Ex-Arizona cop acquitted in fatal shooting of sobbing, unarmed man at hotel - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE] A Mesa Police Department internal report found that the words “You’re f--ked” were inscribed on the on the dust cover of the AR-15 patrol rifle Philip “Mitch” Brailsford used to shoot 26-year-old Daniel Shaver.[/QUOTE] Something tells me he was a cop for all the wrong reasons

I don't think this was a unjustified as people think. The police were told that three people were in the hotel room. And there was originally three people in the room, one unknowingly to everyone left before the police arrived. I would not approach two suspected armed people in a tight hallway knowing that there is a suspected third person not in sight who might also be armed. And that is why they did not approach them and instead asked for them to come to them. Yes it could have been handled better, without the severe threats (never tell someone they might die because then they have less to lose), but the police were on edge because they were in a bad spot with lacking intel. And the guy did reach behind his back, into the small of his back, where he very well could have been hiding a handgun, and then when crawling, with his hand no longer in the air (the police should have stopped him when he dropped his hands to the floor) he again reached to his back and very quickly brought his hand forwards. Looking back we all can assume that he, in a state of panic, was pulling up his pants and quickly brought his hand forward as to correct his mistake, but if I was that cop, in that moment, I would have shot him. And the "You're Fucked" thing is completely irrelevant. Lots of service weapons in police forces have things written on them. Whether it's biblical lines or quips about killing bad guys, it doesn't make the user a psychopath and it doesn't mean jack shit.

The demeanor of the cop is unsettling, everyone was compliant and the guy was just drunk and shook up. Even then his hands were in clear view and he didn't have anything. This is easily a situation where more could have been done before they even considered shooting. If they had both of them at gunpoint and they're complaint...why didn't the officers cover and cuff each one. The door was closed. If they needed more coverage why didn't they call for more units and wait? I get the call they got, but everything was in control. Confused and scared doesn't equal non-compliance. This is a situation that is pretty clear cut to me personally, what that cop did was awful. I honestly think he wanted to hurt someone.

[QUOTE=Chris Morris;52960330]What the cop said makes it clear he'd decided before he'd even shown up on the scene that he was going to shoot somebody that night. Obedience meant nothing -- he was going to shoot somebody.[/QUOTE] Oh please. This shooting is ass ugly and the cop is aggressive but the cop didn't waste him the first time he put his hands behind himself uninstructed. The cop fired as he was crawling and then reached one hand behind him to his waistband. [img]https://i.imgur.com/1wjwfcS.jpg[/img] This is on a call of a man waving a gun out of a window. That's what the police knew when they showed up and why they were aggressive. And he did have a gun. It was a scoped rifle and it's laying there in his hotel room next to the window. Looks like an air rifle but who the hell is going to know that from however far away they were outside when they called the police [img]https://i.imgur.com/iJMQoeh.jpg[/img] Fact is, there was enough evidence for a jury to see this wasn't murder, the police didn't show up and think Hey you know what, let's just shoot a guy tonight, and there was a legitimate reason the officer opened fire, as ugly as the shooting is Just an edit here, The call itself was, in my opinion, very mismanaged, though. And they should have gone with Involuntary Manslaughter because it was their handling of the call that lead to the event of him being shot. They should have had them in the hallway, and then from that moment on, treat it like a felony traffic stop, rather than all these convoluted commands to make them come to you. But then again it is a narrow ass hallway, Going to them while still being able to cover would have been difficult, especially with a potential 3rd suspect. There are still easier and safer ways to make them come to you

