Black Lives Matter; The Cerebral Warlords of Our Time

[I35]

Crutcher's Criminal history. He was just released from Jail in May after serving 9 years.

1996 Shooting with intent to kill — Dismissed
2001 Petit larceny — Conviction
2004 Driving while suspended — Conviction
2005 Driving while suspended, resisting officer — Conviction
2006 Driving while suspended — Conviction
Driving with open container — Dismissed
2006 Trafficking in illegal drugs — Conviction. (He was also charged in that incident with assault on a police officer and resisting, but that was dismissed.)
2011 Public intoxication (while in prison for drug trafficking) — Conviction
2012 Public intoxication — Conviction
Obstructing an officer — Conviction
2013 DUI — Conviction
Resisting officer — Conviction
Open Container — Conviction
Failure to wear seatbelt — Conviction
Speeding — Conviction

 

[theiioftx]

Crutcher's Criminal history. He was just released from Jail in May after serving 9 years.

1996 Shooting with intent to kill — Dismissed
2001 Petit larceny — Conviction
2004 Driving while suspended — Conviction
2005 Driving while suspended, resisting officer — Conviction
2006 Driving while suspended — Conviction
Driving with open container — Dismissed
2006 Trafficking in illegal drugs — Conviction. (He was also charged in that incident with assault on a police officer and resisting, but that was dismissed.)
2011 Public intoxication (while in prison for drug trafficking) — Conviction
2012 Public intoxication — Conviction
Obstructing an officer — Conviction
2013 DUI — Conviction
Resisting officer — Conviction
Open Container — Conviction
Failure to wear seatbelt — Conviction
Speeding — Conviction

No lie. Last night CNN caption under story was unarmed church choir member shot by Tulsa police.

This country is headed for a race war thanks to dishonest media.

 

[texas_ex2000]

As the days go by, I'm slowly starting to lose any empathy I had for BLM. Any progress in bringing communities together will have nothing to do with this stupidity.

With regards to Crutcher and the police officer Shelby, why is Crutcher walking back to his vehicle? PCP was found in his vehicle, the officer's lawyer said he was acting as if he was under the influence of drugs...he obviously was not complying with the officer.

I don't know if she should have shot him or not, but I don't doubt she felt fear and acted out of protecting herself and her colleagues. And for those BLM morons who say, "is she was afraid, she shouldn't be a police officer," every leo and military member who has ever been downrange of a hostile has experienced fear. You're an idiot if you aren't afraid. That's why you rely on your TRAINING to protect yourself and your teammates.

And you know what law-abiding CCL citizens do when stopped by police? They let police know they are carrying and do everything to make the officer feel secure about the stop.

 

[Statalyzer]

Crutcher's history isn't really relevant to whether killing him was the right move. His case is totally different from the Charlotte case, where a guy had a gun and the officers did their best to not get lethal, but he gave them no choice. Crutcher wasn't threatening to hurt anybody. He was, in his disoriented and probably drugged state, ignoring some orders, but that in itself is not a crime worth of a summary death sentence.

 

[theiioftx]

Crutcher's history isn't really relevant to whether killing him was the right move. His case is totally different from the Charlotte case, where a guy had a gun and the officers did their best to not get lethal, but he gave them no choice. Crutcher wasn't threatening to hurt anybody. He was, in his disoriented and probably drugged state, ignoring some orders, but that in itself is not a crime worth of a summary death sentence.

Well I agree that his past history is not relevant, if he was high on PCP and refusing to comply with orders by the officer, I have a hard time finding fault with the officer's actions. She obviously repeated tells him to stop. He proceeds to back to his vehicle and allegedly reaches into his vehicle. His behavior seems to have played a significant role in the situation.

In the end, let the justice system handle it. I am just concerned police will be forced to let criminals go based upon fear of prosecution.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Crutcher's Criminal history. He was just released from Jail in May after serving 9 years.

