Seattle Times – October 15, 2007:
A Seattle police officer shot a 13-year-old twice in the leg early Sunday, and police said he had mistaken the boy’s cellphone for a weapon.
The boy was in satisfactory condition at Harborview Medical Center on Sunday evening, hospital spokeswoman Susan Gregg-Hanson said.
According to police, the 13-year-old took off a large jacket and threw it on the ground, then lifted up his T-shirt, reached into a pocket and pulled out a black object. The boy was moving toward the officer, Seattle spokeswoman Deanna Nollette said. The officer, who had his gun drawn, believed the object was a weapon and shot twice, police said.
The 13-year-old’s parents are “understandably angry” about the situation, Diaz said, and the Police Department has offered the families victim support.
Darwin award finalist.
You fuck with the cops at 3am when you’re up to no good, you better be prepared to shoot to kill. Their inflated egos can’t deal with anything else. And he was pulling out his cell phone? wtf for? To call daddy? Daddy should have tucked him into bed at 10:30.
#34 – MM,
No Darwin award possibilities. The cop neither killed nor sterilized him.
I don’t like your 10:30 rule. It assumes there is one correct time for all 13 year olds to be in bed. Some are responsible enough to stay up later. I never had a curfew. Once (and only once), my mother and I disagreed over what a reasonable hour was. She asked me to call if I was going to be that late again. So, next time I called.
‘(a) Aren’t cops supposed to shoot to kill, whenever they shoot?’
Only as a last resort. They’re not the military.
The boy/victim here should be allowed to shoot the officer in the leg upon recovery to even things up.
They should shoot the ones using a cell phone in a restaurant or movie theater.
#27, Gig,
The boy’s father, who wasn’t there and is the parent of a 13 year old out at 3 am on a school night. Yeah, I’m going to put a lot of stock in his comment.
Instead, you are going to put ALL of your stock into a police public relations officer WHO WASN’T THERE EITHER. My point still is the police have been known to occasionally trump up the charge. So instead of blindly believing the police report, like the good sheeple you are, take a moment to hear the other side.
Now, explain to us why the cop even pulled them over? What law did they break? Why did the cop have his gun trained on them anyway? BTW, apparently there isn’t a curfew in Seattle.
#39 – Fuso
“Now, explain to us why the cop even pulled them over? What law did they break? Why did the cop have his gun trained on them anyway? BTW, apparently there isn’t a curfew in Seattle.”
Well, I suppose we could all pretend that the probability that these kids were up to no good – which the cop is paid to look into, BTW – is no greater than the probability that a cop – a Seattle cop, one of a bunch not exactly famous for corruption, incompentence or suchlike –
simply decided, out of a clear blue sky, for no particular reason, just for shits & giggles, as they say, to molest a couple of kids innocently minding their own business, and shoot one of ’em, since that couldn’t possibly attract any attention or get him in the shit, right?
That’s a bit thick, so let me rephrase – which do you think is more likely; that a couple young kids out in the middle of the night are up to something that the police might want to look into – or that a cop just took it upon himself to roust a couple completely innocent kids and shoot ’em, for no legitimate reason?
Careful – it’s a trick question.
Lauren the Ghoti which do you think is more likely; that a couple young kids out in the middle of the night are up to something that the police might want to look into – or that a cop just took it upon himself to roust a couple completely innocent kids and shoot ‘em, for no legitimate reason?
Its about 50/50 mate: teenagers get into trouble, so cops start assuming that anyway who is a teenager is trouble, even if they are just out on a midnight stroll to get some fresh air because they are have been sitting home all evening playing Runescape.
When I was teenager the cops certainly liked to hassle us mostly because we didn’t actually have anywhere to go we ended up hanging around in front of shops and in parks and other public places, which makes people nervous, so they call the cops, even if all your doing sitting around being a smelly teenager.
You make many goods points graffiti pedro. I reckon what they should do is have a team of snipers out there protecting the streets, and as soon as they see any youths doing graffiti they should simply snipe them… problem solved….
…. and they start doing the same thing to people who don’t ‘poop and scoop’, spit on the street or performing any other major crime against humanity.
So let me get you, Ben… you’re saying – as is Fuso, apparently – that adolescents out doing things they shouldn’t – and cops shooting them – are equally frequent events?
Thousands, tens of thousands of teenagers every night do something they shouldn’t be doing, in public. And you say the odds are 50/50, so that would mean thousands, or tens of thousands of teens are shot by police every night.
Uh-huh. OK. Riiiiight.
I suspect my point escaped you. I is tremendously, staggeringly more likely that these kids were up to no good than a cop decided he would accost and shoot some innocent teens going about their lawful business. Therefore, the teens’ story is to be discounted by the same degree, meaning, very simply, it ain’t worth shit.
#44, Lauren,
I suspect my point escaped you. I[t] is tremendously, staggeringly more likely that these kids were up to no good than a cop decided he would accost and shoot some innocent teens going about their lawful business. Therefore, the teens’ story is to be discounted by the same degree, meaning, very simply, it ain’t worth shit.
You still didn’t answer the questions of why the cop stopped them in the first place? Like it not, and that is your preference, the police still DO NOT have the right to stop you simply because they feel like it. Nor may they ask you for ID simply because they want to know who you are. They need probable cause and so far the only probable cause is they were suspicious. The common reason for this suspicion? They were out late at night.
Well I’m calling bullshit on the police until they come up with a better explanation and BULLSHIT on your stupid reasoning. You are not using any logic to explain your position. All I read is The stupid kids deserve it for being kids out that late”. Your prejudiced opinion is solely based upon the self serving police statement and the dismissal of any contrary evidence or opinion. You’re slipping back into asshat idiotic claims.
And yes. Anyone who wants to give the police the power to stop people just because the police want to is an asshat. The kid got shot for no reason other than the cop pulled the trigger. He had committed no crime. Not following an unlawful police command is not a crime.
#45, pedro,
You are an asshat. In America, there is no law requiring anyone to submit to a police command until they are under arrest. The police need probable cause and even the police spokesperson couldn’t give any probable cause.
Mr. Fusion- You are a completely sheltered idiot. Do me a favor and ride along with a cop for a week then you can talk stupid all you want. Same goes for Ms. Wong.
#48, Russ,
OK asswipe. What law did the kid break? Of course no one has answered that question so I will. HE DIDN’T BREAK ANY LAW !!! The cop had no reasonable cause to stop the kids let alone have his gun drawn and trained on them. Of course it won’t happen, but the cop should be charged with attempted murder. Wait wait, that won’t happen because the kid had it coming, right?
If you prefer to live in a police state, then why not move to Singapore or China. They don’t have a Constitution that allows people some basic rights.
Ride along with a cop? Phuck you asswipe. Two weeks ago I spent about three hours riding with the Sheriff. I’ve spent another six to ten hours riding along with him in the past ten months. Not only is he a neighbor, but a friend. This guy has been a cop for over 35 years. In all that time, he claims he has only drawn his weapon when they busted meth labs. He has never pointed it at a person. Oh, and an FYI, he still carries a bullet from when he was in Viet Nam.
My uncle was a big city cop. He was wounded during an escape attempt and never recovered fully. Another cop shot him. The escapees were unarmed. One got out of his handcuffs but both were still in the car. They weren’t going anywhere.
You see assdip, just because it is a cop that shot the kid shouldn’t matter. Whenever a cop is shot in the line of duty it is a tragedy. Whenever an innocent person is shot by a cop, it is a worse tragedy. The police are there to protect us, they are not there for the citizens to worship. Until you can explain what law the kid broke then forget the crap about riding around with a cop. You have no idea what the fuck you expel from your ass. And stop watching “COPS”. That has to be the worst show on TV for police abuse.
You should sloow down and read things before you over-react Rush Limbaugh. Quote from the story “Officers are trained to try to keep situations from escalating, and an encounter with two teens in the middle of the night might have resolved itself fairly quickly, said Dr. Norman Mar, a Seattle psychologist and consultant to law enforcement.
But if someone flees, fails to respond to commands and reaches into his waistband for something, an officer is faced with the possibility that person is armed and poses a danger, Mar said.”
Your Sheriff friend ever had a gun pulled on him? Or something that looked like a gun? Like I said, ride with him for a WEEK and see what he has to put up with. Generally it’s people like you that they have to deal with, you want to put someone down without understanding the entire situation. What would you do if you thought someone was about to shoot you, besides wet yourself. What will you have to say when a cop passes a suspicious looking character because he doesn’t want to listen to crap from people like you and the character winds up mugging you or breaking into your house? Who’ll be crying in their milk then? YOU! “The cops aren’t doing enough to make me safe!” Wah!
By the way, do you hug your mother with those nasty little fingers of yours?
#50, Russ,
Once again, you miss the point. You are blaming the victim without examining the evidence. You quote a police psychologist. Alright, so what is the point there? Did the cop fail to follow his training? Does this person have some information into the incident that we are missing? What probative value is in that quotation? Or is this just another police spokesperson excusing the cop?
Geeze, did you read the story from the other Seattle newspaper? The one where the other kid and the shot boy’s father said the boy was following the cop’s directions when the cop just shot. How about how the where the cops always ask the public not to jump to conclusions when they put out information that states a conclusion in their favor?
So far I have read comments from a police spokesperson, who wasn’t at the scene, a police psychologist who wasn’t at the scene, the Police Chief who wasn’t at the scene, a reporter that questioned these people that weren’t at the scene and wasn’t at the scene herself, and the cops lawyer who wasn’t at the scene all of whome were relying upon the cops version. Then we have the father who wasn’t at the scene, AND ONE OF THE KIDS WHO WAS AT THE SCENE.
So absent some convincing evidence that the cop had a reason to stop these kids in the first place, the cop is in the wrong from the start. If he had not stopped them to begin with the kid would not have been shot.
*
As with most police, our Sheriff has never had to draw his weapon. It is the rare cop that ever needs to draw his weapon and even rarer to have a weapon drawn on him.
Your problem is in believing it is better to shoot first and then blame the victim. Fortunately, most cops are not like that. Maybe if you rode along with a cop instead of watching “COPS” you would have a better idea of what really happens on the streets.
Regardless, you are a sad excuse of a person to blame the victim.
Fascinating. 100% of the claim that the kid did nothing wrong comes from a highly biased source, the kid’s friend, crony, accomplice – who has more than ample motive to lie.
13 year-olds do not normally have any legitimate reason to be on the streets at 3AM. It is highly unusual. Unusual enough to elicit the legitimate interest of a police officer. And contrary to your wildly incorrect legal theorizing, he has the right – in fact, it is his duty – to investigate suspicious activity. And a couple kids lurking at 3AM IS SUSPICIOUS. And THAT is sufficient PC to stop the kids. And once he has stopped them, as the Supreme Court has made clear, his orders are presumed lawful and must be complied with. If it should turn out later that they weren’t, fine. But it is not up to the kid to decide whether he wants to obey the cop or not.
Of course the other kid is going to say his buddy did nothing wrong – whether the other kid did or didn’t, his buddy would say he did – so the other kid’s claim has no probative value, meaning it is no help in determining the actual events that took place.
You really need to quit imagining you know anything about law, Fusy. You make your liberal ideological bent clear when you automatically, reflexively take the side of an accused wrongdoer against the police. The vast, VAST majority of the time, the millions of incidents EVERY DAY where bad guys and cops come into contact – the wrongdoers ARE the ones doing wrong, NOT the police. When an exception comes along, you dishonestly use it to make it look like the police are to be assumed to be the wrongdoers, when it is seldom the case, even in cities where corruption is rampant, unlike Seattle.
Quit playin’ the fool, fooool.