[QUOTE=$$>MUFFIN<$$;52960559]I don't think this was a unjustified as people think. The police were told that three people were in the hotel room. And there was originally three people in the room, one unknowingly to everyone left before the police arrived. I would not approach two suspected armed people in a tight hallway knowing that there is a suspected third person not in sight who might also be armed. And that is why they did not approach them and instead asked for them to come to them. Yes it could have been handled better, without the severe threats (never tell someone they might die because then they have less to lose), but the police were on edge because they were in a bad spot with lacking intel. And the guy did reach behind his back, into the small of his back, where he very well could have been hiding a handgun, and then when crawling, with his hand no longer in the air (the police should have stopped him when he dropped his hands to the floor) he again reached to his back and very quickly brought his hand forwards. Looking back we all can assume that he, in a state of panic, was pulling up his pants and quickly brought his hand forward as to correct his mistake, but if I was that cop, in that moment, I would have shot him.[/QUOTE] Even if there was a third guy, one officer could have watched the two while the second checked the corner. While the waistband thing itself is valid, the reason why this is unjustifiable is because it all could have been avoided if they conducted this in a simpler way. And this COULD have been done simpler. They also asked if there was a person and they said no. If the suspects couldn't be trusted, why ask? There are just so many fuckups that trying to justify details is a moot point. Lacking intel isn't an excuse either. If they didn't feel they were equipped enough, they should have called for help. Worst case, they should have just kept the two suspects on the floor and called for backup, maybe have someone check the inside of the hotel room from the outside since their room was on the first floor. Both officers were well equipped and two out of the possible 3 suspects submitted. Sending two people for 3 possible armed combatants sounds like a bad idea anyway imo.

[QUOTE=Renegade Master;52960597]Even if there was a third guy, one officer could have watched the two while the second checked the corner. While the waistband thing itself is valid, the reason why this is unjustifiable is because it all could have been avoided if they conducted this in a simpler way. And this COULD have been done simpler. They also asked if there was a person and they said no. If the suspects couldn't be trusted, why ask? There are just so many fuckups that trying to justify details is a moot point. Lacking intel isn't an excuse either. If they didn't feel they were equipped enough, they should have called for help. Worst case, they should have just kept the two suspects on the floor and called for backup, maybe have someone check the inside of the hotel room from the outside since their room was on the first floor. Both officers were well equipped and two out of the possible 3 suspects submitted.[/QUOTE] Their room was on the fifth floor. And no you don't approach the two suspects unless you know it is safe, they did not believe it to be safe. They asked them if there was anyone else probably to see if they could be trusted. The fact that they said 'no', while being truthful, probably made the cops suspicious that they were lying because the cops believe there to be three people. That hallway was the only way to the room. There was no good place to be if there was a third person. They wanted everyone out of that hallway so they could beach the room in the safest possible manner. And the girl did everything she was told to do, and she is alive. If the guy had just done as he was told, regardless of how harshly he was ordered, he would be alive.

I don't understand. The victim had his hands in the air. If they just told him to stay put and then cuffed him, they wouldn't have made the grievous mistake of murder.

[QUOTE=J!NX;52960062]I disagree with guns themselves being the issue,, but how they are used[/QUOTE] The issue isn't that there's a lot of guns or gun-owners in America. It's that there's a lot of guns being carried around casually. There's no harm in someone wanting to go down to the shooting range every once in a while, but every random person on the street potentially having a pistol in their pocket has more than it's fair share of negative effect.

[QUOTE=elowin;52960672]The issue isn't that there's a lot of guns or gun-owners in America. It's that there's a lot of guns being carried around casually. There's no harm in someone wanting to go down to the shooting range every once in a while, but every random person on the street potentially having a pistol in their pocket has more than it's fair share of negative effect.[/QUOTE] That I can totally agree with There is a point where it becomes a matter of safe because enough people have guns VS silly because everyone and their grandmother have their guns. The more guns you introduce the more variables are at play. [editline]9th December 2017[/editline] I think gun laws should be pretty lax in everywhere except a city where there's so many people that it just gets dumb to want to introduce guns. It becomes dramatically far more dangerous the more people you have around.

Stories like this make me sick to my stomach. I've got a ton of cops in my family, and whenever an officer fucks up so hard that someone dies (yet gets off scot-free), their (i.e. officers in my family) job gets a little bit harder. The less punishment there is for negligent officers, the more the public gets that impression that all cops are a bunch of violent psychopaths who have free reign to do whatever they want. And the more that impression of perceived threat is out there, the less trust there is, the more dangerous it becomes for the good cops. The cops who aren't Frank Castle wannabes. When people are fearing for their lives, they do crazy things; this is true on both sides of the badge. But now we're living in a time where, whenever one of these stories comes up, I end up worrying about one of my cousins getting shot and killed, taken away from their children, all because someone was under the impression they were dealing with Judge fucking Dredd and that it was either their life or the cop's. There needs to be communication. There needs to be transparency. There needs to be accountability. The officer and the judge should be charged with criminal negligence, at the very least. They fucked up in their civic duties and an otherwise innocent dude is dead. There has to be some repercussion for that beyond just getting fired. And I understand that him adjusting his pants gave the police probable cause to use force; cops want to go home unscathed too, and a moment of hesitation in a situation like that could mean the difference between life and death. But the way that this officer handled the situation, constantly threatening that poor, sobbing dude with instant death, making a clearly inebriated individual do the fucking hokie-pokie at gunpoint... he didn't handle shit the way that shit is supposed to be handled. There's many times where police shootings can be written up as a tragedy rather than a murder, and while I don't know if I'd go as far to say "oh this dude was on a power trip and was LOOKING FOR AN EXCUSE TO SHOOT SOMEONE", he is objectively the reason shit went south. He is the one at fault; yes, the victim shouldn't have waved his airsoft gun out a window like a drunken idiot. But once things started to go down, he was totally compliant (to the best of his ability); the officer is the reason a simple misunderstanding ended with half a dozen shots fired and completely harmless guy dead on the floor. Sorry for the novel, but stories like this really fuck me up.

[QUOTE=$$>MUFFIN<$$;52960611]If the guy had just done as he was told, regardless of how harshly he was ordered, he would be alive.[/QUOTE] Did you watch the video in its entirety, and actually listen? You actually, honestly, sincerely believe that the man in this video was not cooperating and deserved to be shot and killed? This makes me sick to think about, maybe even more than the video itself. There is one thing to say that the cop should have handled it better, but he was not convicted because of probable cause. It is entirely a different thing to say the vitim was to blame for not cooperating with orders. That's a whole other level of fucked up.

My mom is pretty good friends with the widow, she's been waiting for this to be released for awhile. Fucking disgusting, but it's good that's it out in the media finally.

here's what i don't understand: why are untrained citizens held to higher standards of behavior than police officers? why is an average citizen expected to comply perfectly, with no mistakes, to confusing orders after an unexpected encounter with a group of people in body armor pointing 6 guns at him and saying they'll kill him if he does anything wrong? every time something like this happens there's always people criticizing the behavior of the victim for making a mistake anyone could make, oftentimes insulting them for doing so. the guy was pulling up his pants because they were falling down. he was crying and trying not to get shot after being threatened repeatedly. he likely has no training on how to deal with a high-pressure life-or-death situation like this. the police officers do. so why is it that a guy like this gets criticized for making a simple mistake and getting his life taken away, and the officers are treated like poor victims of fate and get off basically scot-free? i don't understand it. i get it's a stressful job, i get that the officers don't want to be attacked either, but that's a risk they knowingly subject themselves to, and it's a risk they're trained to deal with. a random guy heading back to his hotel room isn't.

There’s just no way to defend this.

[QUOTE=J!NX;52960703]That I can totally agree with There is a point where it becomes a matter of safe because enough people have guns VS silly because everyone and their grandmother have their guns. The more guns you introduce the more variables are at play. [editline]9th December 2017[/editline] [B]I think gun laws should be pretty lax in everywhere except a city where there's so many people that it just gets dumb to want to introduce guns. It becomes dramatically far more dangerous the more people you have around.[/B][/QUOTE] This didn't really work when chicago etc. Did it. It's hard to keep guns out of your city when just one state away, or even just outside of the city, laws are very lax and guns are everywhere.

[QUOTE=Gbps;52960912]Did you watch the video in its entirety, and actually listen? You actually, honestly, sincerely believe that the man in this video was not cooperating and deserved to be shot and killed? This makes me sick to think about, maybe even more than the video itself. There is one thing to say that the cop should have handled it better, but he was not convicted because of probable cause. It is entirely a different thing to say the vitim was to blame for not cooperating with orders. That's a whole other level of fucked up.[/QUOTE] It doesn't matter how many times he might comply. As a cop arriving at a completly alien scene you treat everyone the same. And you treat them that at any moment for no reason they might pull a gun and shoot you. That is how it is the USA. Just because he is sobbing, crying, complying, begging, or being polite, doesn't mean he will continue to comply or not harm you. When your life is at risk, as it is at all times when responding to a firearms related crime, everyone and anyone at any moment can be a life endangering threat and you take the steps to protect your life first. The victim lost his rights to not be treated like a criminal when he pointed a firearm out a window in a public space. It's a bad thing, and it is shit for both parties. A poor man died, and a poor cop had to take an innocent life, and I'm sure he'll think about it the rest of his life.

