Bob as some of us here have said, it just doesn't pass the smell test on first read. Not saying it didn't go down like that, but it certainly warrants a good look.
As for AMonger, well you know...
As for AMonger, well you know...
Chavis Charter death ruled suicide by autopsy report
- Thread starter EnglishLady
- Start date
paullud
Veteran Expediter
Any death that happens in police custody should be looked into but the bigger issue people will have is that they don't know what the media is lying about and what evidence they omitted that won't get their product sold. You have to remember a few months ago the American public was lied to about the death of another young black male, new death, same media.
Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums
bobwg
Expert Expediter
Video missing?? I could be wrong but there are no police departments that have video setup to record what goes on inside a police car only the dashcam videos that shows what goes on in front of the police car
That's very true. And you can substitute "police" for "media" in your post as well. Especially "if" the death was due to nefarious means. (removes tinfoil hat)
Yes on first glance it doesn't pass the smell test. Young black man in cuffs, arrested, by all white cops,Other white occupants let go. Black male shot and killed. Video camera doesn't show incident. Upon further review, most if not all can be plausably explained. It appears to be an unfortunate and kind of freakish chain of events with no sinister actions.
Maybe. You forgot about the gun being missed while searched twice. If that was the case I'm sure that whoever did the searches will have trouble finding partners.
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
Another distortion. I've never said all cops are bad, or never do anything good or correctly. I've been accused of saying that before, by you, I think. Being that this is the 2nd time for that false accusation, it's time for you to take that lie back.
We certainly can't now, being that he's dead. What a horrible twist of fate! It's like Paula Poundstone observed--when the guy who shot the pope came up for parole, he said he was sure the pope would have forgiven him. What horrible luck: the one guy who would have forgiven him, and he SHOT him!
Look, there's what you know and what you can prove. We all know OJ Simpson shot his ex-wife and the homo waiter, but we couldn't prove it. Does that mean it didn't happen? We can't lock him up for it, because we couldn't prove it, but we don't have to pretend he didn't do it.
Can you put aside your worship of anything wearing a badge long enough to admit this doesn't pass the smell test and there's at least a reasonable chance they murdered this guy?
Actually there's an investigator who makes a pretty good argument (and compelling book) that OJ's son killed the ex wife and uhh homo waiter.
bobwg
Expert Expediter
I dont worship cops as you like to say. I do belive most cops are trying to do the right thing and be honest and enforce the laws the same way no matter who they deal with. Your OJ reference seems to show you know the cops lied and murdered this guy. And if you would read previous post on here I did admit the story sounds fishy but until someone proves they did lie and murder this guy i will side with the cops
You say the gun was missed twice. This was explained in a previous post. Carter was initialy frisked and put in the cop car uncuffed. During that search the gun was missed, correct. Carter puts gun under the seat. When he is searched again the gun isn't on him so the second search can not be determined to be flawed. This is an example on first glance it appears nefarious,but upon further review can have an acceptable answer.
bobwg
Expert Expediter
was he searched by the same officer??? cops make mistakes miss things not sure one mistake will have him not being able to get a partner, I think prisoner/suspects get searched again when they get to most jails/prisons.
If it was missed by two officers that's even more troubling. And yeah I'd want to make sure my partner didn't make that one mistake.
He was searched by two different officers. One found the weed but not the gun, the other found not the gun.
In order for the "under the seat" theory to be a plausible, acceptable answer, I'd need to know the definition of "under the seat". It implies under the seal, right behind the ankles. I'm having a problem envisioning how someone with their hands cuffed behind their back while sitting in the back seat that the reenactment video shows has very little leg and wiggle room can reach down and grab something from under the seat behind their ankles. It causes me to ask the question, What would a chair look like if our knees bent the other way?
Frankly, a far more plausible scenario would be that they missed the gun in the first frisk, and then he simply laid the gun down on the seat, maybe squished it in between the seat and the seat back, and the dark gun wasn't spotted in the dark when they pulled him out to cuff him and put him back in. He was then sitting where his hands could easily reach the gun with no effort at all.
Bob says that he doesn't worship cops, so I'll take him at his word. However, he also states that while the police account sounds fishy, until someone proves the police lied, he will side with the cops. That may not be worship, but it's certainly an awful lot of faith. Why take sides at all? Why not, instead, go where the facts take you? Why look for all manner of possibilities, no matter how remote, that will bolster your faith and belief, while ignoring or dismissing equally plausible possibilities?
Part of it, I'm sure, is the notion that the police are supposed to be the good guys, and they don't do bad things. People, myself included, have a hard time in believing that the suspect said enough things that would cause a police officer to lose his temper so badly that he would just shoot they guy. Like, the suspect may have called the officer a
gotry and a sodomite, and said his momma wears SWAT boots. But it happens. It's happened before where a cop lost his cool, and it happens more often than people want to admit.
Wondering why the police would just up and shoot the guy is a valid question, but it is one with plausible answers with precedent. Questioning why the guy who supposedly shot himself with a .38 Cobra at contact-point range didn't have any gunpowder residue on his hands, which is not only improbable, it's impossible, is also a valid question, and it's one with only one plausible answer. The police have not released any details of any residue tests. Those tests are conclusive. Did they not do any tests? Why have they not released them?
Another question that stretches credulity is how police officer, standing right next to their own police car, could not hear a gunshot fired from inside their own car. One cop said he heard nothing, the other said he heard something, "a loud thump with a metallic sound," but thought it was car running over a piece of metal on the road some distance away. Even the Jonseboro Police Chief has a problem with that one. Question: "Don't your officers know the sound of a gun being fired?" Police Chief: "<snort> One would think, but in a confined space like in the back of a police car it could sound very different." Again, possible, but it's just more stretched possibility after another.
In order for the police account to be true and accurate, a lot of possible though highly unlikely things had to occur, a perfect storm of the very rare, and incompetence, coupled with the doubt brought on by this police department's history and the glaring omission of a couple of things in the autopsy report, all converging on this traffic stop. It is certainly possible that all of these improbable things happened all at once. Not very likely, though.
One thing is for certain regardless of who shot whom, when in police custody, the police are responsible for the life and welfare of the person in custody.
In order for the "under the seat" theory to be a plausible, acceptable answer, I'd need to know the definition of "under the seat". It implies under the seal, right behind the ankles. I'm having a problem envisioning how someone with their hands cuffed behind their back while sitting in the back seat that the reenactment video shows has very little leg and wiggle room can reach down and grab something from under the seat behind their ankles. It causes me to ask the question, What would a chair look like if our knees bent the other way?
Frankly, a far more plausible scenario would be that they missed the gun in the first frisk, and then he simply laid the gun down on the seat, maybe squished it in between the seat and the seat back, and the dark gun wasn't spotted in the dark when they pulled him out to cuff him and put him back in. He was then sitting where his hands could easily reach the gun with no effort at all.
Bob says that he doesn't worship cops, so I'll take him at his word. However, he also states that while the police account sounds fishy, until someone proves the police lied, he will side with the cops. That may not be worship, but it's certainly an awful lot of faith. Why take sides at all? Why not, instead, go where the facts take you? Why look for all manner of possibilities, no matter how remote, that will bolster your faith and belief, while ignoring or dismissing equally plausible possibilities?
Part of it, I'm sure, is the notion that the police are supposed to be the good guys, and they don't do bad things. People, myself included, have a hard time in believing that the suspect said enough things that would cause a police officer to lose his temper so badly that he would just shoot they guy. Like, the suspect may have called the officer a
gotry and a sodomite, and said his momma wears SWAT boots. But it happens. It's happened before where a cop lost his cool, and it happens more often than people want to admit. Wondering why the police would just up and shoot the guy is a valid question, but it is one with plausible answers with precedent. Questioning why the guy who supposedly shot himself with a .38 Cobra at contact-point range didn't have any gunpowder residue on his hands, which is not only improbable, it's impossible, is also a valid question, and it's one with only one plausible answer. The police have not released any details of any residue tests. Those tests are conclusive. Did they not do any tests? Why have they not released them?
Another question that stretches credulity is how police officer, standing right next to their own police car, could not hear a gunshot fired from inside their own car. One cop said he heard nothing, the other said he heard something, "a loud thump with a metallic sound," but thought it was car running over a piece of metal on the road some distance away. Even the Jonseboro Police Chief has a problem with that one. Question: "Don't your officers know the sound of a gun being fired?" Police Chief: "<snort> One would think, but in a confined space like in the back of a police car it could sound very different." Again, possible, but it's just more stretched possibility after another.
In order for the police account to be true and accurate, a lot of possible though highly unlikely things had to occur, a perfect storm of the very rare, and incompetence, coupled with the doubt brought on by this police department's history and the glaring omission of a couple of things in the autopsy report, all converging on this traffic stop. It is certainly possible that all of these improbable things happened all at once. Not very likely, though.
One thing is for certain regardless of who shot whom, when in police custody, the police are responsible for the life and welfare of the person in custody.
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Ok... what exactly does that mean? What is the penalty for failing that responsibility?
To me, it's like politicians saying they have a responsibility to uphold the Constitution... all talk, no grambah.
Well, it means the police have a responsibility to not harm the person in custody, and to not allow them to be harmed by themselves or others. It also means the police must feed, clothe and shelter the person in custody in a manner which does no harm. It also means that basic medical attention must be provided as necessary. (I can't believe I'm having to answer such a question.)
When a personal injury occurs outside the context of criminal law and procedure, we take it for granted that the injured victim can seek recovery in a relatively straight-forward fashion. But once police officers get involved, the rules start to operate a little bit differently, sometimes even if the detained individual didn’t even engage in criminal conduct at all. Even though personal injury lawsuits against police officers or prisons can be stickier than a normal personal injury claim, the victims still have rights and an interest in recovery if there was negligent or abusive conduct.
The immediate loss of ten Brownie points and one gold star, usually. Although police can use force where deemed reasonable, the over-use of batons, Tasers or other physical means to control another person may be deemed excessive in certain cases. When a wrongful death or personal injury occurs, criminal civil rights violations may come into play, or straight-up criminal charges may be filed, or civil wrongful death or injury suits can be brought.
Study: Thousands died in police custody
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
It was more or less a rhetorical question (I can't believe I had to point that out).
I more or less thought it was, too, until I read the fiollow-up question, which didn't seem rhetorical at all. (also, I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to be a pedantic little snot).
paullud
Veteran Expediter
I would say the cops definitely have a reason to lie if one of them murdered this guy. The story that is being reported makes no sense and there appears to be no reason at this time for the cops to have shot him. The white kids were released as many are for minor drug charges but Carter had a warrant, so the racial aspect is not important right now. Any of this could obviously change as more details come out. The whole issue of missing the gun in the search is actually easy to understand, I knew some people that had things that should have been found during a search missed.
Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums