[Eff-1]

Anyone else catch this? Just terrible. Luckily he was not hurt too seriously.

‪Raw Video: Dash Cam Video of the Shooting‬‏ - YouTube

One thing I appreciate about the USA. In 20 days from the incident occurring, the officer was fired, charged, and is now held on $75,000 bond.

Canada? The RCMP would say "no comment" for 16 months until the media finally manages to leak something.

[BoostedBB6]

May want to shed a little light on the video.

This guy was pulled over for "no seat belt" at a gas station. He was in the process of getting out of the truck when the cop stopped him. He was asked to provide his drivers license (see video of him patting his back pocket). He did not have his wallet so went into his vehicle to get the wallet and was shot when doing so.

He was shot because he did as the officer asked of him......

[Presto]

related article:
COLUMBIA, SC — An S.C. trooper who stopped a man for a seat belt violation outside Columbia and then shot him – apparently without provocation – was arrested Wednesday and charged with assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature.

Sean Groubert, 31, a lance corporal who was fired from the Highway Patrol after the shooting incident, now faces 20 years in prison if convicted of wrongfully shooting the driver, Levar Jones.

Groubert was booked Wednesday evening at the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center. He was fired from the patrol last Friday.

Wednesday night, in a hearing at the jail, Magistrate Ethel Brewer set Groubert’s bond at $75,000.

A video of the Sept. 4 shooting incident was played at Groubert’s bond hearing.

The video shows Groubert firing repeatedly at Jones, who was not armed and who was not behaving aggressively. Jones was struck at least once, in the hip. He spent time in the hospital and is now out of the hospital recuperating.

Read more here: COLUMBIA, SC: VIDEO RELEASED: SC trooper charged with felony in shooting at traffic stop over seat belt violation | Crime | The State (http://www.thestate.com/2014/09/24/3702695_sc-trooper-charged-with-felony.html?sp=/99/205/&rh=1#storylink=cpy)



One thing I appreciate about the USA. In 20 days from the incident occurring, the officer was fired, charged, and is now held on $75,000 bond.


You must not read a lot of news from US. You're better off finding that needle in the haystack than seeing an officer charged or even disciplined in, the US. Ferguson is still fresh. Of most recent, there was the cop that murderd a black guy that was carrying BB-gun (http://www.whio.com/news/news/special-grand-jury-selected-john-crawford-case/nhRwM/), for purchase, in a Walmart. Ohio is an open-carry state.

[BoostedBB6]

Charges should not be assault, rather attempted murder or equivalent charges like anyone else would get if they shot at another person for no reason.

[Eff-1]

You must not read a lot of news from US. You're better off finding that needle in the haystack than seeing an officer charged or even disciplined in, the US. Ferguson is still fresh. Of most recent, there was the cop that murderd a black guy that was carrying BB-gun (http://www.whio.com/news/news/special-grand-jury-selected-john-crawford-case/nhRwM/), for purchase, in a Walmart. Ohio is an open-carry state.

Certainly the US is far from perfect. The point I was trying to make is that, for the most part, there is more openness, speed and transparancy in the US justice system when it involves alleged misconduct by law enforcement. In Canada, we have nothing but the opposite.

[Manic!]

Anyone else catch this? Just terrible. Luckily he was not hurt too seriously.

‪Raw Video: Dash Cam Video of the Shooting‬‏ - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XFYTtgZAlE)

One thing I appreciate about the USA. In 20 days from the incident occurring, the officer was fired, charged, and is now held on $75,000 bond.


What about all the other police shootings in the US where nothing happens?

Lucky the guy survived or the cop would have probably gotten away with it.

[xXSupa]

So he gets shot for doing what the officer said twice...

The officer wanted his license, so he went to get it.
Then the officer asked him to get out of the car, so he comes out of the car...
Then shots are fired? wtf?

I understand that the cop was concerned for his own safety, but anyone who rushes for their gun and fires that fast should not be a cop. I hope he gets a huge lawsuit coming his way.

[supremematt85]

Waiting for Charles in charge to chime in.

[van_city23]

Certainly the US is far from perfect. The point I was trying to make is that, for the most part, there is more openness, speed and transparancy in the US justice system when it involves alleged misconduct by law enforcement. In Canada, we have nothing but the opposite.

What are you basing this on? I don't have facts, just some things i've seen in the news and it seems very contrary to what you just said. Not that the news itself is a credible source..

[pinn3r]

there's a lot of The Blue Wall of Silence going on in the Canadian criminal justice system

[GabAlmighty]

Cop was just a wee bit trigger happy

[quasi]

He's lucky that cop wasn't a better shot. I'm usually against pile on the police in a shooting thread but this cop is clearly an idiot. The guy who got shot also just won the lottery when he sues the city and the police dept, he won't need to deliver medical supplies anymore.

