Featured Police Fatally Shoot Man During Traffic Stop, Aftermath Video Posted July 6, 2016 11:22 PM

Those aren't the reasons Castile was pulled over. You don't get pulled over for driving without a license and probably not for not using a seat belt. You get pulled over for moving violations and for a car that is public hazard (broken tail light). The items in that list are just what Castile was charged with, which are mostly are either the lessor offense (cops playing) like a seat-built violation instead of a speeding ticket, or an indisputable offense, like driving on suspended licence instead of a failure to yield ticket.

Castile was stopped over 50 times, which nearly means over 50 times he was a danger or nuisance to the public. And, to get pulled over so frequently shows that he flaunted the law and public interests daily.

 

What really got me was the detached uncaring attitude of the woman in the video. Weird, to say the least. Looks like the police officer may be in trouble here, if we have the whole story.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

The GF did seemed detached, or at least too comfortable with what had happened. Someone might say she didn't know how hurt he was. Uh, several bullets and point-blank-range is very likely fetal. And, now the GF is really pimping the shooting.

The Hispanic officer will lose his job, a sacrifice to the lynch mob. He might be tried, but he won't be convicted. He was confronted by a hostile man who reached toward a gun in the front waistband of his pants. There's plenty of reasonable doubt that the officer acted with criminal negligence or intent.

I hope here's a cruiser dashcam video with some audio. Investigators will looking to how Castile handled other of his many encounters with the police. Someone who's been pulled over 50 times is going to be make himself hostile to any officer trying to deal with him, and there will be witnesses to prove it. They'll contradict the GF's story about Castile's behavior. What the public knows right now is not enough to convict, and all we don't know will favor the officer.

But, if the Hispanic officer can be shown to have acted in a criminal manner, he'll be convicted, without any need for a lynch mob to make it happen.

 

In Minnesota you do get pulled over for not using a seat belt. After being cited for it so many times, it is likely that he DID get pulled over by officers to check and see if he had obtained a driver's license. (What is up with not getting your driver's license renewed?)

There are only three of these types of violations listed--speeding twice, and lack of muffler, once.

So now you are determining the police intent from a remote location. That's a neat skill. Defense attorneys might find it useful.

Just stop it with the "he was stopped over 50 times." Looking at the list 777 posted, in Ramsey County I see 20 stops that resulted in 45 violations. In Dakota County 1 violation and in Hennepin County I see 9 violations. At most that is 30 times being stopped. And look at #42-#45 on the list. Those are parking violations, meaning he wasn't pulled over.[/QUOTE]

 

You did not see the entire thing. You have no basis to make a review. What transpired before the video we have is vital. Just about everyone is jumping to conclusions before all the facts are in.

 

No, there are too many holes in her story:

http://bearingarms.com/jenn-j/2016/...ng-investigation-uncovers-explosive-evidence/

It's her credibility I question, her story makes NO sense, now it turns out the taillight wasn't even broken at all.

Then she says she was too scared to film the shooting until after he was shot, but then, didn't he still have his gun? And this Diamond person was arrested, so why did they let her keep this cellphone? It's evidence, and exactly where is the CCW and why won't the family release it?

 

Oh, I bet he was racially profiled in some of those gadzillion stops, but his license was revoked and he shouldn't have ever put himself into this situation. And I later saw that they did grab the cellphone for evidence. kept it, then released her.

But did he have a CCW? Every site takes you right back to:

http://www.startribune.com/philando-castile-had-permit-to-carry-gun/386054481/

when they claim an unnamed source said so. But the county sheriff where he was currently living in went out of his way to point out THEY didn't issue any CCW to this guy:

Mr. Castile never applied for a permit to carry with our office.

Therefore we did not issue his permit.

The wording here implies to me that he DID have a permit, but not issued by them or they could be saying "we didn't issue this non-existing permit".

This would boost Castille's case if they released a CCW, but is there one? I hope Diamond herself isn't the "unnamed source".

The LEO account is off, too, so this cop thought Philando resembled some armed robbery suspect? He said "they" looked like the two, especially Castille because he had the same "wide-set nose". How did he confuse Diamond with a black guy and the other two DID resemble each other to me, particularly with those glasses. And then why did this cop just stroll up to the car if he was so worried they were armed and dangerous?