1996 Shooting with intent to kill — Dismissed
2001 Petit larceny — Conviction
2004 Driving while suspended — Conviction
2005 Driving while suspended, resisting officer — Conviction
2006 Driving while suspended — Conviction
Driving with open container — Dismissed
2006 Trafficking in illegal drugs — Conviction. (He was also charged in that incident with assault on a police officer and resisting, but that was dismissed.)
2011 Public intoxication (while in prison for drug trafficking) — Conviction
2012 Public intoxication — Conviction
Obstructing an officer — Conviction
2013 DUI — Conviction
Resisting officer — Conviction
Open Container — Conviction
Failure to wear seatbelt — Conviction
Speeding — Conviction

If he was serving 9 years in jail and was released in May how did he rack up all those convictions from the penitentiary? That must be a pretty liberal work release program. Did it really take 5 years to get a public intoxication conviction or was he charged with public intoxication and DUI in prison? I imagine him driving around some laundry cart or pushing a library cart while wasted.

I'm not saying he doesn't have some sordid criminal history but those conviction dates and reported 9 year prison sentence should be questioned.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Tulsa officer Betty Shelby has been charged with first degree manslaughter.

Kudos to the Tulsa PD, DA, and community for holding it together and letting the process play out so far.

As member station KGOU reports, "The affidavit states Shelby reacted unreasonably by escalating the situation, became emotionally involved, and overreacted."

 

[I35]

If he was serving 9 years in jail and was released in May how did he rack up all those convictions from the penitentiary? That must be a pretty liberal work release program. Did it really take 5 years to get a public intoxication conviction or was he charged with public intoxication and DUI in prison? I imagine him driving around some laundry cart or pushing a library cart while wasted.

I'm not saying he doesn't have some sordid criminal history but those conviction dates and reported 9 year prison sentence should be questioned.

After I read that my first thought was they meant maybe 9 months. But it actually said 9 years. I'm guessing he was released and then sent back but I don't know that.

 

[Joe Fan]

Charlotte

 

[Statalyzer]

If he was high on PCP and refusing to comply with orders by the officer

Still should not be automatic death sentence. A disoriented person is following some orders but not others. Likely is on drugs. I have no way to make him follow the orders, so I'd better kill him? Something's wrong with that picture.

He proceeds to back to his vehicle and allegedly reaches into his vehicle.

That's what I heard, but it looks in the video like the windows are rolled up. Maybe somebody with super hi-def zoom can say otherwise. The cop at least said that he reached in, but it's also quite possible he put his hand on the window and she freaked out. Even if not, there are better options - as was demonstrated in Charlotte, where sadly even after officers found cover and told the guy to drop a gun that was clearly present and visible, he still wouldn't. Too bad the Charlotte officers weren't in Tulsa and vise versa, or we'd have one less person killed.

 

[Statalyzer]

Someone just died in Charlotte because of a protester firing a gun at random.

In other words, a black man fatally shot a black man at a protest against the fatal shooting of a black man by a black cop, because black lives matter.

 

[mb227]

Tulsa officer Betty Shelby has been charged with first degree manslaughter.

Kudos to the Tulsa PD, DA, and community for holding it together and letting the process play out so far.

More like a rush to judgment...they are postponing their riot until after the acquittal that comes in a year to a year and a half.

Even in a capital case, you rarely see a case move from a shooting to an indictment that rapidly...this was about placing a sacrificial lamb on the altar because she has been convicted in the court of public opinion.

 

[mb227]

Crutcher's history isn't really relevant to whether killing him was the right move. His case is totally different from the Charlotte case, where a guy had a gun and the officers did their best to not get lethal, but he gave them no choice. Crutcher wasn't threatening to hurt anybody. He was, in his disoriented and probably drugged state, ignoring some orders, but that in itself is not a crime worth of a summary death sentence.

There are MANY offense reports that will describe firearms that were in the door pocket...I see them on a regular basis doing the work I do. It is absolutely within the realm of reason for an officer to be in fear when a non-responsive person moves towards the door of their vehicle and appears to be reaching towards the passenger compartment...

 

[Garmel]

I gotta laugh. I had an argument with a couple of people who told me that Crutcher reaching in his car(if true) shouldn't be self-defense for the cop. It could only be self defense if Crutcher pointed a gun at the cop. WTF? LOL!!!

 

[texas_ex2000]

Still should not be automatic death sentence. A disoriented person is following some orders but not others. Likely is on drugs. I have no way to make him follow the orders, so I'd better kill him? Something's wrong with that picture.

