutes of the state of Texas or the city of Fort Worth or the official policies of the Fort Worth PD?
My opinion of your credibility on laws is plummeting.
Matt, you are a unmitigated asshole.
First, you were too dumb, stupid, or lazy to check or quote whatever imaginary Texas Statute that you fantacize is in support of your bullshit at #49.
You huff and puff, but you offer nothing to support your bullshit at #49 with more bullshit at #73, which descended lower at #74.
[Tooconservative #74] The police receive deference to their authority only if they identify themselves and present credentials. This is buttressed by making certain that the public can see their uniform as well as their badge.As with #49 and #73, you pulled that out of your ass, not out of a lawbook or statute.
The Texas criminal statute on assault provides:
ASSAULT.(a) A person commits an offense if the person:
[...]
(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse; or
[...]
(b) An offense under Subsection (a)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the offense is committed against:
(1) a person the actor knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully discharging an official duty, or in retaliation or on account of an exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a public servant;
[...]
(d) For purposes of Subsection (b), the actor is presumed to have known the person assaulted was a public servant, a security officer, or emergency services personnel if the person was wearing a distinctive uniform or badge indicating the person's employment as a public servant or status as a security officer or emergency services personnel.
[...]
Matt, what is the source of your bullshit? Your ass?
It is bold faced and underlined. How did you "miss" it?
#111. To: Deckard (#105)
Morning, Matt. Matt here.
Nice work. Now they're in a cop-sucking tizzy, re-posting their own posts.
nolu's becoming frenetic, posting his repetitive repulsive irrelevant drivel in between racing to peer under his bed to make sure that no Matts are hiding under there.
You get extra Matt points for every time you can get him to use the text string "Matt". As in "Matthew" or "matte black" or "matted", etc.
#112. To: Deckard (#108)
Former officer Dean, who is being charged with murder, did NOT identify himself as a cop.
And she didn't identify herself as the homeowner.
#113. To: Tooconservative, Pierre Delecto (#111)
You get extra Matt points for every time you can get him to use the text string "Matt". As in "Matthew" or "matte black" or "matted", etc.
Post Matt.
A K A Stone posted on 2019-09-04 8:25:38 ET
I'm posting Matt. I'm posting Matt as Tooconservative, Deckard, and Peter R. Quinones, Matt Agorist and Pierre Delecto.
Matt as Deckard posted, 2019-10-22 19:02:25
Title: What if the Police Don’t Identify Themselves?
Source: The Libertarian Institute
URL Source: https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/what-if-the-police-dont-identify-themselves/
Published: Oct 21, 2019
Author: Peter R. Quinones
Post Date: 2019-10-22 19:02:25 by Deckard
[Thread article by Peter R. Quinones]
On Thursday, the 17th, the narrative surrounding the initial call to police was changed from that of a “wellness check,” to one of a “potential burglary.” Once again, anyone who has examined cases as such recognizes that this is often done in officer-involved shootings.
- - - - - - - - - -
Matt as Deckard posted #75, 2019-10-22 20:03:07 ET
On Thursday, the 17th, the narrative surrounding the initial call to police was changed from that of a “wellness check,” to one of a “potential burglary.” Once again, anyone who has examined cases as such recognizes that this is often done in officer-involved shootings.
- - - - - - - - - -
Matt as Deckard posted, 2019-10-23 17:52:26 ET
What if the Police Don’t Identify Themselves?
- - - - - - - - - -
#96 on 2019-10-23 16:14:09 ET
#107 on 2019-10-24 9:49:54 ET
I thought boldface and underline would be enough. You have made it apparent that the font was too small. I'll keep trying until Matt, Matt and Matt can see it.
TEXAS PENAL CODE
CHAPTER 22. ASSAULTIVE OFFENSES
Sec. 22.01. ASSAULT.
[excerpt]
(d) For purposes of Subsection (b), the actor is presumed to have known the person assaulted was a public servant, a security officer, or emergency services personnel if the person was wearing a distinctive uniform or badge indicating the person's employment as a public servant or status as a security officer or emergency services personnel.
Matt, DO YOU SEE IT NOW???
#114. To: nolu chan, A K A Stone (#113)
AKA, the nolu bot is broken and just keeps copy/pasting the same irrelevant crap and discredited lies over and over. You may have to do something to stop this endless spamming of the forum with stale nonsense and pointless word games.
