Chicago Police Officer charged with murder in shooting 17 year old black kid 16 times [Video]

[Muck Ficon]

Muck, Im going to do the CAPS thing here.

Once he hit the ground, he was no longer a threat.<THIS, AS I HAVE BEEN TOLD, IS INCORRECT. IT WILL BE INTERPRETED AND ADDRESSED IN COURT WITH CASES AND LAW> The cop never gave him a chance to drop the knife<THIS IS INCORRECT, AS OFFICERS HAD BEEN TELLING HIM FOR ALLEGEDLY 20 MINUTES TO DROP THE KNIFE>, he was too busy emptying his clip into the kid. So Drk, here's a question you have been dodging. <I ACTUALLY HAVENT AND ADDRESSED PART OF THIS> Why was he the only cop who fired when there were multiple other officers on the scene <TAKE 5 PEOPLE AND STAND THEM ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET. NOW TAKE 10 PEOPLE AND PUT THEM ACROSS THE STREET FROM THOSE PEOPLE. GIVE EVERYONE GUNS. NOW PUT THE BAD GUY IN THE CENTER OF THE STREET. WHICH PERSON CAN TAKE A SAFE SHOT WITHOUT PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET POTENTIALLY BEING IN THE WAY? NOW, THINK ABOUT WHO WERE THE CLOSEST PEOPLE TO HIM, WHO WOULD HAVE FELT THREATENED...NOW, WHICH OF THOSE PEOPLE HAD A CLEAR SHOT, WHERE NO ONE WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET...THAT WILL BE YOUR BEST GUESS>? No other officer fired a single shot. Here's the answer.....none of the other police viewed him as an imminent threat.<THIS COULD POSSIBLY BE ARGUED BECAUSE NO ONE WAS AS CLOSE TO THE GUY AS THE TWO GUYS WERE WHERE ONE OF THEM FIRED THE SHOTS> Had he really made a move at any officer, or even postured like he was....every officer on the scene would have opened fire.<THIS IS PAINFULLY INCORRECT, AS YOU WOULD HAVE A HIGH PROBABILITY, BASED ON WHAT I JUST TOLD YOU, OF SHOOTING OTHER COPS AND PEDESTRIANS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET FROM YOU. THIS WILL BE DISCUSSED IN COURT, AS FAR AS WHAT PEOPLE WERE STANDING WHERE AT THE TIME OF THE SHOOTING>

think about how many people had to go over all this crap already to determine what to do with it. We havent even discussed what happened prior to the video.

Bullshit. Police are trained to stay out of the possible line of fire from other officers. There is a standard protocol on how they approach people. All of which ensures no officers are ever firing shots at each other. Ask your brother. You aren't the only one related to someone in law enforcement.

[Lannister]

Why are you faggots even arguing over this? A dumbass criminal n-word got capped and the world is now a better place. STFU

[SysOp]

Why are you faggots even arguing over this? A dumbass criminal n-word got capped and the world is now a better place. STFU

Cause soon it won't just be African Americans.

[big dick]

If a white guy is breaking into cars while on pcp and running around with a knife I hope the cops fuck him up to.It just so happens that more black people than white people act the fool hence why they are the ones getting the shit kicked out of them and shot, law of averages.

[JimmyG_415]

This bet is still open.



Comments

DRK Star: since Im Napping it out, you can PM me if you want info on this one. Correct decision after other agencies studied the evidence.

this is in public, like all of your rants.

I'll consider the feds an other agency, not Alvarez.
In fact I'll bet she doesn't even keep her job.

How much time does Van Dyke get, and how many Chicago cops lose their job due to the fed investigation?
(The cop in charge of video # 2 retired this week, so that # is going down as we speak.)

I didn't post the one today, but Video # 4 the Chatman one, probably out tomorrow, will be Armageddon.
The black investigator sided against the cops.
Then when he wouldn't change the report to clear the cop, they fired him.
Then said his report was biased, and cleared the cop.

For once again, shooting a black guy in the back.

I don't care what color he is, you shoot a guy in the back you are a coward.

[DRK Star]

In terms of the shooting the guy in the back...the guy had a gun and had likely been shooting at people.