It's not automatic. Officers are not trained to shoot to kill. They're trained to stop the threat. If someone is not complying to orders, acting erratically, WALKING BACK TO THEIR VEHICLE when ordered to stop, and reaching into the car...how long is she suppose to wait? Is she supposed to wait for him to point something at her? Stat...something is wrong with THAT picture. Holy f'in $hi%t. When are we all going to stop with the nonsense PC malarkey and support the men and women who put their lives on the line every day? Everyone of these single brain cell protestors and their message board proxies can have a nice long drink of Golf Fox Yankee.

The line between a completely normal interaction with a citizen and having to defend your and your partners' lives is razor thin. LAW ABIDING citizens know this and how to interact with police with that in mind.

And what is the BLM's reasoning to that she should have had her taser drawn? Tasers are used when subduing suspects that are confirmed to NOT be a lethal threat, and there's an actual reason for that. Tasers have a much shorter effective range (meaning the threat is necessarily closer), aren't accurate, take an eternity for a second shot, are complex electric machines with expiration dates that fail. As a result, while having the benefit of being non-lethal (although people die all the time from tasers), they are decidely less effective at stopping a threat than a .40 S&W. Tasers aren't some magical crimefighting super tool that can solve all of the black community police problems. Forcing LEOs to default to tasers when dealing with a suspect who hasn't been cleared, you are putting officers' lives at risk, making their job more difficult, and making the community they serve less safe. http://www.staradvertiser.com/2016/...ten-dont-work-review-of-lapd-incidents-finds/

That's what I heard, but it looks in the video like the windows are rolled up.

You have a huge crazy doped up suspect not complying to orders walking back to his car. She's behind the driver side tail light for cover (training)...do you think she can see if the window is open or closed at that angle? She sees this erratic non-complying suspect walk up to the driver's side door and lean into the window. In other angles his right arm looks like it's going down into his appendix. Whether the window is up or down is completely irrelevant to how any trained officer in that situation would measure the risk and threat. Irrelevant and immaterial.

Crutcher's history isn't really relevant to whether killing him was the right move.

It's just as relevant as an officer's history of making racists comments when being investigated. The guy was a felon. He was a drug dealer and had a rap sheet, a history of assault and resisting arrest, that took up almost my entire screen. You think violent felons and criminals, even when minding their own business, act completely like normal citizens taking their dog for a walk when dealing with police? Police have a spidey sense to recognize these behavioral and interactive fingerprints. It helps keep them alive. He interacted with Shelby like a criminal. And whadaya know??? He had PCP in his car. And criminals who don't comply with law enforcement are a threat to their safety. His criminal history underscores and supports the credibility of the cues that triggered her fear.
http://www.correctionsone.com/offic...061-Officer-safety-Developing-a-spidey-sense/

BLM is making a hero of a drug dealing violent criminal. Grow up folks and stop espousing this bull$!t the promulgates more violence and needless death. We've had President Obama in office since 2009 towing the line...and it's only hurt the Black Community.

 

[Mr. Deez]

I stopped judging these cases when the Trayvon Martin shooting took place, and I got burned by initially siding with Martin. In light of all the BS the media trumped up in that case to drive ratings and a partisan political agenda, it became clear to me that there's no way for me to know what actually happened. That doesn't mean I won't form opinions based on clear evidence, but they'll be pretty soft opinions.

Having said that, I do have some thoughts on this. Statalyzer is right that Crutcher's past acts are not relevant to the decision to shoot him, and it's highly unlikely that it would be admitted into evidence in the officer's criminal trial or in a civil rights action brought by his family.

texas_ex2000 is seldom wrong, but he's wrong here by equating his criminal history with the officer's hypothetical history of making racist comments because of the purpose of admitting such evidence. If you admit evidence of Crutcher's criminal record, it would be done to prove that he likely acted in conformity with his criminal history. That's not permissible and shouldn't be. We judge how someone behaved based on the evidence related to the incident in question. However, if the prosecutor in the manslaughter case offers the cop's racist statements into evidence, it would be done to prove her motive or intent in firing on Crutcher. That is permissible. (Again, this is hypothetical. I know of no evidence that she had made racist statements.)