[StylinRed]

saw this on the news earlier tonight its said the shooter is a "hero cop" for taking out a shooter earlier in his career and getting a medal of valor for it :suspicious:

also his lawyer had this to say lawyer Barney Giese told WISTV.com that his client was pleaded not guilty to the charge, claiming that Groubert was justified in shooting Jones, who reached for his licence 'aggressively'.

[J____]

lol what the fuck... that cop should NOT be serving the people holy... not only does he shoot people for following orders, but he has a horrible fucking shot.

[MarkyMark]

Jesus Christ it's sad knowing that there are actual cops on the road like this. Apparently you don't even need to see a weapon anymore just the faint chance that there might be a gun within a country mile of the scene and you're justified to shoot someone.

[meme405]

This is why when you are pulled over I try to do the following:

-I try to pull over where the cop knows I'm not just going to speed away, AKA I park up against a curb, or a wall.

-I turn the car off

-When the cop walks up to the car I have my hands where he can see them, and I don't make any sudden movements.

-When the cop asks me for my license and registration I describe where they are and I tell him I am going to reach for them. This way he understands what I am doing and has no reason to panic.

-I also make sure to let them know that I have a dash camera, and that it is recording, both video and audio.

Needless to say, I have had no problems ever, and I get pulled over quite a bit (I don't know what it is, i'm just a sketchy person I guess).

Either way though, cop is clearly not qualified and this should not have been the end result of this scenario. I mean come on "Aggressively reaching for his license"? :seriously:

[multicartual]

The people and the authorities are no longer on the same side

[Gumby]

I want to see the judge's reaction when the defendant says "I shot Jones because he was reaching for his license aggressively." :rolleyes:

[Timpo]

Canada? The RCMP would say "no comment" for 16 months until the media finally manages to leak something.

RCMP is quite violent police force. I've heard of too many stories about it.
BC was trying to create its own BC Police Force but for some strange reason(political pressure?) they decided to make another 20 year contract with RCMP.

[underscore]

saw this on the news earlier tonight its said the shooter is a "hero cop" for taking out a shooter earlier in his career and getting a medal of valor for it :suspicious:

also his lawyer had this to say

I would be questioning if the officer was properly assessed after that incident, something like that will change a person and could easily make them unfit for duty as a police officer.

May want to shed a little light on the video.

This guy was pulled over for "no seat belt" at a gas station. He was in the process of getting out of the truck when the cop stopped him. He was asked to provide his drivers license (see video of him patting his back pocket). He did not have his wallet so went into his vehicle to get the wallet and was shot when doing so.

While the officer is in the wrong here (he should have drawn, but not fired), imo reaching into the truck like that is a very bad idea, especially since the US has such a high rate of gun ownership the officer really has no way to know what you're reaching for and anyone making a move like that shouldn't be surprised to turn around and find a gun drawn on them.

[MarkyMark]

I would be questioning if the officer was properly assessed after that incident, something like that will change a person and could easily make them unfit for duty as a police officer.



While the officer is in the wrong here (he should have drawn, but not fired), imo reaching into the truck like that is a very bad idea, especially since the US has such a high rate of gun ownership the officer really has no way to know what you're reaching for and anyone making a move like that shouldn't be surprised to turn around and find a gun drawn on them.

IMO it's the officers responsibility to talk him through it. Simply asking "where's your license, and slowly go get it" would have made it a much different situation. If the cops going to be that trigger happy who's to say the guy reaching in his back pocket to get his wallet wouldn't have made the officer think he was reaching for a gun back there as well?

[Bouncing Bettys]

Thankfully the camera caught it all. You know damn well that if there was no video, the cop would have claimed: "The suspect aggressively dove for a weapon I thought I saw in his vehicle." He even claimed the guy dove into his vehicle in the tape.

Makes me wonder how many cop shootings not caught on tape were like this incident while they claimed the victim acted aggressively or made a move for a weapon that was never there.

[cheeky_scrub]

Certainly the US is far from perfect. The point I was trying to make is that, for the most part, there is more openness, speed and transparancy in the US justice system when it involves alleged misconduct by law enforcement. In Canada, we have nothing but the opposite.

I'm going to have to lay down a big fat "wat" on this. Misconduct by cops is swept under the rug far more than in Canada. Police unions push back hard against proposals for an IIO-style civilian police watchdog. Good ol'boy networks in the US, especially in the southern states, run deep. The chief of police is the brother of the courthouse judge, who plays golf with the lieutenant governor at the country club, whose son is the county DA, who's friends with the cop.

Remember the guy who was found dead handcuffed in the back of a cruiser? No biggie, just a suicide. The family's word against the cop--in rural America, the cop almost always wins, unless CNN or the ACLU get wind of it--or, in this case, there is video evidence. And even then, cops will often smash cameras or order the filmer to wipe the evidence. They'll even go as far as to get filming of police banned by state law (the courts have overturned these laws multiple times).

[mr_chin]

I'm going to have to lay down a big fat "wat" on this. Misconduct by cops is swept under the rug far more than in Canada. Police unions push back hard against proposals for an IIO-style civilian police watchdog. Good ol'boy networks in the US, especially in the southern states, run deep. The chief of police is the brother of the courthouse judge, who plays golf with the lieutenant governor at the country club, whose son is the county DA, who's friends with the cop.

Remember the guy who was found dead handcuffed in the back of a cruiser? No biggie, just a suicide. The family's word against the cop--in rural America, the cop almost always wins, unless CNN or the ACLU get wind of it--or, in this case, there is video evidence. And even then, cops will often smash cameras or order the filmer to wipe the evidence. They'll even go as far as to get filming of police banned by state law (the courts have overturned these laws multiple times).

Not to mention Chris Dorner's case, where they just lit the house on fire and left him inside and burnt alive.

I could understand that cops in the US is more likely to use excessive force because the crime down there are much worst, but even when police brutality is caught on video, officers would be put on administration leave with pay.

There needs to be an internal internal affair that investigate these officers and put them to the test if they abide by the law themselves. I say internal internal because there are already internal affair in the states, but they are just as bad as police officers who doesn't follow the rules.

I'm so glad this officer got 20 years.

[cheeky_scrub]

I could understand that cops in the US is more likely to use excessive force because the crime down there are much worst, but even when police brutality is caught on video, officers would be put on administration leave with pay.


Sometimes, it's even worse. The cop just gets put on desk duty. There was one officer with the Milwaukee Police who dropped the ball with one of Jeffrey Dahmer's victims, who is now the chief.

There needs to be an internal internal affair that investigate these officers and put them to the test if they abide by the law themselves. I say internal internal because there are already internal affair in the states, but they are just as bad as police officers who doesn't follow the rules.

That is supposed to be what civilian watchdogs are for. In B.C. it's called the IIO. In Ontario it's called the SIU. In Alberta there's the ASIRT (but they've come under scandal).

Down in one of the suburbs of Seattle, someone anonymously created animated videos illustrating police misconduct among the force. The force responded by filing a search warrant to find out who made those videos. Kind of a "stays within the family" approach.

Steubenville, Maryville, Amadou Diallo, Eric Garner...and these are just the major ones that got media attention. Imagine the incidents that got swept under the rug. The blue code of silence is very real. That's why I don't totally write off people with a "fuck da cops" mentality.

[underscore]

IMO it's the officers responsibility to talk him through it. Simply asking "where's your license, and slowly go get it" would have made it a much different situation. If the cops going to be that trigger happy who's to say the guy reaching in his back pocket to get his wallet wouldn't have made the officer think he was reaching for a gun back there as well?

He asked "Can I see your license please?" and the guy turns and reaches into the cab less than a second later, so when exactly is he supposed to say that? I'm not saying the officer isn't at fault (and he definitely made the bigger mistake) I'm just saying that turning around and reaching into the vehicle without saying a word to a police officer first is a very bad idea.

[mr_chin]

He asked "Can I see your license please?" and the guy turns and reaches into the cab less than a second later, so when exactly is he supposed to say that? I'm not saying the officer isn't at fault (and he definitely made the bigger mistake) I'm just saying that turning around and reaching into the vehicle without saying a word to a police officer first is a very bad idea.

Proper procedure for an officer to fire his weapon is probably, see and acknowledge that suspect does indeed have a weapon in hand.

When an officer feel his life is in danger.

If feel threatened by suspected firearm (not confirmed), probably should hide behind his vehicle (doors).

When officers ask me for my license, I reach into my back pocket and get it. Should I be shot then? Even if I did a sudden movement and quickly reach into my back pocket, the officer would probably just step back and draw his gun.

In the original incident, the police officer should not have approach him while asking for his license. Instead, when he stepped out of the car, he should ordered him to get back into his vehicle.

[MarkyMark]

He asked "Can I see your license please?" and the guy turns and reaches into the cab less than a second later, so when exactly is he supposed to say that? I'm not saying the officer isn't at fault (and he definitely made the bigger mistake) I'm just saying that turning around and reaching into the vehicle without saying a word to a police officer first is a very bad idea.

How about "slowly reach for your license please" ? Some people don't get pulled over by the cops all the time, and when someone with authority tells you to do something you just do it right away.