[QUOTE=TheHydra;52960940]here's what i don't understand: why are untrained citizens held to higher standards of behavior than police officers? why is an average citizen expected to comply perfectly, with no mistakes, to confusing orders after an unexpected encounter with a group of people in body armor pointing 6 guns at him and saying they'll kill him if he does anything wrong? every time something like this happens there's always people criticizing the behavior of the victim for making a mistake anyone could make, oftentimes insulting them for doing so. the guy was pulling up his pants because they were falling down. he was crying and trying not to get shot after being threatened repeatedly. he likely has no training on how to deal with a high-pressure life-or-death situation like this. the police officers do. so why is it that a guy like this gets criticized for making a simple mistake and getting his life taken away, and the officers are treated like poor victims of fate and get off basically scot-free? i don't understand it. i get it's a stressful job, i get that the officers don't want to be attacked either, but that's a risk they knowingly subject themselves to, and it's a risk they're trained to deal with. a random guy heading back to his hotel room isn't.[/QUOTE] Whats even worse is how different a cop like this and a soldier or marine would have reacted in this situation while enlisted still (hint: they are held to higher standards and wouldn't have been allowed to shoot.); This was outright murder, as others said the decision was made way before that trigger *needed* to be pulled. I believe if they are too fucking pussy to go up and cuff a guy on the ground, hands out, while covered by an additional member with a rifle then they need to wait. They need to reassess the situation and call for additional force to sweep the hallway down further while covered by the other two with the man on the ground, then they could arrest the man who was never a threat and use additional manpower to pile the suspect if resistance on the ground was what they were expecting. Dude should be put on a list for all employers and service industries to know of him, he should be in jail imo.

[QUOTE=$$>MUFFIN<$$;52961026]It doesn't matter how many times he might comply. As a cop arriving at a completly alien scene you treat everyone the same. And you treat them that at any moment for no reason they might pull a gun and shoot you. That is how it is the USA. Just because he is sobbing, crying, complying, begging, or being polite, doesn't mean he will continue to comply or not harm you. When your life is at risk, as it is at all times when responding to a firearms related crime, everyone and anyone at any moment can be a life endangering threat and you take the steps to protect your life first. The victim lost his rights to not be treated like a criminal when he pointed a firearm out a window in a public space. It's a bad thing, and it is shit for both parties. A poor man died, and a poor cop had to take an innocent life, and I'm sure he'll think about it the rest of his life.[/QUOTE] so no matter what the guy did, the officer was justified in killing him. okay. that makes sense. great system we have here.

[QUOTE=TheHydra;52961040]so no matter what the guy did, the officer was justified in killing him. okay. that makes sense. great system we have here.[/QUOTE] Or the guy could have crawled forward and not reached for his waist. Exactly as he was told not to do 10 seconds earlier. He acknologed the officer when he did it the first time. It was a mistake on his part, and it cost him his life. It's a sad event.

[QUOTE=$$>MUFFIN<$$;52961054]Or the guy could have crawled forward and not reached for his waist. Exactly as he was told not to do 10 seconds earlier. He acknologed the officer when he did it the first time. It was a mistake on his part, and it cost him his life. It's a sad event.[/QUOTE] He was drinking, clearly fearing for his life, while being unnecessarily screamed at by a hostile psychopath aiming a gun in his face. If we didn't have clearly mentally insane thugs who want to powertrip to the max this man wouldn't have died. It is a sad event, an event representative of the huge problem this country has with aggressive, brutal thugs that get to be cops. If you think this man did not attempt to follow every single retardedly confusing nonsensical order this cop gave, you're out of it.