Having said that, I'm not rendering judgment in this case or assuming the cop was right or wrong. Nevertheless, I'm very disturbed at the timing of the indictment. There's no way the investigation is already complete, and it reeks of a rush to judgment made in order to prevent rioting such as what's occurring in Charlotte.

I don't know enough about the Charlotte incident to form an opinion, but from what I have heard, it doesn't look good for the shooter. Furthermore, the fact that it's a black cop makes the BLM and terrorists in Charlotte look especially stupid. (The minute you turn violent, you cross the line from the protester to terrorist, because you're serving the same purpose as those who commit acts of terror.) However, even if the officer was white, the infusion of racial politics into these cases is only making matters worse and making it more difficult for both sides to look at them with any sense of objectivity.

Finally, Hillary Clinton's rush to judgment in these cases is a friggin' disgrace. It's one thing for a bunch of crackheads in Charlotte to do that. They have a right to be stupid, and frankly, I'm starting to expect that sort of thing in the current political climate of lunacy. However, a candidate for President, especially one who's claiming to be more measured, mature, unifying, and contemplative in her approach, isn't suppose to be like that. I understand why she's doing it - because she's afraid black voters aren't motivated enough to turn out for her. However, what's needed in times like this is leadership and maturity, not cheap political cowardice.

Every stupid statement Hillary makes, every blatant lie that comes out of her mouth, every hyperbolic piece of propaganda our baldly partisan and intellectually fraudulent media puts out, every embrace of the BLM movement or reinforcement of their ********* narrative that Hillary participates in is a camel on the back of me abandoning the Never Trump position, and the load is getting heavy. I don't want to have to crawl back to @mchammer and tell him I changed my mind. I don't want to have to admit to Seattle Husker, NJLonghorn, and Hollandtx that I voted for an intellectually weak blowhard rather than sticking to my guns. But those considerations can't drive my decision, and Hillary is making my position very difficult to defend in my own mind. And coincidentally, my absentee ballot showed up in my e-mail box today . . . I'm going to wait before casting it.

 

[texas_ex2000]

texas_ex2000 is seldom wrong, but he's wrong here by equating his criminal history with the officer's hypothetical history of making racist comments because of the purpose of admitting such evidence. If you admit evidence of Crutcher's criminal record, it would be done to prove that he likely acted in conformity with his criminal history. That's not permissible and shouldn't be. We judge how someone behaved based on the evidence related to the incident in question. However, if the prosecutor in the manslaughter case offers the cop's racist statements into evidence, it would be done to prove her motive or intent in firing on Crutcher. That is permissible. (Again, this is hypothetical. I know of no evidence that she had made racist statements.)

I should have clarified. It was an argument for a regular American trying to make sense of what's happening in our country. I thought that's where Stat's comment was. It wasn't an argument for a judge at an evidentiary hearing. It is definitely not legally admissible.

 

[Phil Elliott]

I think she was very justified in fearing for her life when he refused her multiple orders to stop and continued all the way back to his car.

In my world, you do what the cops say or you deserve whatever is coming to you. They've got a hard enough job already without people deciding for themselves what orders from an officer they will or will not obey.

 

[Mr. Deez]

In my world, you do what the cops say or you deserve whatever is coming to you.

It isn't that simple. If the Temple police officer had blown this guy away, would he have deserved it?

 

[Mr. Deez]

I should have clarified. It was an argument for a regular American trying to make sense of what's happening in our country. I thought that's where Stat's comment was. It wasn't an argument for a judge at an evidentiary hearing. It is definitely not legally admissible.

Why do you think this sort of thing isn't legally admissible?

 

[texas_ex2000]

Why do you think this sort of thing isn't legally admissible?

Didn't you just say Crutcher's history wasn't permissible? He's not on trial, Shelby is.

If Crutcher were alive and on trial for something as a defendant, then I think his history would be admissible. Is that correct?

 

[theiioftx]

The fact that he is not following commands, acting irrationally and generally creating an unsafe situation, makes him culpable. The black lives community pushes a narrative that the police must first show them respect before they will give police respect. That simply is not the way it works for anybody including my lilly white butt. When I am pulled over, I follow commands, answer yes sir, no sir and make sure I do not create any doubt for the police officer that I intend no harm. In every one of these highly publicized cases, the subject is creating a dangerous situation. For this guy, he left his car in the middle of the road, refused commands and allegedly was on PCP. I stand, and will always stand, behind the police officer.