#115. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone (#114) (Edited)
AKA, the nolu bot is broken and just keeps copy/pasting the same irrelevant crap and discredited lies over and over. You may have to do something to stop this endless spamming of the forum with stale nonsense and pointless word games.
https://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=60370&Disp=6#C6
What if the police Don't Identify Themselves? [Article by Peter R. Quinones]
[Tooconservative #6] How could the victim see a badge in the dark? How could she see a black uniform?
Matt, how would a blind or severely vision-impaired person see a uniform and badge in the light or the dark?
Matt, do you view it as perfectly acceptable and lawful for a blind person to wave a loaded gun about, pointing it at someone?
The Texas law makes one responsible for being able to see what they are aiming at.
Under Texas statute law, " (a) A person commits an offense if the person: ... intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse; or An offense under Subsection (a)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the offense is committed against: (1) a person the actor knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully discharging an official duty, or in retaliation or on account of an exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a public servant; ... (d) For purposes of Subsection (b), the actor is presumed to have known the person assaulted was a public servant, a security officer, or emergency services personnel if the person was wearing a distinctive uniform or badge indicating the person's employment as a public servant or status as a security officer or emergency services personnel."
The Texas statute clearly states the law. Whatever you aim your gun at, you are responsible for knowing what you are aiming at. If you aim at an officer in a distinctive uniform or with a displayed badge, you are responsible and are presumed, under the law, to have known that the person was a public servant, a security officer, or emergency services personnel.
Peter R. QuinonesPeter R. Quinones is managing editor of the Libertarian Institute and hosts the Free Man Beyond the Wall podcast. He released his first book, Freedom Through Memedom – The 31-day Guide to Waking Up to Liberty in November 2017. It reached #4 in the Libertarian Section on Amazon. He has spoken at Liberty Forum in Manchester, New Hampshire and is currently co-producing a documentary entitled, “The Monopoly on Violence,” which is scheduled for a 2020 release. It will feature the most prominent figures in libertarianism explaining how nations states came into existence, the atrocities they commit and what a truly open libertarian society would look like. Contact him at pete@libertarianinstitute.org
[From Amazon]
https://www.amazon.com/Freedom-Through-Memedom-31-Day-Liberty/dp/1978400810/
Freedom Through Memedom: The 31-Day Guide to Waking Up to Liberty 1st Editionby Mance Rayder (Author), Peter Raymond (Author), Scott Horton (Foreword)
Paperback: 96 pages
Publisher: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform; 1 edition (November 19, 2017)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1978400810
ISBN-13: 978-1978400818
https://www.amazon.com/Dream-Factory-Peter-Quinones/dp/0595257216/
About the AuthorPeter Quinones is a salesperson and speaker from New York City. Janice Malkotsis is a writer and editor from Long Island, New York.
When confronted by Texas statutes, I do not always choose outside counsel, but when I do, it is a salesperson from New York City, the most interesting source of law in the world. Not. Stay stupid my friend.
#116. To: Tooconservative (#92)
Damn Matt. Only an asshole of gigantic proportions could claim to have worked out the time to the one hundred thousandth of a second. This claim features the inescapable illogic of the jackass who fantasized about the distance of the Las Vegas shooting using Google Sketch.
Looks like nolu sham is calling you and me both conspiracy freaks Matt.
Even just watching and listening to the video, it's clear that Miss Jefferson did not have any chance of responding before she was murdered.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#117. To: Deckard (#116)
Even just watching and listening to the video, it's clear that Miss Jefferson did not have any chance of responding before she was murdered.
Responding? She was the one with her gun out and she had the ability to shoot first, or at any time while the officer stood helpless, until he responded to her display of deadly force and pulled his gun.
#118. To: Deckard (#116)
Looks like nolu sham is calling you and me both conspiracy freaks Matt.
Well, Matt, speaking strictly as a fellow-Matt, I have to agree with your measured conclusion.
Maybe we should start an organization for mutual support, the Society Of Matts.
#119. To: Tooconservative (#118)
https://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=60425
When Atatiana Jefferson Pickup Up Her Gun, Officer Dean's Requirement to Issue a Warning of Attempt to Deescalate Disappeared
nolu chan
October 28, 2019
Regarding Use-of-Force, the Fort Worth PD adopted PERF ICAT training in 2018. While it requires issuance of a warning and attempting deescalation before using lethal force, it explicitly does not apply to situations where the subject is armed with a gun.
A subject with a firearm is treated differently from all other situations. In such situation, the Fort Worth PD Use-of-Force policy does not require the officer to issue a warning, or to attempt deescalation, prior to using lethal force.
Let us review the Use of Force policy of the Fort Worth PD, beginning with PERF ICAT, adopted in January 2018, and proceeding to the general Forth Worth PD policy of 2017 as reviewed by The Use of Force Project.
- - - - - - - - - -
PERF ICAT TRAINING
Police Executive Research Forum
Integrating Communications, Assessment and Tactics De-escalation Training
http://fortworthtexas.gov/news/2018/01/police-perf-training/
FWPD completes training that emphasizes de-escalation tacticsPosted Jan. 31, 2018
Every officer in the Fort Worth Police Department has completed training that encourages them to use a new way of thinking when it comes to crisis intervention, communication and tactics.
The training is called PERF ICAT— Police Executive Research Forum Integrating Communications, Assessment and Tactics De-escalation Training. The nationally-recognized training educates officers on the skills, knowledge and confidence needed to manage non-firearm threats, influence behavioral changes and gain voluntary compliance whenever possible. The training is a key to the department’s mission to safeguard the lives of residents and enhance public safety through building trust with the community.
The PD has recently made changes to how officers approach use-of-force situations and amended policies to incorporate de-escalation tactics. Biannual in-service training and training for new recruits have been modified to provide more tools to resolve police encounters that emphasize the safety of residents and officers.
The PD has invited city officials and members of the Chief’s Advisory Board, Policy Advisory Committee, and the Race and Culture Task Force to an ICAT training session so they can realize what is expected of officers and have a better understanding of the situations officers face each day.
Well, that sounded impressive. However, PERF ICAT training mainly benefits Officer Dean and the defense.
https://www.policeforum.org/about-icat
About ICATIntegrating Communications, Assessment, and Tactics, or ICAT, is a use-of-force Training Guide designed to fill a critical gap in training police officers in how to respond to volatile situations in which subjects are behaving erratically and often dangerously but do not possess a firearm. The Training Guide includes model lesson plans and support materials (including Power Point presentations, videos, and other resources) in the key areas of decision-making, crisis recognition and response, tactical communications and negotiations, and operational safety tactics. ICAT then integrates these skills and provides opportunities to practice them through video case studies and scenario-based training exercises.
Read the ICAT Mission Statement and Training Goals
Four Areas of Focus
The ICAT Training Guide focuses on four key areas:
Patrol officer response. In almost every situation where a subject is behaving erratically (often because of mental illness or behavioral crisis), it is a patrol officer—a “beat cop”—who is the first to respond. ICAT provides these officers with the skills and options needed to safely and effectively manage these encounters, especially in the critical first few moments after officers arrive. In many instances, the goal is for the first responding officers to buy enough time so that additional, specialized resources can get to the scene to support a safe and peaceful resolution.
Non-firearms incidents. ICAT focuses on those critical incidents in which the subject is unarmed or armed with a weapon other than a firearm (such as a knife, baseball bat, rocks, or other blunt instrument). Unlike situations in which the subject has a firearm and officers have few options besides lethal force, these non-firearms incidents often present officers with time and opportunity to consider a range of responses. Helping officers safely and effectively manage these types of encounters is the focus of ICAT.
Integration of crisis recognition/intervention, communications, and tactics. In recent years, a growing number of police agencies have been providing their officers with specialized training on how to interact with persons who are in crisis because of mental health issues or other factors. ICAT builds on those efforts by integrating communications and tactical skills with crisis intervention approaches. This integrated approach is presented in the context of a Critical Decision-Making Model that helps patrol officers develop and think through their options in these challenging non-firearms incidents.
Officer safety and wellness. ICAT is centered on PERF’s Guiding Principle #1: “The sanctity of human life should be at the heart of everything an agency does.” The Training Guide focuses on protecting officers from both physical threats and emotional harm. This is accomplished by equipping officers with the tools, techniques and skills needed to slow down some situations and pursue options for safely resolving them. The goal is to help officers avoid reaching the point where their lives or the lives of others become endangered and the officers have no choice but to use lethal force.
Read How the ICAT Training Guide Was Created
Flexible and Adaptable
PERF encourages police agencies and academies to be creative in how they choose to use the ICAT Training Guide.
- Some may decide to present ICAT as a stand-alone training program, for recruit or in-service training, or both.
