quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
My original concern was because "Castile" is a variant spelling of my surname, and the family is very widespread and prolific

I think the chances of that b..ch being related to me are virtually infinitesimal (and also her son). (I am relieved.)



flashguy

So, you're saying " no soap" ?

quote:

Originally posted by rusbro:
For the case at hand I can see where there was stupidity/confusion/poor communication. According to a report I heard tonight, Castile handed the officer his insurance, but not his license. If that's true, he was probably next reaching for his license. The LEO hears "I have a firearm," and Castile starts reaching for his license. The LEO thinks he's reaching for his gun, says "don't pull it out, don't pull it out! Castile thinks, "I'm not, I'm getting my license," and then he's dead.


Maybe the officer should have said "hands on the wheel NOW" or something similar, but Castile should have understood the gravity of the situation and been more in tune to what was happening and what the officer was thinking.

I agree. It's easy now to second guess Castile, but I like to believe if the officer had said to me, "don't pull it out!", I would have frozen right there or at least put both hands on the steering wheel in plain sight. I figure if a police officer stops me while I'm carrying, I need to do anything I can to alleviate any anxiety the he or she might have over my possessing a firearm.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

Yeah, the officer should have waited for the dude to shoot first.

I would have settled for waiting to see him draw it. Since the gun was in the deceased's pocket, the officer never even saw a gun.

The mere presence of a firearm does not a life or death situation make. Were that the case, officers would be shooting each other at roll call.

Is waiting a few seconds more dangerous? Absolutely. But look at some of the trouble it would save.

Not necessarily the case.
The gun was in his front pants pocket (if I have read the correct info) dependent upon pants and gun with him sitting down one could have very well have fully seen the outline of the gun in the pocket he was reaching for.

The mere presence of a gun does not create a life or death scenario you are correct. But failing to stop reaching for one after MULTIPLE orders to stop doing so certainly can be perceived as one. And when it comes to defending your life what is perceived at the time is how it is judged.

In this case jurors were presented ALL the evidence and made the UNANIMOUS decision to acquit so I am good with it.

No requirement to disclose as a Minnesota Permit to Carry holder.

I'm local to this as well. What I find amazing is that, in the wake of this, none of the lame-stream media outlets here have taken the time to interview anyone in LE about what ONE SHOULD DO (anyone) in the event of event a routine traffic stop.

This case serves as a great opportunity for public education. Do we think that if it were to become "widely known" what a person SHOULD do in a traffic stop (whatever the correct procedure is -- license & registration out before approached by LE, hands on the wheel or dash /clearly visible/not moving, etc.), that these incidents could be avoided???

I think that if the general public were to become educated/trained on the CORRECT response, and that those not intent to do harm to a LE officer were to routinely conduct themselves accordingly, would not the "outliers" (those behaving criminally or with criminal intent) be easier for LE to identify as such and to act accordingly?

I don't agree with the officer's actions, but I do fully support the not guilty verdict. It's been reported in the news here that after the shooting, as the medics were loading Castile onto a back board, his gun FELL OUT of his right pocket. Same right pocket that Castile was supposedly digging in to retrieve his drivers license.

My opinion is that Castile acted like a dumb ass, and was rewarded as such.

Sad case.

quote:

In this case jurors were presented ALL the evidence and made the UNANIMOUS decision to acquit.

They determined that he was not criminally liable for the specific charges levied against him.

That doesn't mean what happened was right. It's a bad situation for all involved, but as somebody who is sometimes on the wrong end of that gun, I don't want to encounter a jumpy officer. Ever.

I once had an officer, holding me at gunpoint, ask that I remove my firearm from my holster and hand it to him. No thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:


In this case jurors were presented ALL the evidence and made the UNANIMOUS decision to acquit so I am good with it.

If I am interrupting the case correctly, the jurors made the decision to acquit based on the fact that the officer was in fear of his life. All the evidence seems to support that. They were instructed that they were to base their decision on that element of the law. A not guilty verdict would therefore be the only real correct outcome based on the law. (Please correct me if I have that interpretation wrong)

Beyond that though, I have absolutely nothing good to say about this former officer or his actions that day. Not a thing, so I'll leave it at that.

^^^^^^^

I think your analysis is correct.

quote:

Originally posted by MNSIG:

quote:

Originally posted by AirmanJeff:Question - is it a legal requirement to inform the officer you are carrying when you have a permit?

No

After being pulled over for some stupid brake light being out I wouldn't have said shit about carrying. I know he did what he thought was the right thing, but it probably cost him his life. I know a lot of people on this forum do that too and I always wonder why (unless legal requirement of course). If I am legally transporting firearms and get pulled over for speeding (has happened), the cop has no need to know that I am legally transporting firearms. That just opens up a can of worms that didn't need to be opened.

OK, are we just about done with this thread? I've seen enough.