He was a felon, who had just attacked a cop, and was fleeing the scene...the police have every right, under the law, to use Deadly Force. They could have tossed a grenade at him if they had one. They shot him. They could have shot him if he was standing there holding a bouquet of flowers, singing Zippity Doo Dah, while having his back to them and standing on his head. Shooting him in the back.....hope you are reading this...means NOTHING. He was armed and could have easily turned (or hell, not turned, just turned his wrist around to point at them) and shot them.

Im really surprised you, and a few others apparently, are so hung up on this shoot a guy in the BACK thing. Its completely irrelevant, under the LAW. If I can find something that shows you guys what is allowed in terms of when they can use deadly force, I will post it. He could be wearing a little school girl outfit, with an I <3 The Police shirt...but if he has committed those felonies, and is a danger and is resisting and fleeing, they can light him up every which way til sunday, until he isnt a threat. You state that he is a coward for shooting him in the back. Im not sure what you think is supposed to happen here, but this isnt a "who has the biggest dick" contest b/w the Felon and the cop. If that was the case, is the cop supposed to request that the gentlemen turn and face him, and then they can do a RO SHAM BO to see who shoots first? If the cop waits for him to turn around, and then gets shot at first, a cop dies. Is he supposed to die "AS A BRAVE MAN" who faced this felon with pride, LIKE A MAN!!

no

I have no clue where you get this belief from. Its not supposed to be a "Fair Fight" scenario.



Is Coleman the guy who was tased in the cell?

I dont see the press talking about why he was even in the cell. Or how he turned Roseland hospital into a shitshow, or the reports from the nurses/hospital staff, or how he was having a breakdown. Or how he resisted the officers in the cell when they were trying to get him out of there, so they therefore had the rights to use the taser. Or the bathsalts he was likely on. He possibly died from the psych meds they gave him at the hospital.

The cops though COULD HAVE USED BETTER JUDGEMENT IN GETTING HIM OUT OF THE CELL. You dont have to drag the guy out of there, but the gurney may have been on another floor or down the hall. Those are your two options, once a guy is out. Gurney or drag. It looked bad. IPRA already cleared the cops 2 years ago on this one. Rahm is going to continue to toss the CPD under the bus.

I dont know that much in this case yet, but those are the comments Im hearing so far. If anything, the hospital possibly could have done a better job with the guy.




In terms of LaQuan, its too early to wager. So far, I think its a better chance, the more this stays in the public eye, of the cop getting nothing charged against him. Otherwise, if something really weird happens and he has to get tried in the city, by a city judge in front of a black jury, he will get manslaughter (likely) or nothing happening to him (maybe a 25% chance).

again, its still very puzzling that he is getting charged with 1st degree. Alvarez is very competent, so for her to charge him with that instead of what seems obvious to everyone, has people scratching their heads and wondering what she has up her sleeve.




enter chicago IL on this map, to see where all the shootings are taking place

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...gs_around.html

[RealTalk]

really napping it out hard in this thread, eh?

[Hockey Guy]

All I'm really getting from this thread is that some black guy did some stuff &, under the law, the police had justification for over 20 minutes to use deadly force & the call went out over the radio of the opportunity to plug a black guy & then there was a nascar race to the scene to shoot the black guy 20 times(by law you're apparently allowed to shoot once for every minute that you've had the justification to do so) & this officer was just too quick for the rest of the cops & was able to squeeze off 16 shots &, while he was reloading, realized that the remaining 4 shots he was entitled to seemed unnecessary & was able to show great restraint causing disappointment & a drop in moral among Chicago police officers.

[JimmyG_415]

DRK Star: so, you're going to ask a question, but you bitch at me if I dont answer it, then bitch at me if I do answer it....ok...

My only question was if you want some action on your prediction that the Chicago cops will win in court.
I'll take this editorial below as a no.

I think we all stopped reading your rants, (on this thread only). I stopped when I was told I have no business forming an opinion on this video, w/out a law degree.

Even Rahm has thrown in the towel, now.

In terms of the shooting the guy in the back...the guy had a gun and had likely been shooting at people.