 

[mchammer]

I stopped judging these cases when the Trayvon Martin shooting took place, and I got burned by initially siding with Martin. In light of all the BS the media trumped up in that case to drive ratings and a partisan political agenda, it became clear to me that there's no way for me to know what actually happened. That doesn't mean I won't form opinions based on clear evidence, but they'll be pretty soft opinions.

Having said that, I do have some thoughts on this. Statalyzer is right that Crutcher's past acts are not relevant to the decision to shoot him, and it's highly unlikely that it would be admitted into evidence in the officer's criminal trial or in a civil rights action brought by his family.

texas_ex2000 is seldom wrong, but he's wrong here by equating his criminal history with the officer's hypothetical history of making racist comments because of the purpose of admitting such evidence. If you admit evidence of Crutcher's criminal record, it would be done to prove that he likely acted in conformity with his criminal history. That's not permissible and shouldn't be. We judge how someone behaved based on the evidence related to the incident in question. However, if the prosecutor in the manslaughter case offers the cop's racist statements into evidence, it would be done to prove her motive or intent in firing on Crutcher. That is permissible. (Again, this is hypothetical. I know of no evidence that she had made racist statements.)

Having said that, I'm not rendering judgment in this case or assuming the cop was right or wrong. Nevertheless, I'm very disturbed at the timing of the indictment. There's no way the investigation is already complete, and it reeks of a rush to judgment made in order to prevent rioting such as what's occurring in Charlotte.

I don't know enough about the Charlotte incident to form an opinion, but from what I have heard, it doesn't look good for the shooter. Furthermore, the fact that it's a black cop makes the BLM and terrorists in Charlotte look especially stupid. (The minute you turn violent, you cross the line from the protester to terrorist, because you're serving the same purpose as those who commit acts of terror.) However, even if the officer was white, the infusion of racial politics into these cases is only making matters worse and making it more difficult for both sides to look at them with any sense of objectivity.

Finally, Hillary Clinton's rush to judgment in these cases is a friggin' disgrace. It's one thing for a bunch of crackheads in Charlotte to do that. They have a right to be stupid, and frankly, I'm starting to expect that sort of thing in the current political climate of lunacy. However, a candidate for President, especially one who's claiming to be more measured, mature, unifying, and contemplative in her approach, isn't suppose to be like that. I understand why she's doing it - because she's afraid black voters aren't motivated enough to turn out for her. However, what's needed in times like this is leadership and maturity, not cheap political cowardice.

Every stupid statement Hillary makes, every blatant lie that comes out of her mouth, every hyperbolic piece of propaganda our baldly partisan and intellectually fraudulent media puts out, every embrace of the BLM movement or reinforcement of their ********* narrative that Hillary participates in is a camel on the back of me abandoning the Never Trump position, and the load is getting heavy. I don't want to have to crawl back to @mchammer and tell him I changed my mind. I don't want to have to admit to Seattle Husker, NJLonghorn, and Hollandtx that I voted for an intellectually weak blowhard rather than sticking to my guns. But those considerations can't drive my decision, and Hillary is making my position very difficult to defend in my own mind. And coincidentally, my absentee ballot showed up in my e-mail box today . . . I'm going to wait before casting it.

Deez, the secret will be just between you and me.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Didn't you just say Crutcher's history wasn't permissible? He's not on trial, Shelby is.

If Crutcher were alive and on trial for something as a defendant, then I think his history would be admissible. Is that correct?

If Crutcher were alive and on trial for something as defendant, his history wouldn't be admissible in the guilt/innocence phase of the trial. A judge or jury could consider it in rendering a punishment, but that wouldn't happen until after he was found guilty of the crime.

Obviously it wouldn't be admitted in Shelbys case either.

 

[horninchicago]

It isn't that simple. If the Temple police officer had blown this guy away, would he have deserved it?

I do not know what he law says, but why shouldn't or wouldn't the police be able to stop this ******* when he has a rifle out in the open like that? This clown acts like everyone should know he is above board and legal to carry. Hell, he sounded totally unreasonable and like he was just trying to find a reason to sue, as he said, threatening the cop with the impending civil suit. I say, to hell with this clown, makes gun owners look like the nuts that the left likes to portray.