When I was like 18 I was walking home from a friends place at night. It was winter and my hands were already in my pockets when the cop pulled up and asked me to come over to him. I did without even thinking of taking my hands out of my pocket. He told me after it's not a good idea to do that, but at the same time he should have told me before he asked me to come towards him if he felt I was a threat. It's not common sense when you've never been in the situation before. I'm sure glad I wasn't gunned down because the cop thought I was packing heat though.

[hchang]

^ yeah but we have less guns to citizens ratio and overall safer communities.

[MarkyMark]

That doesn't justify popping off at unarmed people because you think there's a chance they might have a gun. If being a cop scares you that much perhaps consider another job where you don't get to hold a weapon.

[hchang]

I'm not saying it's justified.

I'm saying that If you put yourself in a police officers position, knowing that the suspect has a high chance of being armed, wouldn't you be more on edge too?

[mr_chin]

I'm not saying it's justified.

I'm saying that If you put yourself in a police officers position, knowing that the suspect has a high chance of being armed, wouldn't you be more on edge too?

With what facts? That he is black? The driver was pulled over for no seat belt. The officer has no criminal check on him, no reported offense or behavior, he was not called to the stop because a black man in a white vehicle is suspected to be armed.

If the officer "knows that the suspect has a high chance of being armed", he would not walk towards him, calmly asking to show his license and registration. To be already determined that he might be armed, the officer would draw his gun, and yell, "GET THE FUCK ON THE GROUND".

The officer's decision to fire was based on the driver's spontaneous spin to get his license.\

Stop thinking that the officer's action is understandable. The officer is guilty 100%, whether common sense, logic, bullshit, what ifs, might or might not, reasoning, plays a role.

[AzNightmare]

Most men have their wallet and license in their pockets, which is probably what the cop assumed and was expecting.
When the driver turned around and reached into the car, the cop should drawn the gun and told him to Freeze and back out the vehicle with is arms up.

Once the shots were fired, the cop crossed the line.

[underscore]

Does anyone know if they've looked into the officers assessment following the previously mentioned incident where he stopped a shooter? IMO anyone who approved him for duty after that should be getting some heat right now.

How about "slowly reach for your license please" ? Some people don't get pulled over by the cops all the time, and when someone with authority tells you to do something you just do it right away.

When I was like 18 I was walking home from a friends place at night. It was winter and my hands were already in my pockets when the cop pulled up and asked me to come over to him. I did without even thinking of taking my hands out of my pocket. He told me after it's not a good idea to do that, but at the same time he should have told me before he asked me to come towards him if he felt I was a threat. It's not common sense when you've never been in the situation before. I'm sure glad I wasn't gunned down because the cop thought I was packing heat though.

How does that change the fact that doing something an officer isn't going to be expecting, with no warning, is a bad idea? In your case the officer already knew your hands were in your pockets, but if the first thing you did when he asked you to come over was reach for your pockets you're going to cause more concern.

Stop thinking that the officer's action is understandable. The officer is guilty 100%, whether common sense, logic, bullshit, what ifs, might or might not, reasoning, plays a role.

You can understand someones actions without agreeing with them. I can understand why the officer pulled his gun, I can understand why he may have fired his gun, however that doesn't mean I agree with his decision to fire.

[mr_chin]

You can understand someones actions without agreeing with them. I can understand why the officer pulled his gun, I can understand why he may have fired his gun, however that doesn't mean I agree with his decision to fire.

Fair enough.

[MarkyMark]

Does anyone know if they've looked into the officers assessment following the previously mentioned incident where he stopped a shooter? IMO anyone who approved him for duty after that should be getting some heat right now.



How does that change the fact that doing something an officer isn't going to be expecting, with no warning, is a bad idea? In your case the officer already knew your hands were in your pockets, but if the first thing you did when he asked you to come over was reach for your pockets you're going to cause more concern.



You can understand someones actions without agreeing with them. I can understand why the officer pulled his gun, I can understand why he may have fired his gun, however that doesn't mean I agree with his decision to fire.

Yeah pulling your gun out is warranted, but running and shooting multiple times without even seeing a weapon is something i'll never "understand". Beyond being an absolutely horrible shot, he reacted the same way i'd expect my girlfriend to react if she saw a big spider.

"Ahhhh no get away!! *pew pew pew*"

[underscore]

I think you missed my point, you really can't understand that someone who has previously been involved with a shooter might have a panicked reaction when faced with someone potentially pulling a gun on him?

[MarkyMark]

I think you missed my point, you really can't understand that someone who has previously been involved with a shooter might have a panicked reaction when faced with someone potentially pulling a gun on him?

Yes *potentially* pulling a gun. If a previous encounter is interfering with your judgement on how to do your job properly he should be put on desk duty until he has his shit worked out. I'd hate to die because a cop is jumpy about a past experience.