Woman With Pot of Boiling Water Shot Dead by Police

[freekforge]

I hear leo's say some guys just aren't good cops. I believe they're being honest when they say it. What I never hear is what leo's are doing to remove the bad cops. "They shouldn't have a badge" isn't gonna make anyone safer or the force stronger. "One bad apple" doesn't explain what the other apples are doing to save the bushel. This cop literally said he was going to shoot her in the face.... over sme boiling water he lawfully directed her to handle. Oh well, at least he as at the right address.

I've submitted reports detailing an incident where my superior crossed the line. And was asked by the board to watch his body cam and tell them what I would do as a relatively new officer. It was a pretty sad day because he was someone that at one point I looked up to but we owe it to the community to police ourselves.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Another George Floyd we'll be villains again.

Ben Crump is desperately trying to make "boiling water woman" the next George Floyd.

 

[Denny347]

So when I do watch Cops and Live PD it's not really real?

Weelllllllll, sort of....lol. Mostly......

 

[Denny347]

What I never hear is what leo's are doing to remove the bad cops.

In what forum would you hear such a thing? The news? Those investigations are at department/HR level. I will 100% guarantee the conversations you are wanting to hear happened regarding this "cop" we are currently talking about. They probably happened in his 1st 5 departments. He saw the writing on the wall and moved on before they could fire him. See it all the time. How you stop that is by having the State revoke his/her LE powers and the jumping stops. However, that is difficult and may require laws to change. In Indiana, EVERY police officer (full-time, part-time, reserve) are certified by the Law Enforcement Training Board. The LETB holds your certification and they are the only ones who can decertify it. It difficult to decertify someone against their will.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I'd also like to throw out this reminder, at least in Indiana, the laws for deadly force the police operate under is the same as for everyone else in the state with one exception: The ability to use deadly force to effect an arrest when the person's escape would create a risk of serious bodily injury or death to the officer or a 3rd party. I've never seen a situation where this would apply but defense of self or others under another part of the same law would also apply. I can't even come up with a hypothetical where it applies that another section wouldn't as well. It's just a wording difference of "I shot the guy to effect an arrest before he could get into the school and take the children hostage" vs "I shot the guy to defend the children in the school from him taking them hostage should he make it through the door". Think of the event in Texas where the general citizenry chased an active shooter after he shot up a church. There's no functional difference in 'chasing him to effect an arrest' vs 'chasing him to protect the next church from a potential shooting'.

In practice, the general citizenry 'gets away' with a lot of questionable shoots. Shooting at fleeing suspects, etc. Police are generally held to a higher standard due to training/experience and also, frankly, politics. You choke some guy out when you could have shot him, nobody cares. Police do it...

So, be careful what you wish for.

 

[downforce137]

I believe they charged this guy with murder because the grand jury decided boiling water was not a deadly weapon? they used unreasonable force, as if she was unarmed... sooo... murder...

thats not what it looks like to me.. turn the sound up and listen..

i really think that they didnt know what rebuke means, and took it as she was going to sacrifice their lives so they pulled guns out, and then she didnt comply..

"Today, many people casually say "I rebuke [something] in the name of Jesus" to mean they strongly reject or oppose it, often invoking spiritual authority to ward off negativity or harm"

not defending the cop, but this is an illinois burning at the stake right before election time, as has been seen several times in elections past...

 

[Destro]

What I never hear is what leo's are doing to remove the bad cops.

It's not usually a crime to be lousy at your job. I have known "not very good" cops who never did anything illegal or against policy for me to report. Most of the "not very good" cops I knew ended up going to prison or getting fired. I can't say I was surprised by any of the outcomes.

I always hear about cops "covering up" or whatever from the general public, but actual criminal cops are usually smart enough to steer clear of the guys they know will turn them in. I retired last year, but I hated going to the jail just to drop people off, zero chance I cover up criminal activity for someone else. I think some people just watch too much TV.