 

Every video I've ever seen a cop shooting the suspect, the suspect was uncooperative. And, when guns are involved, any hesitation by the cop, any second chances he gives the suspect, is at the risk of the officer's own life.

I have no doubt that Castile was uncooperative, as that is the universal pattern and the only motive for the officer to shoot. The officer told him not to reach for it. Yeah, Castile looked harmless after he was shot, but before he was shot, it doesn't take much to think that Castile was belligerent, given that he had already been stopped over 50 times -- Castile's motivation, even more so if the tail light wasn't broken.

The officer should have the presumption of innocence. And, the preponderance of evidence is on his side.

If Castile fit the description of a criminal, that doesn't make the officer racist to notice that Castile fit the description. And, yes, I've seen people try to describe a black person without mentioning race. It's hilarious and sad. I don't know if that was the case here. It could be that they were just narrowing down what the black person looked like. Some have wider noses than others.

The, the officer didn't act like the racist assassin the Left pretends him to be. The GF, on the other hand, looked like she was already calculating before the video started how to spin events against the officer.

The Left invents racism as a motive because the officer had no motive but self-defense.

 

You would not be able to make a determination because you don't have enough information as of now.

 

One thing that we need to keep in mind, is that the "victim" (I used quotes because we don't know yet if he was a victim, or if it was justified) is not on trial here. As sad as it is, what is done is done. The police officer will likely be on trial, and those on trial are to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. So, unless and until evidence comes out that proves beyond doubt that the officer acted with malicious intent, we are to assume his innocence.

The history of the victim does not paint him in a good light, however; and this brings more doubt into the intentions of the police officer. So, the history of Castile is relevant. He doesn't have a violent history, however; and that helps him look better. But the fact is, his history shows that he didn't care about the law. Driving on a suspended/revoked license several times alone proves this.

Now, the subject of whether or not he had a permit to carry the gun is irrelevant, at least in light of the fact that the weapon may have been in plain sight of the officer in his waistband. In the pictures released showing the gun in his waistband, I'm not convinced that it is a gun that people are pointing to. It could be, but I'm not an expert on low resolution pictures.

I can't speak to the acting of the girlfriend, other than to say in a super high stress situation like that a person will often go into a calm state. Many of you can relate to this if you are hunters, as you are about to shoot a deer (unless you get the yips!). And those of us who have been in firefights can relate easily.

In a situation like this, we must allow the system to do its job, and not place blame on one party or the other before all the evidence is released. On this board, we have two extremes; one that says this was a racially charged shooting due to a systemic racism inherent in the system, and the other that says that Castile was a thug that deserved what he got. Who's right? Maybe neither side. Maybe this was negligence. Maybe it was a misunderstanding and Castile was complying while the officer thought he wasn't. My point is, one or both sides are going to have egg on their face.

The old adage "look before you leap" also applies to conclusions.

 

In what way was he harassing the policeman?

 

A broken tail light could mean that it didn't light up at night, not necessarily that the plastic cover is cracked. It's frustrating that authorities aren't more forthcoming with evidenced in this and other cases. Just have someone look to see if the tail light is lit when the head lights are on and then tell the public. What's the problem with that?

Why cant they tell us where the gun was. Was it in his lap? Was it in a holster? (I agree, it's better to error on withholding evidence until the witnesses are questioned.)

I'm curious as to why the GF didn't start recording until after the shooting. Obviously, she's very phone savvy, able to live-stream a video, even under the stress of having her BF shot several times. I'd think she'd want the whole thing on video from the start. But, maybe it didn't start in a manner she wanted to film.

There's no way the officer-of-color will be convicted. I doubt he'll even be tried. He did nothing wrong. Too bad his career has ended over a petty thug with a gun.

 

I don't see any acquittals on his record. He must not have been driving to work. And, again, no one is stopped for driving on suspended or revoked licences. They're pulled over for moving violations and for cars that safety hazards (e.g. broke tail light).

The officer shot a man he believed was reaching for a gun. Race had nothing to do with it. There's nothing radical about that notion.