He was a felon, who had just attacked a cop, and was fleeing the scene...the police have every right, under the law, to use Deadly Force. They could have tossed a grenade at him if they had one. They shot him. They could have shot him if he was standing there holding a bouquet of flowers, singing Zippity Doo Dah, while having his back to them and standing on his head. Shooting him in the back.....hope you are reading this...means NOTHING. He was armed and could have easily turned (or hell, not turned, just turned his wrist around to point at them) and shot them.

Im really surprised you, and a few others apparently, are so hung up on this shoot a guy in the BACK thing. Its completely irrelevant, under the LAW. If I can find something that shows you guys what is allowed in terms of when they can use deadly force, I will post it. He could be wearing a little school girl outfit, with an I <3 The Police shirt...but if he has committed those felonies, and is a danger and is resisting and fleeing, they can light him up every which way til sunday, until he isnt a threat. You state that he is a coward for shooting him in the back. Im not sure what you think is supposed to happen here, but this isnt a "who has the biggest dick" contest b/w the Felon and the cop. If that was the case, is the cop supposed to request that the gentlemen turn and face him, and then they can do a RO SHAM BO to see who shoots first? If the cop waits for him to turn around, and then gets shot at first, a cop dies. Is he supposed to die "AS A BRAVE MAN" who faced this felon with pride, LIKE A MAN!!

no

I have no clue where you get this belief from. Its not supposed to be a "Fair Fight" scenario.



Is Coleman the guy who was tased in the cell?

I dont see the press talking about why he was even in the cell. Or how he turned Roseland hospital into a shitshow, or the reports from the nurses/hospital staff, or how he was having a breakdown. Or how he resisted the officers in the cell when they were trying to get him out of there, so they therefore had the rights to use the taser. Or the bathsalts he was likely on. He possibly died from the psych meds they gave him at the hospital.

The cops though COULD HAVE USED BETTER JUDGEMENT IN GETTING HIM OUT OF THE CELL. You dont have to drag the guy out of there, but the gurney may have been on another floor or down the hall. Those are your two options, once a guy is out. Gurney or drag. It looked bad. IPRA already cleared the cops 2 years ago on this one. Rahm is going to continue to toss the CPD under the bus.

I dont know that much in this case yet, but those are the comments Im hearing so far. If anything, the hospital possibly could have done a better job with the guy.




In terms of LaQuan, its too early to wager. So far, I think its a better chance, the more this stays in the public eye, of the cop getting nothing charged against him. Otherwise, if something really weird happens and he has to get tried in the city, by a city judge in front of a black jury, he will get manslaughter (likely) or nothing happening to him (maybe a 25% chance).

again, its still very puzzling that he is getting charged with 1st degree. Alvarez is very competent, so for her to charge him with that instead of what seems obvious to everyone, has people scratching their heads and wondering what she has up her sleeve.




enter chicago IL on this map, to see where all the shootings are taking place

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...gs_around.html

[RealTalk]

DRK Star: so, you're going to ask a question, but you bitch at me if I dont answer it, then bitch at me if I do answer it....ok...

No, I haven't asked you any questions. I just wish you would actually stop posting 5 paragraph essays one day after telling everyone you are done with the thread like a fucking mong.

Also feel free not to PM me again about the "facts" that you have access to but aren't at liberty to disclose, no one gives a fuck.

If you have some mind blowing insider info then shit or get off the pot.

[bukowski72]

I am surprised we haven't heard about this on. I wish some other news organizations were looking at this to see if it is true.

Two Innocent Black Men Shot By Police, Then Falsely Accused Of Murder
The alleged murder victim was actually hit and killed by a police vehicle.

LOS ANGELES (CN) - An Inglewood police officer shot down two innocent and unarmed men, without warning or questions and without identifying himself, the men say in Federal Court.

Thirty-five-year-old Robert Pickett, of Los Angeles, and Darryl Lewis, 39, of Gardena, say they spent the day grilling burgers with friends and were picking up some dumbbells and checking on one of Pickett's cousins after midnight on May 24, 2011, when Officer Mike Bolliger pulled up and came out shooting.

Pickett says Bollinger "parked his car at the corner, got out armed with his shotgun cocked, loaded and ready to fire" and shot them.

"No questions asked, no weapons seen, no words offered or exchanged. Defendant Bollinger blasted three shotgun rounds at the hapless and unarmed plaintiffs, striking them and wounding them as they sought to take cover from assault, leaving them in critical condition, bleeding face-down on the ground," Pickett says in the Dec. 3 complaint.