I personally think the issue of "not very good" cops is going to get worse before it gets better. Many of the types of people you want working in law enforcement are smart enough to avoid law enforcement at the moment.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I always hear about cops "covering up" or whatever from the general public, but actual criminal cops are usually smart enough to steer clear of the guys they know will turn them in. I retired last year, but I hated going to the jail just to drop people off, zero chance I cover up criminal activity for someone else. I think some people just watch too much TV.

That's the truth. There's nothing special about the work dynamic on a police department vs a military unit vs a work site vs a factory floor. Somebody may "cover" that you were 10 minutes late to your shift, but somebody else will sprint to the nearest manager to tattle thinking they may get a brownie point for later considerations. Neither is going to 'cover' you Johnny Cashing a Cadillac. If someone is "covering" anything significant they are probably an active participant as well. I expect most people will find this true at most of their work places, but for some reason assume other professions are wildly different than human experience suggests.

 

[Ark]

It's not usually a crime to be lousy at your job. I have known "not very good" cops who never did anything illegal or against policy for me to report. Most of the "not very good" cops I knew ended up going to prison or getting fired. I can't say I was surprised by any of the outcomes.

I always hear about cops "covering up" or whatever from the general public, but actual criminal cops are usually smart enough to steer clear of the guys they know will turn them in. I retired last year, but I hated going to the jail just to drop people off, zero chance I cover up criminal activity for someone else. I think some people just watch too much TV.

I personally think the issue of "not very good" cops is going to get worse before it gets better. Many of the types of people you want working in law enforcement are smart enough to avoid law enforcement at the moment.

The body cam era killed the notion that the "blue wall" colludes or "covers up" anything.

 

[HoughMade]

If anyone has questions about this shooting, I'd say watch the footage directly from the Illinois State Police on a bigger screen and slow it down if you have to. I have been watching this full screen on my 28" monitor. The sequence of what happens when is pretty important here. She did NOTHING that she was not told to do right up until the time the shooter pointed his gun at her face. No movement of the pot from where it had been, nothing. Then, when the gun was pointed at her face, she did not pick up the pot initially, but held her hands up holding potholders, then crouched on the ground. As the shooter approached her over the counter, she, stupidly, reached up for the pot and threw it...but not very far as far as I can see. I think the pot landed before any shots were fired, but it was split-second, so that's not my issue.

I don't know what the grand jury believed, but whether a pot with boiling water is a weapon or not (it certainly could be), she did not use it as a weapon at any point until SHE was being threatened with death or bodily injury.

Now, I don't know the law in Illinois, but Indiana has this law:

"(i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to:
(1) protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;
(2) prevent or terminate the public servant's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle; or
(3) prevent or terminate the public servant's unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect."

Ind. Code § 35-41-3-2.

This law was upheld in a resisting case by both the Indiana Court of Appeals and Indiana Supreme Court. I think, under Indiana law, at least, a plausible case can be made that she was allowed to use the pot as a weapon under the law. Also, it's still unclear to me what the context of them being in the house was. If that was the case, we can see what the result was always likely to be, so it would have been a stupid thing to do.

Using the body cam footage released by the Illinois State Police, in this case, the cam of the shooter here are some pics in order:

 

[manifest destiny]

The guys working at the manufacturing plant aren't bestowed with supra authority and shielded by qualified immunity. While the employment dynamics among staff may be similar, the results of the work most certainly are not.

I believe there are very good officers. Men who truly want to make society safer. But all officers should be held to higher standards than the average worker. If sharing info about a Leo's past job performance doesn't occur between forces because his ****ty performance didnt didn't rise to illegalities, then the police aren't doing their due diligence to weed out unfit officers.

It may well just be another kind of job, but it **** sure is a different kind of job. And it should operate under different, stricter rules. Given the number of forces this cop worked for, someone somewhere new he was or would be a danger. Yet, here he is blasting a women in the face for doing what she was told - by him. I don't think this officer is unique.

 

[KG1]

If anyone has questions about this shooting, I'd say watch the footage directly from the Illinois State Police on a bigger screen and slow it down if you have to. I have been watching this full screen on my 28" monitor. The sequence of what happens when is pretty important here. She did NOTHING that she was not told to do right up until the time the shooter pointed his gun at her face. No movement of the pot from where it had been, nothing. Then, when the gun was pointed at her face, she did not pick up the pot initially, but held her hands up holding potholders, then crouched on the ground. As the shooter approached her over the counter, she, stupidly, reached up for the pot and threw it...but not very far as far as I can see. I think the pot landed before any shots were fired, but it was split-second, so that's not my issue.

