I would argue it also doesn't matter how the officer ended up on the hood i.e. he jumped because he was going to be hit or jumped on on his own. Once he was on and she didn't stop.....it's on her. She can't claim she didn't know he was on there.

 

100% agree! That is the nuts and bolts of the whole incident.

I would argue it also doesn't matter how the officer ended up on the hood i.e. he jumped because he was going to be hit or jumped on on his own. Once he was on and she didn't stop.....it's on her. She can't claim she didn't know he was on there.

Exactly, as that was my point about her sobriety. It really doesn't change much if she was sober or intoxicated. The only difference it makes is if she wasn't sober then she is guilty of another crime, if she was sober then the first mistake she made was refusing to stop. Either way, once the officer was on the hood of her car, her refusal to stop only aided in the outcome.

 

I don't think anyone who commented in this thread doesn't wish she was still here with us including the officer himself. The issue of course was why she felt it necessary to flee and once the officer was on her car why she still refused to stop. She had several,opportunities to comply but chose not to, now because of poor decisions she is no longer with us and a Deputy will go through the rest of his life with that on his conscience as well as being labeled murderer by many others. Very sad situation.

I would argue it also doesn't matter how the officer ended up on the hood i.e. he jumped because he was going to be hit or jumped on on his own. Once he was on and she didn't stop.....it's on her. She can't claim she didn't know he was on there.

 

She can't claim anything. She's dead. I would hope they are doing everything to make sure the evidence actually matches his story.

Exactly, as that was my point about her sobriety. It really doesn't change much if she was sober or intoxicated. The only difference it makes is if she wasn't sober then she is guilty of another crime, if she was sober then the first mistake she made was refusing to stop. Either way, once the officer was on the hood of her car, her refusal to stop only aided in the outcome.

 

I don't think anyone who commented in this thread doesn't wish she was still here with us including the officer himself. The issue of course was why she felt it necessary to flee and once the officer was on her car why she still refused to stop. She had several,opportunities to comply but chose not to, now because of poor decisions she is no longer with us and a Deputy will go through the rest of his life with that on his conscience as well as being labeled murderer by many others. Very sad situation.

 

She allegedly didn't stop when he was on the hood.

She can't claim anything. She's dead. I would hope they are doing everything to make sure the evidence actually matches his story.

 

My apologies for the "she can't claim" remark. Not thinking.

 

I should have said the witnesses can say that he jumped on from the side, however, it's irrelevant to the situation. Did the driver accelerate once the officer was on the hood? How long did she accelerate? Those two seem to be the only two factors to me.

One thing that just came to mind. How many of these witnesses were drunk ? I know if the driver was drunk, then her passengers were probably drunk as well. I say this because of the credibility of the witnesses both in the car and watching from afar, would be basically useless if they were intoxicated.

My apologies for the "she can't claim" remark. Not thinking.

 

I should have said the witnesses can say that he jumped on from the side, however, it's irrelevant to the situation. Did the driver accelerate once the officer was on the hood? How long did she accelerate? Those two seem to be the only two factors to me.

 

Agreed. I've made it pretty clear that I believe the officer. However all of us know some cops have been known to lie. Not all cops certainly, but there are people already saying the girl was drunk and accelerated with the cop on the hood and we just don't know either of those to be true yet.

One thing that just came to mind. How many of these witnesses were drunk ? I know if the driver was drunk, then her passengers were probably drunk as well. I say this because of the credibility of the witnesses both in the car and watching from afar, would be basically useless if they were intoxicated.

 

So if any intoxicated witnesses testify in favor of the deputy and confirm his report, we should toss it out??? If I'm the deputy, I want as many witnesses as possible intoxicated or sober to back up my story. The best wiitnesses imo seem to be the pedestrians that were pleading for the driver to stop (heard in the report). They should be excellent sources.

So if any intoxicated witnesses testify in favor of the deputy and confirm his report, we should toss it out??? If I'm the deputy, I want as many witnesses as possible intoxicated or sober to back up my story. The best wiitnesses imo seem to be the pedestrians that were pleading for the driver to stop (heard in the report). They should be excellent sources.

 

I see what you're saying. I think from a court's perspective if a witness was intoxicated or high, testimony gets tossed out either way. I could be wrong though.

New cruiser cam vid, coroner's report released in Samantha Ramsey shooting | Local News - WLWT Home

Doesn't appear to be anything really new in that report.

Doesn't appear to be anything really new in that report.

I agree, kind of a waste of video. Once again though they show the edited video and make it look like the other car pulls up right behind her car when she pulls out and the reporter simply says as Samantha pulls out shortly afterwards the dark car pulls up and the video has it looking as if it's simultaneously but look at the time of the video it's like 7 seconds later.

 

Also weren't there people claiming that she was shot in the head? Wasn't the case at all.

552 posts later and I'll simply say thanks to those of you who said if an officer tells you to stop, aside from a cavity search on a traffic stop, it would be in your best interests to mind his/her wishes.

How did the car get in reverse?

 

We know her hands weren't on the steering wheel after he began shooting b/c her arms were shot protecting herself.

How did the car get in reverse?

 

We know her hands weren't on the steering wheel after he began shooting b/c her arms were shot protecting herself.

 

I wondered the same thing before.

 

It's possible that she had her hand on the shifter and knocked it into reverse as she brought her hands up in a defensive posture (I assume the car was an automatic). Then, that raises the question of how fast she could have been going if she was able to put the car into reverse and the officer still maintain balance on the hood to fire off four accurate shots. And then again, one of the passengers might have tried to put the car in park to stop it after the shots were fired.

 

Like most everything else in this case, there's just enough missing information for it to become a Rorschach test for us observers.