As to whether he deserved to be blown away, I don't know. I don't know if any of the people who are shot by the police deserve it, either. Neither does anyone on the internet because we don't have all the evidence and aren't in the situation at the time.

 

[Phil Elliott]

I do not know what he law says, but why shouldn't or wouldn't the police be able to stop this ******* when he has a rifle out in the open like that?

It is legal in Texas to open-carry a rifle without a permit. I cannot say one way or another who is right here because we do not get to see the officer approaching the man and what their initial exchange was like. However, the guy is pretty agitated and giving them a ration of crap, which I would not ever do. I yes sir and no sir them to death. If I feel like I was mistreated, I will deal with that later with an attorney at my side - you are not going to win an argument with a cop in that situation, especially when you are yelling at him. At one point, he tells the officer to shut-up. I would never ever do that.

 

[texas_ex2000]

It isn't that simple. If the Temple police officer had blown this guy away, would he have deserved it?

MSgt Grisham actually did what he was told. He was incredulous about it, but he did it and he didn't resist. Now, that's not the way I would do it. But he didn't resist, and that's probably why he didn't get blown away.

That said, as this video shows...the police officer stupidly grabs Grisham's rifle. And Grisham stupidly touches his rifle. STUPIDITY all around. If a citizen hasn't done anything suspicious or the officer should have asked if he can see his rifle. One thing about Grisham though is that he admits to having PTSD. IMO, if you've been clinically diagnosed with having PTSD, you should not be allowed to own a gun until medically cleared.

I do not know what he law says, but why shouldn't or wouldn't the police be able to stop this ******* when he has a rifle out in the open like that?

That's the difference between the two cases. MSgt Grisham wasn't doing anything illegal nor was he acting in a threatening manner. He's hiking out with his son where there are a lot of feral hogs. I've posted many times on here that after sport and paper shooting, feral hog and coyote control is probably the most used application by AR-15 owners. Like getting stopped for being black, which is a problem, MSgt Grisham was stopped illegally.

Should I be stopped if I'm hiking to a fishing hole simply for open carrying a .357 magnum (which I do regularly after accidentally running into a meth deal)? No. The more we discourage people with illegal stops based on someone saying "there's a guy walking around with a gun," the more

If I'm doing 85 in a 65 and pulled over, do I hand over my CCL with my DL and tell the officer I'm carrying? Yes. If I moved back to Texas, was pulled over for speeding and was told to step out of the car because I had some outstanding parking tickets from 1996 that I completely forgot about, do I expect to be disarmed? Yes and I would ask the officer how they would like to disarm me.

Was Crutcher stopped for being black? No. His car was in the middle of the street and he walked up to Shelby. Was Crutcher acting in a threatening manner? Yes, she said he was acting as if under the influence of drugs, and so far the evidence supports that. And he was walking towards the driver's side of the car.

 

[mb227]

Didn't you just say Crutcher's history wasn't permissible? He's not on trial, Shelby is.

If Crutcher were alive and on trial for something as a defendant, then I think his history would be admissible. Is that correct?

It may become admissible in Shelby's case if there was any indication that she knew OF the history or, alternately, if the State puts someone on the stand that says he has no history of criminality or aggressiveness.

 

[Mr. Deez]

It may become admissible in Shelby's case if there was any indication that she knew OF the history or, alternately, if the State puts someone on the stand that says he has no history of criminality or aggressiveness.

Yes, but we have no reason to assume that will happen. With the facts we know, it shouldn't be admitted.

 

[Crockett]

Donald Trump has weighed in on this.

Asked Wednesday about the police shootings in Charlotte and Tulsa, Oklahoma, that have reignited the debate over race and policing in the country, Trump did not address the Charlotte incident but said he was "very, very troubled" by the shooting of Terence Crutcher, an unarmed black man, in Tulsa on Friday night.

Trump suggested the police officer who fatally shot Crutcher "got scared" or "was choking," referring to individuals who fail under pressure

Funny that I can't remember President Obama ever saying anything so judgmental or divisive on these issues, but I constantly hear of the President's "divisive" and "anti-law enforcement" message.