- Other agencies may choose to incorporate the ICAT training modules into existing programs on de-escalation, tactical communications or crisis intervention.
- Still other agencies may want to take elements of individual modules and create their own lesson plans that are tailored for their agencies and communities.
- And because many skills (such as tactical communications) are perishable and need to be reinforced and practiced on a regular basis, some agencies may choose to include elements of ICAT in their roll call or team training exercises.
ICAT is designed to be flexible enough to accommodate these and other approaches. However, it is critical that whatever approach is used, the agency or academy focus on the integration of skills, and not present the material in training “silos.” This focus on integration is what makes ICAT unique.
PERF ICAT training does not include subjects with a firearm. Shit, that looked so promising too. Introduce a firearm into the equation and PERF ICAT goes out the window. Introduce a firearm and PERF ICAT has no application whatever. Incidents with firearms are subject to a very different policy.
Repeated for emphasis.
Non-firearms incidents. ICAT focuses on those critical incidents in which the subject is unarmed or armed with a weapon other than a firearm (such as a knife, baseball bat, rocks, or other blunt instrument). Unlike situations in which the subject has a firearm and officers have few options besides lethal force, these non-firearms incidents often present officers with time and opportunity to consider a range of responses.
PERF ICAT redounds to the benefit of the defense of Officer Dean as it makes clear that asituation with a subject armed with a firearm is handled differently from all the other situations, and the officers have few options besides lethal force.
- - - - - - - - - -
FORT WORTH PD USE OF FORCE POLICY AS REVIEWED BY THE USE OF FORCE PROJECT
http://useofforceproject.org/#review
We reviewed the use of force policies of America's 100 largest city police departments to determine whether they include meaningful protections against police violence. Click the boxes below to view details for each policy.[...]
Below is the use of force policy, including the use of deadly force on a subject armed with a firearm, for Forth Worth as documented by the above review of the Use of Force Project.
- - - - - - - - - -
Fort WorthYes.Year of most recent policy 2017
Requires De-Escalation:
Does the policy require officers to de-escalate situations, when possible?
• "When safely possible, an officer shall use de-escalation techniques consistent with department training whenever possible and appropriate before resorting to force and to reduce the need for force.”Bans Chokeholds and Strangleholds:
Are chokeholds and strangleholds Gncluding carotid restraints) explicitly prohibited, except in situations where deadly force is authorized?
• "Officers are prohibited from using choke holds and other types of neck-restrain ing tech niques except when protecting them selves or others against an imminent threat of serious bodily and death."Duty to Intervene:
Are officers required to intervene when witnessing another officer using excessive force?
• "Officers have the duty to intervene when observing another officer using force that is beyond that which is objectively reasonable under the circumstances."Requires Warning Before Shooting:
Are officers required to give a verbal warning, when possible, before shooting someone?
• "If not already known by the subject to be detained, arrested, or searched, officers should, if reasonable, make clear their intent to detain, arrest or search the subject. When practicable, officers will identify themselves as a peace officer before using force"Restricts Shooting at Moving Vehicles:
Are officers prohibited from shooting at people in moving vehicles unless the subject presents a separate deadly threat other than the vehicle itself?
• 4. Officers shall not fire a weapon into a moving vehicle or at its occupant(s) unless the occupant(s) are using deadly force against the officer or another person present, by means other than the vehicle.• 5. Officers shall not place themselves in the path of a moving vehicle in a manner which may lead to the use of deadly force. If a confrontation with a moving vehicle does occur, officers shall move out of the path of the vehicle."
Requires Comprehensive Reporting:
Are all uses of force required to be reported, including the pointing of a firearm at a civilian?
Pointing a weapon at a civilian is not required to be reported.Requires Exhaust All Other Means Before Shooting:
Are officers required to exhaust all other reasonable alternatives before resorting to deadly force?
Officers not required to exhaust other reasonable means before resorting to deadly force.
"Under no circumstances will the force used by an officer be greater than necessary to make an arrest or a detention or to protect oneself or another, nor will the force be used longer than necessary to subdue the suspect, and deadly force shall not be used except as specifically provided in this directive."The use of deadly force is authorized only when it is necessary for officers to protect themselves or others from an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury.”
Has Use of Force Continuum:
Is a Force Continuum or Matrix included in the Policy, defining the types of force/weapons that can be used to respond to specific types of resistance?
- - - - - - - - - -
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]