So question for those who know, the articled stated she had cleared the driver side of the SUV already...

 

If that's the case, wouldn't she have at least some comfort level that there was no weapon within his reach if he did in fact reach into the vehicle?

One, how is anyone on here going to know what her comfort levels was or even should be? That said put yourself in her shoes. You willing to bet your life you didn't miss something?

Good shooting or bad shooting it comes down to several factors.

 

Officers need more training on conflict resolution and how to de-escalate a situation verbally. They also need much more training on how to deal with the mentally ill.

 

However,

 

If the deceased was under the influence of a behavior-altering drug such as synthetic marijuana or PCP (as the firing officer suspected when she arrived and he failed to follow initial commands, according to her), the above doesn't apply. And you cannot train for the unpredictable or unknown. Training is done based on known scenarios and known possibilities.

 

Here is an excerpt from the Tulsa World:

Attorney Scott Wood, who is representing Officer Shelby, told the Tulsa World the situation unfolded for nearly 2 minutes before the video footage began. Prior to the deadly encounter, Wood said, no one was around when Shelby pulled up. The SUV was straddling the center line with its engine running and doors open, “so she isn’t really sure what’s going on,” Wood said.

He said Crutcher repeatedly ignored Shelby’s commands and didn’t respond to her questions. Crutcher, he said, reached toward or into his pockets several times despite Shelby’s telling him not to do so.

Wood said Shelby, who has completed drug-recognition expert training, believed that Crutcher was acting like a person who might be under the influence of PCP.

Shelby was concerned that Crutcher kept reaching toward his pockets, Wood said, because someone carrying a weapon will often touch it to make sure it’s still there. She drew her handgun after Crutcher walked toward the passenger side of the police car and started to put his hand in his left pocket, Wood said. She then radioed dispatch to report that she was with a person who wasn’t complying with her demands, he said.

“He never makes any response to her,” Wood said.

Wood said Shelby cleared — or checked — the SUV from the driver’s side and was about to clear the passenger side when Crutcher approached from the east. The backup officer arrived and drew his Taser, Wood said. The Taser deployment and gunshot were simultaneous because both officers perceived the same threat, he said.

 

Here is where it gets murky for the Tulsa PD.

 

If Officer Shelby were the only officer on the scene, based on the video of the shooting, her statements, and her perception of the threat (him reaching into the vehicle), evidence leans more to a justified shooting than unjustified. But when you see three other officers arrive, one draws and approaches with a taser. A second draws something (gun or taser) and approaches. A third doesn't draw anything. He stays behind them. So now the question facing the Tulsa PD is this -- how much of a threat was it that one officer only drew a taser and another didn't draw a weapon at all.

 

Even if Officer Shelby is 100% positive in her thinking that the deceased was indeed a threat, two other officers didn't perceive the threat in the same way.

 

Kind of like people in this thread who view the video and say a.) threat or b.) no threat.

 

The same officer who fired the weapon, just happened to not turn on her dash-cam. That's the first mistake the officer made in this situation. If this was a non life threatening call, she had plenty of time to do so before engaging the man. And at what point do you become a suspect for having a vehicle parked in the streets?

The camera only comes on when lights and siren are activated. A car in the middle road does not meet the criteria of responding lights and siren does it? It's another reason to have body cameras also

So question for those who know, the articled stated she had cleared the driver side of the SUV already...

 

If that's the case, wouldn't she have at least some comfort level that there was no weapon within his reach if he did in fact reach into the vehicle?

She cleared the vehicle to make sure there wasn't anyone else in the vehicle. Clearing and searching are two different things

One, how is anyone on here going to know what her comfort levels was or even should be? That said put yourself in her shoes. You willing to bet your life you didn't miss something?

 

I'm asking the question because I don't know how involved "clearing" an area is. My goodness.

She cleared the vehicle to make sure there wasn't anyone else in the vehicle. Clearing and searching are two different things

 

Thank you.

 

So it's very possible that even though she cleared that side, she was still uncertain if a weapon was present.

I tell you what...there are some text book examples of white privilege in the list thread.

I tell you what...there are some text book examples of white privilege in the list thread.

 

I could say many things . I'll say I simply disagree . Its hard not to keep typing on this one.

I could say many things . I'll say I simply disagree . Its hard not to keep typing on this one.

I agree. I was going to reply but knew it was a lose lose situation.

As some know, my father is a retired Federal Agent, and was State police before that, so I'm as pro-LEO as a person can be. However, I've also heard countless stories of lousy (NOT saying dirty) cops at the local, county, state, and federal levels, so I typically think there is the same percentage of lousy LEO's as there are lousy plumbers, teachers, lawyers, carpenters, etc. Right, wrong, or indifferent, that is the lens I look through.

I don't think they have them.

 

They do not. I read they had a chance to get them with some sort of matching grant but it never happened.

The lady that called this in mentioned " He might be on something". I read that in a different article. Maybe the helicopter pilot heard that?

 

 

The caller said that the victim approached her saying to get away from the vehicle since he said it might blow up. She laughingly said to the 911 operator "he might have been smoking something."

As I stated previously , the intent was not to debate right or wrong. That's a useless proposition.

 

My intent was to show that some people are skeptical of the police accounts. When the original account given to the media said he wouldn't put his hands up and then you see him with his hands up (doesn't matter how long it took for him to get them up - they were up) you can see where some are dubious at best.

 

Step back and ask yourself if you can at LEAST see where they are coming from regardless of your feelings on the legitimacy of this shooting.

Following up on a previous post that indicated different levels of perceived threat by the four officers, was the window down on the driver's side of the vehicle? The aerial video seems to be that it was up.

 

If (key) that is determined to be true and you have other officers who by words or deeds didn't seem AS threatened as the shooting officer then an attorney is going to ask how quickly the victim could have opened the door, reached in to grab the gun, and then turn back around to shoot. While I'm sure it's faster than any of us realize or faster than any of us want to chance it will make it a challenge to prove imminent death fears being realistic.

 

Again - she COULD have been 100% correct in what she claimed about him reaching and her perceived level of threat BUT an attorney is going to put her and the force through every second of this episode.

Edited September 20, 201610 yr by Clyde

This may have been brought up (I only read page 1). I think what happened was "sympathetic gunfire". I think she heard the pop of the taser and reflex fired her gun cause she thought the other dude fired his gun.