...To top it off, they say, "While driving with reckless abandon to the scene, they ran over a pedestrian, in a cross walk, killing her."

Pickett says Bolliger told him that "he did not give a f*** that he had shot him in the head."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b080eddf560fec

[JimmyG_415]

Its not that a cop does a bad thing every now and then, its the cover up. Talking to people like they are stupid, that pisses everyone off.

This shows there are still good cops on the Chicago force.
Only they have to make anonymous calls, as their lives would be in danger, if their name got out.

Good thing I didn't go down that road, I'd either be dead, or I'd be SF's version of Serpico.

Bad Cops, Good Cops, Secrets and Lies in the Chicago Police Department
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/20...cops-good-cops

...........This is not the first time that Futterman has received an inside tip about police abuse. He believes that the whistle-blowers represent “the majority of Chicago cops,” who are doing their jobs “just as you would want them to.” Those officers “hate this stuff” as much as anyone, because “it creates hostility to the police, and steals the honor of those who are doing things right.”

a cop named Jerome Finnigan pleaded guilty to plotting to kill a fellow-officer who he suspected would testify against him.


of nearly twenty-nine thousand allegations of misconduct filed between 2011 and 2015, only two per cent resulted in any discipline—and, of those which did, the vast majority took the form of reprimands or suspensions of less than a week.

[DRK Star]

Jimmy G,

I will take action on this. What are the terms?

Are you going to take 1st degree murder and I get everything else? Odds?



A white Chicago police officer accused of killing a black teenager after shooting him 16 times has been indicted by a grand jury on six counts of first-degree murder.
Officer Jason Van Dyke was filmed on several police dash cams allegedly shooting 17-year-old Laquan McDonald.
The indictment alleges that Officer Van Dyke opened fire knowing it 'created a strong probability of death or great bodily harm'.


According to the indictment, Van Dyke has been charged with:
MURDER/INTENT TO KILL/INJURE WITH FIREARM
MURDER/STRONG PROB KILL/INJURE WITH FIREARM
MURDER/INTENT TO KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM
MURDER STRONG PROB KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM
MURDER/INTENT TO KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM PROXIMATELY
MURDER/STRONG PROB KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM PROXIMATELY
MISCONDUCT/FORBIDDEN ACT

[jsearles22]

Jimmy G,

I will take action on this. What are the terms?

Are you going to take 1st degree murder and I get everything else? Odds?



A white Chicago police officer accused of killing a black teenager after shooting him 16 times has been indicted by a grand jury on six counts of first-degree murder.
Officer Jason Van Dyke was filmed on several police dash cams allegedly shooting 17-year-old Laquan McDonald.
The indictment alleges that Officer Van Dyke opened fire knowing it 'created a strong probability of death or great bodily harm'.


According to the indictment, Van Dyke has been charged with:
MURDER/INTENT TO KILL/INJURE WITH FIREARM
MURDER/STRONG PROB KILL/INJURE WITH FIREARM
MURDER/INTENT TO KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM
MURDER STRONG PROB KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM
MURDER/INTENT TO KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM PROXIMATELY
MURDER/STRONG PROB KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM PROXIMATELY
MISCONDUCT/FORBIDDEN ACT

Is the cop denying he thought shooting 16 times created a strong probability of death? I doubt it!

First degree murder typically means there was premeditation, malice afore thought. Did he act inappropriately? Maybe, maybe not. But murder 1 will NEVER stick. I'd give 100/1 and only reason I dont go higher is the 1% chance the dude is schizophrenic and tells his psychiatrist he wanted to kill a black dude

[DRK Star]

Well...

Anita Alvarez is the one who pushed for these charges, sooo...she "must" have some good reasons for doing this, right?....

And you guys saw the video....he just straight up got out of his car and murdered the kid with 16 shots, which is completely excessive, right?...




Let me know what you want to lay. Im sure you guys have decent knowledge of what happened, from that video, and like half of the city, think the cop is a racist murderer, so you should be pretty confident in your wager. Everything you need to know is in that video. Straight up shot a kid, when he only had a knife, and he wasnt a danger to anyone, right? Hell, the kid was even trying to get his life back together. You saw the photo of him in his cap and gown. Tragedy.

