Has there been any indication that the girl had been drinking? I've seen a lot of people mention her being impaired, but haven't seen anything that states it as being factual yet. Shouldn't we give her the same benefit of doubt we're giving the officer?

 

I think assuming that she was drinking IS giving her the benefit of the doubt. If she was sober or not under any influence this looks much worse on her. Believing she is impaired allows that she may not have intentionally taken the actions that led to her death and put her passengers in grave danger.

 

A policeman's perspective...

Outside of circumstantial evidence, i.e. being at a field party at 2 in the morning, no. If I were a gambling man, I would assume that she had had a couple or was high. I have been to enough field parties to know that you can count non-drinkers on one hand. However, that is just presumption and assumption on my part. The toxicology report could help the officer.

 

So if the report comes back clean, does that change anyone's opinion?

I think assuming that she was drinking IS giving her the benefit of the doubt. If she was sober or not under any influence this looks much worse on her. Believing she is impaired allows that she may not have intentionally taken the actions that led to her death and put her passengers in grave danger.

 

How so? If she was sober, what was she doing (that we can see) that put anyone in grave danger?

So if the report comes back clean, does that change anyone's opinion?

Yes it looks worse on the young lady, if it's clean then that means she was willfully disobeying his order to stop and intentionally steered her car at the officer.

How so? If she was sober, what was she doing (that we can see) that put anyone in grave danger?

 

She disobeyed an order to stop and attempted to hit a police officer resulting in shots being fired which put her passengers in grave danger because of her actions.

Outside of circumstantial evidence, i.e. being at a field party at 2 in the morning, no. If I were a gambling man, I would assume that she had had a couple or was high. I have been to enough field parties to know that you can count non-drinkers on one hand. However, that is just presumption and assumption on my part. The toxicology report could help the officer.

 

I realize it doesn't prove anything, but the fact that she's had a DUI in the past adds fuel to the fire in regards to speculation that she was intoxicated. Time will tell.

Yes it looks worse on the young lady, if it's clean then that means she was willfully disobeying his order to stop and intentionally steered her car at the officer.

 

So you can see what happened off camera? How do you know she did so intentionally? Couldn't it just as easily be said that he was trying to get her to stop, she wouldn't, so he jumped on the hood to try to make her stop?

 

We don't know what happened off camera, so I'm not sure how you can say that.

 

What we know she did was willfully disobey an officer's order to stop. Wrong, yes. A crime, yes. Cause for being shot? No. What happened off camera is the key.

How so? If she was sober, what was she doing (that we can see) that put anyone in grave danger?

 

She didn't stop when told to by a police officer. That is most likely going to result in a pursuit, unless of course you try to run the officer over...which is even more dangerous than a pursuit.

So you can see what happened off camera? How do you know she did so intentionally? Couldn't it just as easily be said that he was trying to get her to stop, she wouldn't, so he jumped on the hood to try to make her stop?

 

We don't know what happened off camera, so I'm not sure how you can say that.

 

What we know she did was willfully disobey an officer's order to stop. Wrong, yes. A crime, yes. Cause for being shot? No. What happened off camera is the key.

 

We know that some of the eye witnesses already appear to be liars. I believe one girl in the car said something to the extent that they didn't know he wanted them to stop...could be wrong on that though. I'm sure someone here has the quote. I believe that was the same eye witness that said he jumped on the hood of the car.

She didn't stop when told to by a police officer. That is most likely going to result in a pursuit, unless of course you try to run the officer over...which is even more dangerous than a pursuit.

 

Is not stopping when an officer tells you to cause for being shot? I'd venture no, but I'm not really sure.

 

I've said in here, I don't think he did anything wrong, he took the only course of action possible. However, I think we at least need to consider (after seeing the video) other scenarios.

So you can see what happened off camera? How do you know she did so intentionally? Couldn't it just as easily be said that he was trying to get her to stop, she wouldn't, so he jumped on the hood to try to make her stop?

 

We don't know what happened off camera, so I'm not sure how you can say that.

 

What we know she did was willfully disobey an officer's order to stop. Wrong, yes. A crime, yes. Cause for being shot? No. What happened off camera is the key.

 

Absolutely what happened off camera is the key. But on camera you see that the officer seems to be trying to stop her and she refuses and keeps driving and turning towards the officer and his car.

 

As far as intentionally I don't know nor do you. What I am saying is that if this happened as reported in the first post by Guru and she was sober there is no excuse on her part, she should have stopped. If she was impaired in some way It is a lot easier to understand that she may not have been able to make clear decisions.

 

Police officers don't put their life on the line by jumping on the hood of a car except in extreme situations, I don't think he just jumped up there to stop her. I think as others have mentioned she may have been about to pin him against his own cruiser and he jumped on her hood to keep from being killed.

We know that some of the eye witnesses already appear to be liars. I believe one girl in the car said something to the extent that they didn't know he wanted them to stop...could be wrong on that though. I'm sure someone here has the quote. I believe that was the same eye witness that said he jumped on the hood of the car.

 

I've stayed out this conversation because it's to emotional of a subject and there really aren't any winners. But I think calling one of the witnesses a liar without any proof is a little bit of stretch. Do you know where this witness was located and what they could hear and see?

Is not stopping when an officer tells you to cause for being shot? I'd venture no, but I'm not really sure.

 

I've said in here, I don't think he did anything wrong, he took the only course of action possible. However, I think we at least need to consider (after seeing the video) other scenarios.

 

You asked what she did that was putting anyone in danger...

 

She put everyone in her vehicle in danger when she didn't stop immediately. And no, not stopping by itself is not enough for a police officer to shoot you in most cases.

I've stayed out this conversation because it's to emotional of a subject and there really aren't any winners. But I think calling one of the witnesses a liar without any proof is a little bit of stretch. Do you know where this witness was located and what they could hear and see?

 

She was in the car...and I it appears that she lied. I didn't say she was definitely a liar.