Still, Liles says the emotional wound will take the longest to heal. Rancho Cordova Police Officers, claiming self-defense, opened fire on her fleeing car after a tense encounter in November 2023, striking her twice.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I know it's not illegal to be a woman and be crazy,.. .but walking the neighborhood with a knife, then knocking on the door of someone you've had words with before is kind of a Brittany Spears thing. Police or no police, you're asking for trouble.
ReplyDeleteWhile she had a hand in making the situation worse, the cops (not just these, but everywhere) need to learn that they have to have a crime before they get to manhandle or otherwise assault people, or even be trespassing on someone's property.
ReplyDeleteThey need to learn some limits.
A fleeing suspect is not a threat. If I shoot at you while you are fleeing, that is illegal, as you are not a threat any more. Cops need to be held to the same standards as the rest of us. One could make a case for attempted murder.
Bodycams are showing that cops often fail to follow commonsense and even do illegal things while interacting with citizens they are supposed to protect. one of the best uses of technology ever.
One wonders why , during the trial the judge did not allow the bodycam footage to be played in court??
"While she had a hand in making the situation worse,"
DeleteAfter that you should've stopped.
Cops are held to the same, if not higher standards than you or me, but then again, they have a significantly more dangerous job. They had to go into this situation cold, not knowing if the woman was a danger to them, herself or anyone else. She could've easily brought the tension down by opening her door and following instructions. A few more minutes of explanations afterward would've helped the cops concerns for her and their own safety, as well as her own mental well-being, and she would've gone home without being shot.
Personal accountability also applies to civilians.
-lg
Before we had to suffer with Garner vs. Tennessee, police were allowed to deal with fleeing suspects with deadly force. My philosophy professor in the 1970s discussed this issue. His argument was essentially deadly force was OK as not using it would devolve society into anarchy as everyone who wanted to avoid arrest would run (which is what we have now). There must be some respect for the police, as long as they do not abuse their power, which we, as citizens, have given them.
Delete“Personal accountability also applies to civilians.”
DeleteCOPS ARE CIVILIANS!!
The LEO designation does not make them military, they are civilians just like anyone else.
This bullshit of giving them “special” status is Stolen Valor.
It’s no different than someone wearing a fake uniform and claiming they flew Huey’s, Leweys and Deweys in the Pecan delta.
If you don’t go to federal prison for tapping out and quitting your job, you are a civilian!
Anon 8:58: Then apply the same standards to the cops that would be applied to you or me. Shooting at her when she was no longer a threat is attempted murder.
DeleteRather than escalating the situation they could have de-escalated it...but the had "Respec Mah Autoriteh" issues. Perhaps if you actually learned about the case you might be able to do more than blindly and reflexively defend the cops. There is LOTS of video on this all over the internet. Educate yourself before you prove your ignorance.
If you bother to investigate, you will find that the cops were wrong, and that they LIED in their reports.
A insane person “fleeing “ with a knife is not a threat?
DeleteHow about if you’re the next person they come in contact with?
Anon 9:29.
DeleteIn this case, I was trying to differentiate civilians and cops as:
Civilians who go about our daily lives in a modicum of peace,
And‐
Cops who are specifically trained and paid to try to keep that peace.
I apologize for any confusion it may have caused you.
-lg
I have seen more than a few videos where the police intentionally stepped in front of a moving vehicle so they can make the claim of self defense.
ReplyDeleteThe compensation lawyers will make her feel better even after they take 40%
ReplyDeleteSix inches higher and she'd just be a dead b-i-itch. Lawyers normally get a 30% cut, I hope she gets seven figures.
ReplyDeleteJpaul
I see it as all her fault. Someone who has nothing to hide has no reason to run especially with the body cam .
ReplyDeleteAll she had to do was hang up the damn phone and explain her situation and I’m sure it would have been the end of the story- unless she had in fact threatened someone with the knife or was drunk or high.
They taught us that in the Army - just comply and it’ll work itself out if you are not guilty of anything.
Common sense as I see it
"Cops are held to the same, if not higher standards than you or me"
ReplyDelete-- Oh, they've eliminated qualified immunity?
Ignorance of the law is no excuse ... unless you are a leo
Mark in PA
She brought this on herself. Going to a troublesome neighbor with a knife in your hand! The police thought they were dealing with a crazy person armed with a knife (which they obviously were). She did not comply with lawful orders during an investigation and gives the appearance of trying to either run over the police or run from them. Either way, she gave the appearance of being a danger to the community at large, and therefore, deadly force is lawful under Garner vs. Tennessee.
ReplyDelete