I even have a "cherry" for the top of your sundae....there was a decent chance, the cop was dropping some N-bombs after he shot him. He apparently went to reload his gun after all 16 shots, so he could shoot him some more. He was told to stop shooting by another officer, after the 16 shots. He had around 20 complaints against him. That should strengthen your case, right?

What do you think is fair for the odds?

Found guilty of nothing = 8:1
Found guilty of something minor = 4:1
Found guilty of 2nd degree = 2:1
Found guilty of 1st degree = 1:2

thoughts?

[JimmyG_415]

Jimmy G,

I will take action on this. What are the terms?

Are you going to take 1st degree murder and I get everything else? Odds?



A white Chicago police officer accused of killing a black teenager after shooting him 16 times has been indicted by a grand jury on six counts of first-degree murder.
Officer Jason Van Dyke was filmed on several police dash cams allegedly shooting 17-year-old Laquan McDonald.
The indictment alleges that Officer Van Dyke opened fire knowing it 'created a strong probability of death or great bodily harm'.


According to the indictment, Van Dyke has been charged with:
MURDER/INTENT TO KILL/INJURE WITH FIREARM
MURDER/STRONG PROB KILL/INJURE WITH FIREARM
MURDER/INTENT TO KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM
MURDER STRONG PROB KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM
MURDER/INTENT TO KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM PROXIMATELY
MURDER/STRONG PROB KILL/INJURE DISCHARGE FIREARM PROXIMATELY
MISCONDUCT/FORBIDDEN ACT

Is the cop denying he thought shooting 16 times created a strong probability of death? I doubt it!

First degree murder typically means there was premeditation, malice afore thought. Did he act inappropriately? Maybe, maybe not. But murder 1 will NEVER stick. I'd give 100/1 and only reason I dont go higher is the 1% chance the dude is schizophrenic and tells his psychiatrist he wanted to kill a black dude

How much time does Van Dyke get, and how many Chicago cops lose their job due to the fed investigation?

That was my exact quote, so not sure how you read that as everything but 1st degree.
You are insulting, just like the cops. That is why I don't read your posts on this thread.

You are talking like once they get into court he will be vindicated.
Remember, the people w/Law degrees will explain to the jury of idiots, like me that don't have one, that they are not seeing a crime committed.

The bet I'm offering is if Van Dyke does time or not.
If he just gets fired, I lose.


And if someone wants to set an over/under on how many cops will lose their job I'd take a look at that.

[DRK Star]

If we do the wager based on how much time he does, what would you set the amount at?

zero days?

6 months?

[DRK Star]

In terms of cops losing their jobs, are we talking about cops at the scene?

If he loses his job over something else, besides this case, does that count?

Are you talking about top brass? The head of the cops is already gone. They have an interim now.


If we ignore the fact that HE (above) is already gone, its probably fair to have the over/under set at 1 (Van Dyk). If you want to consider that some of the reports from the scene varied quite a bit, that could be an issue

[JimmyG_415]

"He's not walking away",
"you need a law degree to know if something illegal happened." (Find 1 juror to agree w/that)
"You'll see when they get to court"
"You don't know what he did before hand" (which IMO wouldn't have mattered at all)

w/posts similar to these, the fact that you feel I would lose a bet if he only got 2nd degree murder, blows me away. Not sure if that was an angle shoot or what but the IGNORE button is well deserved here.

Here is proof Van Dyke didn't have ANY clue what had happened before hand.


Audio Of Laquan McDonald Shooting Released
Police radio recordings reveal officers repeatedly requested Taser backup.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b014efe0d813a0

Newly released Chicago police radio recordings reveal that officers repeatedly asked for a non-lethal Taser stun gun before a cop fatally shot teenager Laquan McDonald 16 times as he walked away from them.

[El Gallo]

I rarely see someone be as wrong as DRK on this thread. It's getting difficult to watch. You keep brining up these people's past as if it has ANYTHING to do with the moment of the shooting.... the justification of lethal force because they've done bad things in the past is the type of apologetic bullshit that helps our rights as citizens to be taken away. Perhaps because you are a white middle aged man you don't quite get it.... as a Hispanic male who looks middle eastern, I get it.