The LEO models make a pop almost like a 22 short. Civilian model more like a subdued pop like something in the microwave making a popDo tasers make a loud noise when fired? Never heard one; heck, never handled one.
The LEO models make a pop almost like a 22 short. Civilian model more like a subdued pop like something in the microwave making a popDo tasers make a loud noise when fired? Never heard one; heck, never handled one.
A man who repeatedly ignores a police officer's commands to stop can reasonably be believed capable of going for a weapon and then trying to fight his way his way out of a tough spot.
I don't think there is a conversation that takes place while a subject is reaching for a gun about who is going to respond to the threat. Two different officers might simultaneously fire whatever weapon they had at their disposal if they simultaneously witnessed the same threat. If she felt he was reaching for a weapon and had a split second to defend herself, she is probably not going to ask her fellow officer, who failed to deploy his taser as the subject was disobeying orders while walking back to his vehicle, if we was going to deploy his taser now that the subject was reaching into his vehicle. Her testimony and that of the fellow officer is that they both saw him reach into his vehicle and they both reacted to that action at the same time. She may be lying but I don't see the evidence to prove that she is.If one is trying to avoid repercussions, which testimony best suits that position?
1)Oops, I accidentally killed an individual.
or
2) I was in fear for my life?
"I was in fear for my life" seems to be the better choice.
Genuine question, why would officers fire a taser AND a firearm simultaneously. That doesn't make much sense, either an individual needs killing or they need tasing, they never need both.
I don't think there is a conversation that takes place while a subject is reaching for a gun about who is going to respond to the threat. Two different officers might simultaneously fire whatever weapon they had at their disposal if they simultaneously witnessed the same threat. If she felt he was reaching for a weapon and had a split second to defend herself, she is probably not going to ask her fellow officer, who failed to deploy his taser as the subject was disobeying orders while walking back to his vehicle, if we was going to deploy his taser now that the subject was reaching into his vehicle. Her testimony and that of the fellow officer is that they both saw him reach into his vehicle and they both reacted to that action at the same time. She may be lying but I don't see the evidence to prove that she is.
Where are you getting this information or are you just making stuff up? It is not discernible in the video and it is in contradiction to the testimony of both officers.when the taser went off with it's normal pop sound she discharged her weapon.
That line of reasoning didn't work out very well for the deaf woodcarver in Seattle, sucks to be him, I guess.
when the taser went off with it's normal pop sound she discharged her weapon. The fact that she did not discharge multiple rounds as most officers do also indicates it was a sympathetic reflex. Not an intentional discharge. I have witnessed it during qualifications and it is certainly documented at police shootings and combat environments. lack of stress inducing training is main reason it occurs http://aele.org/no-recall.html
http://www.chemicalbiological.net/sympatheticfire.html
If one is trying to avoid repercussions, which testimony best suits that position?
1)Oops, I accidentally killed an individual.
or
2) I was in fear for my life?
"I was in fear for my life" seems to be the better choice.
Genuine question, why would officers fire a taser AND a firearm simultaneously. That doesn't make much sense, either an individual needs killing or they need tasing, they never need both.
Ha,..yeah. They were trying to shoot the autistic guy and shot the guy lying in the road next to him..wasn't a man shot recently who was the caregiver for an autistic man? IIRC, the guy was complying and on the ground while still trying to communicate to the officers who he was and that the other individual had a mental condition.
Enter your email address to join: