WATCH: Phoenix Cops Kill Man after Responding to Noise Complaint over Video Game

He couldn't place the gun down by leaning backwards because the human body is not designed that way. And he could not drop it behind him because it could discharge accidentally. This left two options: place it down by his side or place it down in front. He chose the front. The key though is that he did so slowly and cautiously so as to not cause the Officer to feel threatened and shoot him. He also did this while squatting, and bending down and over. Had he remained upright and brought the gun forward close to his side, quickly, it would have meant he intended harm. But he bent over, squatted, all while moving the gun around, forward and down, slowly. At the same time, his other hand he splayed open to show nothing in it. It is a classic surrender.

 

How do you know he went for the front option?

 

Well, he was moving the gun slowly around in that direction while squatting and bending. Regardless, he was surrendering his gun. Officer #2 over reacted. After re-watching it, I see he was attempting to place it on the ground to his right. Aside from answering the door with a gun, he did nothing wrong. And he did all in his power to comply.

 

ReasonableRob, can you think of any OTHER ways the situation could have been resolved without shooting the man in the back several times? I understand you always want to side with the officer (and I "get" that) but the cover officer had options he didn't even attempt to employ.

 

When the shooting officer saw the gun behind the guy's back, he may have reasonably assumed that the much further away contact officer couldn't see the gun. Then when he saw the gun move to the side of the guy, he may have thought that the guy was about to engage the contact officer. That's the only possible reason for firing that I can think of. The problem is that the guy looks nothing other than in total 'surrender mode' as he moves to the ground with his left hand VERY much raised.

Not only that, but from what I can tell, a single frame seems to show his right hand raised with no gun right before he is shot. To me it looks like he actually dropped the gun. I may be the only person in the thread who is saying that. Check out the below pic:

 

No, I've been busy, it's called 'working a living' so I had no time to post. You're quite the hypocrite, 'arn't' you?

 

No time, this was a micro-second, split second decision.

 

Yes, he brought it around his side, did you not see the footage?

 

Like what? What else could he have done in the time available?

 

That's his left hand, watch the contact officer's footage and you can see that. The last the cover officer sees is the right hand coming around the right side with the pistol.

 

Nope!

It was pure PANIC on the part of the KILLER cop instead of using standard VOICE COMMAND protocols to maintain CONTROL of the situation.

No one else who has watched the videos is supporting your position.

Why does everyone else AGREE that the KILLER cop MURDERED the unarmed victim?

Is it because they can SEE for themselves that he did NOT have a gun in his hands when he was MURDERED?

 

Just because his left hand is raised at some point, doesn't mean that the right hand isn't raised at some point too. You'll notice that once the contact officer steps back, the wall prevents the guy from being in full view. Then when the contact officer steps forward, he has his gun drawn and so his arm/hand prevents the guy from being in full view. That's the problem with bodycam footage when guns are drawn - the arms and hands block a huge chunk of the view, and the same is true for the cover officer's footage.

Well actually, we have no idea WHAT any of the officers saw - only what they MIGHT have seen.

 

Yeah, so then why did you say, "by bringing it around the FRONT it is bringing it to bear on the contact officer?"

 

There are many options between nothing and shooting someone in the back multiple times.

Voice commands
Taser
Baton
Physical force

None of these are ideal or guaranteed to work in all situations, but the guy would still be alive.

 

Maybe I'm just smarter than the rest of you? No time for voice commands, split second, life and death decision. Show me in the cover officer's footage were he can see he didn't have the gun in his hand?

 

And that's why we must give this officer the benefit of the doubt.

 

Yes, he's bringing his hand around his side to his front.

 

No time, no time at all. You say they're not guaranteed to work, if they don't the contact officer would be a dead man. All the techniques you list are not for people with guns, they get lead.

 

The KILLER cop PANICKED and MURDERED the UNARMED victim.

Justice MUST be done FOR the VICTIM!

 

Might as well just hire MERCENARY VIGILANTE KILLERS instead of cops given your SHOOT FIRST attitude in the content above.

 

There is no victim, this idiot got himself killed, who opens the door to the police in their shorts with a gun in their hand and rather than dropping it when instructed brings it around his side to the front?

 

Not at all, people with guns get lead, non lethal alternatives are fine for folks who are not using firearms.

 

Now you are just making up CRAP that is NOT anywhere in the video!

 

We the People do NOT want panicking KILLER cops who shoot UNARMED people on their own doorsteps.

 

Then why did you previously say, "NOT to his front?"