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

Just a few seconds into the video, the GF says, "They killed my boyfriend." Either she was lying or she knew he was mortally wounded and yet was acted detached. Either way, she has no credibility. Her later mild hysterics was an act.

 

Hmm...I've seen some high resolution photos taken at the scene of a gun lying on the ground outside the car with yellow evidence number by it. Wonder whose it was where it came from and how it got there?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

That's the one. I was typing my earlier post when you posted the photo.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

The pistol was concealed. How did the officer know the man had a pistol until he, the man, told him he had a permit and weapon ... as is required by law.

How did the policeman know the man's record when he stopped him?

I had not thought about the policeman being Hispanic. Why do you dwell on race all the time.

 

If Officer Jeronimo Yanez suspected Castile of being a suspect in a felony, then he did not follow police procedures properly.


From: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...456cc6-4987-11e6-8dac-0c6e4accc5b1_story.html

St. Anthony police training documents outline how an officer should respond to traffic stops. According to the documents, if an officer believes it’s a high-risk stop — as one involving an armed robbery suspect would likely be — he should have the driver and others exit the car before approaching the vehicle, while officers take cover and draw their weapons.

Albert Goins, an attorney who assisted the Castile family after the shooting but is not representing anyone in the case, has said if Yanez and the other officer involved, Joseph Kauser, believed they could be stopping the robbery suspect, they should have done a “felony stop.” He described a procedure similar to what is outlined in the police training documents.

 

The gun is partially visible in Castile's lap in the video. This has been pointed out several times in this thread. Because I'm not dumb, I place no weight on the statements of the GF, such as her claiming Castile told the officer about the gun. And, Castile's 50+ stops shows that he has little concern about following the law. Driving with weed in the car and with a tail light that's broken is someone who doesn't care about the law.

BTW, I don't even care what the officer said. I expect them both to say whatever they can to support their side, no matter what the truth is. And, I suspect you also don't really care what either said. Why would you take her word over his, if you care? You're just using the GF's statements as cover for your prejudice.

You need to work harder on understanding what's said to you. I didn't say anything that implied the officer knew the man's record. It's like you chose not to understand the point I clearly made.

The only reason this shooting is in the news is because your side claims it's about race. Take ownership and stop accusing others for the prejudice of your side. Of course you didn't think about the officer being Hispanic. He is white to you, because you wanted this to be about white racism. The BLM crowed and your peers frequently make comments about white police vs black and Hispanic people.

 

<caugh> Castile took the class for the gun permit in May and was shot in early June. He was pulled over three times in just one month, maybe in just one week????? This is a guy who wanted a confrontation with the police!

Crabtownboy, I appreciate your desperate effort to smear the officer, but give it up. The article says "if an officer believes it’s a high-risk stop..." Just because the officer thought this could be an armed robber doesn't mean he thought it was high risk. If he thought there was only a small chance that this was the robber, then he wouldn't have thought it high risk.

Castile was stopped for a broken tail light. The officer was just being a good cop by being mindful of other suspects at large.

Even if the officer should have waited waited for backup, what does that have to do with whether the officer had reasonable cause to shoot a belligerent man reaching for a gun?