quote:

Originally posted by bcereuss:The fact Noor has disclosed the events of the evening to friends will raise questions over his conduct.

I'd say it also raises questions over his judgement/intelligence.

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:
To what benefit would a LEO decline a BCA interview (whatever that is)? If truly innocent, wouldn't one want to get the facts reported? Perhaps this is standard procedure?

Officers used to not worry too much about giving their interviews. The U.S. Supreme Court made it clear that their actions would be judged on whether or not they were reasonable given what the officer could articulate about the situation and how they felt at the moment it happened. The vast, vast, majority of the time officers used sound judgement at the time--though not always correct looking back with full information days or weeks later.

In the last 4 or 5 years, that has changed. Officers who are 100% legally justified in shooting, based on well-established case law, have been charged or have been fed to the social and regular media wolves. These have led to nation-wide covered trials, almost all ending in hung juries or complete exoneration, with the officers still being forced out of their jobs, all in the name of "Transparency" or "Public Interest" or what-the-fuck-ever to satisfy the BLM movement and their ilk.


So...it should come as no surprise that officers are a bit more reluctant to give statements these days. Even if the officer in this case had a perception that, 5 years ago, would have been easily accepted as a legal action that a reasonable officer could have taken based on what he knew at the moment, his attorney likely knows that he is proper-fucked.

And, all the above aside, his attorney might know the guy is guilty as hell, and the officer has enough sense to listen to his attorney and keep his mouth shut so they can try to mitigate the time he is going to spend in prison.

quote:

And, all the above aside, his attorney might know the guy is guilty as hell, and the officer has enough sense to listen to his attorney and keep his mouth shut so they can try to mitigate the time he is going to spend in prison.

The lawyers who show up on local radio talkshows are all in agreement that the officer's attorney is very good.

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:
The lawyers who show up on local radio talkshows are all in agreement that the officer's attorney is very good.

Good lawyers ain't cheap. I wonder who's paying.

quote:

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:
The lawyers who show up on local radio talkshows are all in agreement that the officer's attorney is very good.

Good lawyers ain't cheap. I wonder who's paying.

I'd guess with certainty the union, FOP, or PBA.

quote:

Good lawyers ain't cheap. I wonder who's paying.

From what I heard this morning, his lawyer is one assigned to him from the police union. The guys on the radio were saying that the officer drew one of the best from that pool.

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:

quote:

Good lawyers ain't cheap. I wonder who's paying.

From what I heard this morning, his lawyer is one assigned to him from the police union. The guys on the radio were saying that the officer drew one of the best from that pool.

Yeah, I have no doubt that they have a lawyer on retainer with the union. We have something similar with the Merchant Marine union I am a member of. As long as it wasn't something grossly deliberate, like selling drugs out of the police car or premeditated murder, he'll receive representation from the union.

Local Update

Harrity's attorney: 'Reasonable' for officers to fear ambush before Justine Damond shooting

The attorney for Minneapolis police officer Matthew Harrity said that “it’s certainly reasonable” for the officers to believe they were the target of a possible ambush when Harrity's partner, officer Mohamed Noor, shot and killed Justine Damond in a south Minneapolis alley Saturday night.

Fred Bruno declined to discuss the ongoing investigation into the incident, which has drawn national and international attention and stirred community unrest and demands for answers as to why Noor, 31, shot the 40-year-old spiritual healer from Australia.

“It’s certainly reasonable to assume that any police officer would be concerned about a possible ambush under these circumstances,” Bruno said. “It was only a few weeks ago when a female NYPD cop and mother of twins was executed in her car in a very similar scenario.”

I can already see the writing on the wall. It's going to be the same type of nonsense that got Yanez off. Because the Officer was "legitimately in fear for his life." Doesn't matter that he was wrong. What matters is that he was truly in fear for his life.

If this is how this really went down, that she approached the squad car and startled an officer who was already jacked up thinking he was walking into an ambush and he fired, then shame on the system if he walks.

But here I am playing what if when I said I wouldn't...

Thanks gw3971 and Mike in NC for your insight.

I was referring to headlight usage in the alley. I'm not an LEO, so forgive my lack of subject knowledge, but if I was responding to a 911 call about an assault in progress, I would prioritize stopping the assault over catching the perpetrator(s), therefore I would think cruising the alley with headlights on would be best to witness and STOP an assault, while sneaking up without headlights would be best for apprehending suspects. In either case, if they were patrolling the alley I would think their dash cam would be engaged which it was not.

Just way too many unanswered questions in this tragedy.

Stay safe guys. Steve

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:
“It’s certainly reasonable to assume that any police officer would be concerned about a possible ambush under these circumstances,” Bruno said. “It was only a few weeks ago when a female NYPD cop and mother of twins was executed in her car in a very similar scenario.”

Mentioned that on page 2 of this thread. Sounds like that's the direction they are going to go.

http://kstp.com/news/officers-...tine-damond/4546095/

The two officers involved in the shooting of a 40-year-old woman in south Minneapolis Saturday night thought they were caught in an ambush seconds before the deadly shot was fired, according to a 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS source.

That source says Officers Matthew Harrity and Mohamed Noor were startled when someone pounded loudly on their SUV in an alley off of 51st Street near Justine Damond's home.

The officers had responded to a report of a possible assault. After not noticing any activity, they were dispatched to another call when a young man rode past on a bicyle along 51st Street. As the officers watched the bicyclist cross the passenger side of the vehicle, they heard the pounding noise on the driver's side, the source said.

Harrity, who was driving, told BCA investigators that "Officer Noor discharged his weapon" from the passenger side of the vehicle.

Noor had his gun in his lap at the time, according to the source.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
I can already see the writing on the wall. It's going to be the same type of nonsense that got Yanez off. Because the Officer was "legitimately in fear for his life." Doesn't matter that he was wrong. What matters is that he was truly in fear for his life.

Better hiring standards would likely raise the level of "fear" required to meet the threshold. That said, and with a respectful nod to your point, if reasonable officers aren't allowed to protect themselves when they are in fear of their lives, they aren't going to leave the station, because they will never be right 100% of the time with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight and frame-by-frame video review. Particularly in a nation where currently 100% legitimate shootings result in violent riots and officers being charged anyway.

Pounding noise on the driver side? What they mean is that the woman tapped on the glass to get their attention. Pounding, eh?

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
I can already see the writing on the wall. It's going to be the same type of nonsense that got Yanez off. Because the Officer was "legitimately in fear for his life." Doesn't matter that he was wrong. What matters is that he was truly in fear for his life.

If this is how this really went down, that she approached the squad car and startled an officer who was already jacked up thinking he was walking into an ambush and he fired, then shame on the system if he walks.

But here I am playing what if when I said I wouldn't...

You make a lot of sense here and may well be correct. It does bring up the question, why was the shooting officer spooked when the officer closer to the supposed "threat", talking to her through the rolled down window, was not spooked? Training? Level of confidence? Cultural?

quote:

Originally posted by CoinRoller:
I was referring to headlight usage in the alley. I'm not an LEO, so forgive my lack of subject knowledge, but if I was responding to a 911 call about an assault in progress, I would prioritize stopping the assault over catching the perpetrator(s), therefore I would think cruising the alley with headlights on would be best to witness and STOP an assault, while sneaking up without headlights would be best for apprehending suspects.

In the training I received, that is often an invitation to becoming a target...even if it isn't a planned ambush. This was back in the 80s, it is much worst now...almost as bad as in the 60s.

As opposed to what you'll see on TV, the only time we used to roll up with lights on was to fights/parties in the street...so that we could take in the whole scene

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:
It does bring up the question, why was the shooting officer spooked when the officer closer to the supposed "threat", talking to her through the rolled down window, was not spooked? Training? Level of confidence? Cultural?

Based on sdy's post a bit above yours, looks like it went down like this:

Officers were already jumpy due to recent ambushes. Noor had his weapon un-holstered for quick reaction to this jumpiness. They pull into the alley, the woman taps on the window, or hits the car to get their attention, and Noor shoots her. Does not sound like the driver was talking to anyone, they blasted her before they likely ID'd or spoke to her.

quote:

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:
The lawyers who show up on local radio talkshows are all in agreement that the officer's attorney is very good.

Good lawyers ain't cheap. I wonder who's paying.

In these situations, almost always their Union

from

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...ne-startled-him.html


look at the map where the events happened. That indicates a long way from the victim's house to where the shooting occurred.

it is 350 ft (as crow flies) from the house in note 1 to the shooting scene in note 3.

quote:

Originally posted by bcereuss:
More information


Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull called the shooting "shocking" and "inexplicable" and said his diplomats were seeking answers from U.S. authorities.

"How can a woman out in the street in her pajamas seeking assistance be shot like that?" the prime minister said in the interview with Nine Network. "It is a shocking killing, and yes, we are demanding answers on behalf of her family."

Dear PM Turnbull,

Did you by any chance see these news articles?



Two partygoers have been shot by police during a fancy-dress swingers ball at a Melbourne nightclub after what might have been a fake gun was pulled on officers.
A man and a woman sustained gunshot wounds at Inflation nightclub on King Street shortly after 3am on Saturday.
The club was hosting a Saints and Sinners Ball, an erotic fancy-dress party described on its website as a “no holds barred extravaganza of adult fun”.
Police arrived at the club after a report of a man being armed with a gun at the venue.
Fairfax Media reports the 35-year-old man was dressed as Batman character the Joker and was with a woman dressed as Harley Quinn.


https://www.theguardian.com/au...-melbourne-nightclub

Australian police shot a man dressed as the Joker and a woman dressed as Harley Quinn early Saturday morning after being called to the nightclub Inflation where a costumed sex party was taking place.

DC Comics

While the Harley Quinn cosplayer merely sustained a non-lethal flesh wound in her leg, her partner was rushed to the Royal Melbourne Hospital where he was initially in critical condition before eventually being stabilised. According to the police, they opened fire on the couple because the man dressed as the Joker allegedly brandished a gun at them. But security for the event said they verified the gun was not real, and witnesses who were attending the "Saints & Sinner Ball" claim the man was not holding it at the time of the shooting.

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/201...#XXA6ywBhP6rpCDm3.99