I don't know what the grand jury believed, but whether a pot with boiling water is a weapon or not (it certainly could be), she did not use it as a weapon at any point until SHE was being threatened with death or bodily injury.

Now, I don't know the law in Illinois, but Indiana has this law:

"(i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to:
(1) protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;
(2) prevent or terminate the public servant's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle; or
(3) prevent or terminate the public servant's unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect."

Ind. Code § 35-41-3-2.

This law was upheld in a resisting case by both the Indiana Court of Appeals and Indiana Supreme Court. I think, under Indiana law, at least, a plausible case can be made that she was allowed to use the pot as a weapon under the law. Also, it's still unclear to me what the context of them being in the house was. If that was the case, we can see what the result was always likely to be, so it would have been a stupid thing to do.

Using the body cam footage released by the Illinois State Police, in this case, the cam of the shooter here are some pics in order:

View attachment 368556

View attachment 368553

View attachment 368557

View attachment 368558

View attachment 368559

View attachment 368560

Who knows what her mindset and motivation truly was for tossing the pot of boiling hot water but I think the case could be made that she only threw it at the cop when he was advancing toward her aggressively, the firearm trained on her with a threat of shooting her in the face, that it was an instinctive act of self-defense in the moment on her part out of fear.

 

[foszoe]

Who knows what her mindset and motivation truly was for tossing the pot of boiling hot water but I think the case could be made that she only threw it at the cop when he was advancing toward her aggressively, the firearm trained on her with a threat of shooting her in the face that it was an instinctive act of self-defense in the moment on her part.

I've been wondering that myself

 

[racegunz]

The body cam era killed the notion that the "blue wall" colludes or "covers up" anything.

No it didn’t, especially when “they” shut them off or erase the footage.
They have also been known to just gaslight the viewers and thumb their noses at the public as well.

 

[racegunz]

That's the truth. There's nothing special about the work dynamic on a police department vs a military unit vs a work site vs a factory floor. Somebody may "cover" that you were 10 minutes late to your shift, but somebody else will sprint to the nearest manager to tattle thinking they may get a brownie point for later considerations. Neither is going to 'cover' you Johnny Cashing a Cadillac. If someone is "covering" anything significant they are probably an active participant as well. I expect most people will find this true at most of their work places, but for some reason assume other professions are wildly different than human experience suggests.

Nope, actually ,hell no, this is a completely dystopian statement not grounded in any actual reality.

 

[Ark]

No it didn’t, especially when “they” shut them off or erase the footage.
They have also been known to just gaslight the viewers and thumb their noses at the public as well.

When? When does that happen? Do you have actual sources or confirmed instances of footage being tampered with by police?

 

[racegunz]

The recent atf raid in AR is a prime example of both the federal agency and the “local authorities” either not wearing their cameras or having them turned off or not sharing the damning footage.

 

[racegunz]

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation...-cameras-new-developments-week-heres-happened

Gee this came up immediately on a simple google search…… yep no corruption to be seen in law enforcement, cops would never tamper with their body cameras now move along sheeple……

In case your fingers are broken and can’t google search yourself here’s another article
https://prismreports.org/2024/07/16/complex-troubling-history-police-body-cameras/

 

[Ark]

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation...-cameras-new-developments-week-heres-happened

Gee this came up immediately on a simple google search…… yep no corruption to be seen in law enforcement, cops would never tamper with their body cameras now move along sheeple……

That's a seven year old article all about Baltimore.

Not having body cameras in the first place is not the same thing as tampering with them to destroy evidence.

 

[racegunz]

That's a seven year old article all about Baltimore.

Not having body cameras in the first place is not the same thing as tampering with them to destroy evidence.

Ah I didn’t know there was a statute of limitations on police corruption…. My bad
Must be all good now! Move along sheeple your stop watch has timed out.