Manhunt: Police shoot innocent people looking for suspect

[the1kidd03]

i understand the view he is coming from in this case i disagree and i think he needs to open he's eyes to the facts and see the overreach of LAPD to the public and cowboy unprofessional tactics to the public they are using because of fear and that fear has gotten 3 innocent people shot and there vehicle's shot up.....

and I haven't disagreed with that OTHER than for people to recognize they don't have ALL the facts that they think they do...

ONE mistake, no matter how costly is not evidence ALONE to ruin a man's life/career/etc. without sufficient evidence to prove otherwise. ONLY in this situation have I gotten enough details to make me recognize conflicting reports and therefore realize NONE of us REALLY know the context of the situation and are filling in gaps with our own interpretation.

It should be investigated properly and UNBIASEDLY. Will that happen? I doubt it...

"The victims said ....." - Yes, and I'm sure they don't feel like paying for their vehicles, medical bills, etc. either.

 

[sepe]

Again, the media has the Constitution which grants them the ability to interpret things however they wish or even leave whatever they want out and present it as truthful. We as gun owners should KNOW this better than ANYONE.

I haven't followed this story all the way through. Honestly, because I don't care. I first learned of it early in the weekend and it caught my attention Saturday morning when I heard of the lady being shot. So I called my friend who's a supervising officer in the area for clarification.

Based on what he told me in a relatively short conversation, and while understanding he cannot tell me too much detail, I know the media has or is leaving a LOT out. Whether or not that is intentional IDK nor do I care. It simply serves as proof to the fact that we know relatively NOTHING of truth.

According to that conversation, they did receive verbal commands. Whether or not they were able to hear them...

Regardless, it ALL proves that it is/was a very confusing situation and set of circumstances. In which case, it is not justifiable reason enough IMO to crucify a man by possibly having an effect on the outcome of his trial through community outcry.

You've already admitted that your friend wasn't there, that the conversation was short and not in much detail...yet you know that they gave verbal commands?

If you're searching for a killer who's armed and all you know is the description of the last vehicle he was driving, then a similar vehicle sneaks up on you at night to where you cannot positively identify the occupants with the lights turned out are you willing to bet your life on the thought that vehicle isn't a threat even after it ignores your verbal commands to stop?

Again, you know what I know. Which is merely enough NOT to condemn a man before ALL of the evidence is gathered and presented in appropriate fashion (ie NOT through media interpretation).

I dunno about you but when I've been outside a vehicle and had it's lights in my eyes, that usually makes it harder for me to see inside of said vehicle. If the officers were scared for their lives, maybe they would have shed a little light on the situation before spraying and praying. Those houses that got hit never did anything threatening to the cops.

 

[sepe]

It's hardly a secret since I'm publically anouncing it here.

Have you seen ALL 4 sides of the vehicle to CLEARLY indicate that ALL of the officers were firing from a "past tense" and thus presumable "non-threatening" position?

Not all 4 sides but other than the windshield, the front and the passenger side look pretty clean to me.

 

[the1kidd03]

first i take it as not a insult ...i was just giving my opinion of the facts from my background and experience ..

To point out, I completely agree with this on my initial assessment. That is why I contacted my friends in the area later Saturday morning to clarify. Knowing of his integrity personally, I put a great deal of trust on his judgement. He's one of the FEW LEOs I know that openly admits he will quit/retire if and when asked to disarm citizens, for example. He's also gotten on his officers case about their conduct when it's brought to his attention.

Therefore, I can only reasonably assume what he tells me as truth at least to the best of his knowledge. I do know he's a supervising officer involved in the search and regularly works with DHS, but as to his authority in this situation I do not know exactly. So again, I can only reasonably assume that he would hold the same level of standards against those officers that I've known of him to hold to others and that to me he would not lie.

 

[the1kidd03]

Not all 4 sides but other than the windshield, the front and the passenger side look pretty clean to me.

So, obviously there were officers likely IN FRONT of the vehicle when firing began....

 

[the1kidd03]

You've already admitted that your friend wasn't there, that the conversation was short and not in much detail...yet you know that they gave verbal commands?



I dunno about you but when I've been outside a vehicle and had it's lights in my eyes, that usually makes it harder for me to see inside of said vehicle. If the officers were scared for their lives, maybe they would have shed a little light on the situation before spraying and praying. Those houses that got hit never did anything threatening to the cops.

Because he specifically, although briefly, mentioned verbal commands.


other than that, it's all speculation. just like everything else based on what we "know" of the situation.

 

[hornadylnl]

So, obviously there were officers likely IN FRONT of the vehicle when firing began....

Or the bullets fired through the rear window exited the windshield?

 

[churchmouse]

Or the bullets fired through the rear window exited the windshield?

A .40 could do that. What were the LEO firing???

 

[hornadylnl]

A .40 could do that. What were the LEO firing???

Either way, rounds put through the rear window or windshield were intended to disable the vehicle. They weren't shooting to kill.

 

[fireblade]

Here these's pictures may help you...... it shows evidence numbers with the bullet holes shell casing, police car postion, direction of fire, 4 fired shotgun shells etc......(looks like all firing was done from behind and to the left )

 

[rambone]

Here's another shot of Dorner's look-a-like #3.

 

[churchmouse]

Either way, rounds put through the rear window or windshield were intended to disable the vehicle. They weren't shooting to kill.

Looking at these pics I see what you mean..........

Tires, radiator etc were all missed.

 

[sepe]

So, obviously there were officers likely IN FRONT of the vehicle when firing began....

I hope they weren't trained in the good ol' circle the wagon technique that is taught in the Cleveland area, you know...the shoot from all sides and hope you don't kill your buddy in the cross fire.

 

[fireblade]

if you look close the upper right side rear window is a shotgun blast hole .......

 

[hornadylnl]

Looking at these pics I see what you mean..........

Tires, radiator etc were all missed.

They weren't shooting to kill the occupants because they couldn't positively ID them. They were shooting to stop the car's movement....

The guy that keeps telling everyone that NOBODY knows for sure what went on keeps telling us that there was warning given and it was ignored. Oh, and he stated the above as fact as well. Everybody knows that you shoot where somebody's head would be if you're shooting to disable a vehicle.

 

[roisigns]

This thread needs a lot of purple.

 

[the1kidd03]

Or the bullets fired through the rear window exited the windshield?

Exactly. None of us TRULY know

 

[Yup!]

WOW!

 

[fireblade]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Malf2PFXLG0[/ame]

 

[the1kidd03]

Either way, rounds put through the rear window or windshield were intended to disable the vehicle. They weren't shooting to kill.

You caught me. I'm secretly a badge lover and government spy and I made the whole thing up to gauge your willingness to engage officials...

Relaying information I was presented by people who are actually within 2000 miles of the scene is obviously unwanted and not in line with the theories, so I'll just drop out here. I'm over it and couldn't care less about the whole situation honestly since none of us will have an effect on it.