Apparently the officer who shot the guy isn't the same guy yelling orders. Though I may be wrong, various sources have conflicting information on who was saying what. According to [URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/08/graphic-video-shows-daniel-shaver-sobbing-and-begging-officer-for-his-life-before-2016-shooting/?utm_term=.15a286ec8443"]this article[/URL] it was Sargent Charles Langley barking orders.

[QUOTE=$$>MUFFIN<$$;52961054]Or the guy could have crawled forward and not reached for his waist. Exactly as he was told not to do 10 seconds earlier. He acknologed the officer when he did it the first time. It was a mistake on his part, and it cost him his life. It's a sad event.[/QUOTE] it's cool that a cop can point a gun at me and demand i do whatever weird shit he wants and if i make one slip-up in this situation i've never prepared for in my life i will be justifiably shot and killed in the eyes of the law.

This is the most brutal officer related shit I've ever seen. Well now I know that If I ever encounter a deranged cop that is dead set on shooting something, I should just accept my death and frame last moments of my life with a jury in mind.

[QUOTE=noh_mercy;52961168]This is the most brutal officer related shit I've ever seen. Well now I know that If I ever encounter a deranged cop that is dead set on shooting something, I should just accept my death and frame last moments of my life with a jury in mind.[/QUOTE] Practice crawling with your legs crossed without using your hands and never wear loose fitting clothes. It's really the only way to prevent this horrible tragedy. :sick:

[QUOTE=$$>MUFFIN<$$;52961026]When your life is at risk, as it is at all times when responding to a firearms related crime, everyone and anyone at any moment can be a life endangering threat and you take the steps to protect your life first.[/QUOTE] Okay, can someone explain to me why this is a thing? Why officers should prioritize their own life over everyone they've pledged to protect in the first place? I would've thought priority would be given to minimizing innocent civilians' deaths, not to shoot them to death as soon as they make a move that could [I]eventually[/I] lead to threatening the cops. For instance, why do they get to shoot people as soon as their hand approaches their waistband? One poster explained earlier that it's basically impossible to quickdraw and shoot a cop so why don't they give a sommation first or wait until they actually see a weapon? This is the same shit as when that jumpy cop shot a guy who was reaching for his driver's license repeatedly (when there was a fucking baby in the car no less)

Man. From where I'm sitting. America just went from Tourist "un-friendly" to "fuck that shit". Right next to the middle-east and fucking Sudan and North Korea. Not about to risk my fucking neck to see some smoke and mirrors "freedom". Shit is going south and I'm scared as fuck of your country and your insane arms-race. Always have been. Just a note, Freedom-sniffers: Paranoia is supposed to be a mental disorder, not a lifestyle.

[QUOTE=Bomimo;52961262]Man. From where I'm sitting. America just went from Tourist "un-friendly" to "fuck that shit". Right next to the middle-east and fucking Sudan and North Korea. Not about to risk my fucking neck to see some smoke and mirrors "freedom". Shit is going south and I'm scared as fuck of your country and your insane arms-race. Always have been. Just a note, Freedom-sniffers: Paranoia is supposed to be a mental disorder, not a lifestyle.[/QUOTE] Chances are if this is what you actually believe we're probably better off with you staying right wherever you are. :v: :v:

The way cop behaved in the video gives me off vibes that he went on a power trip. The dipshit must get the chair, not get off to another job. Wow the video just made my blood boil. [editline]9th December 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Toybasher;52960458]Full video of incident. [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjr0Ts6yORE&feature=youtu.be[/URL] NOT embedding for obvious reasons. I also would like to mention the guy barking orders was NOT the guy who shot him. The guy with the body-cam and rifle is NOT the guy shouting orders, he's the guy with the really quiet voice. The guy barking orders didn't shoot him. Just want to clarify that for everyone.[/QUOTE] Confused a bit. This means that the guy who shot and the "Simon Says" guy are both power tripping pricks? [editline]9th December 2017[/editline] Reading last page, it actually all makes sense then. Eh, its a tragedy indeed for everyone.

There are two conversations that are going on. One is: this is the law and the officer did or did not follow it. The other is: the law should be [x] If you are arguing with someone make sure you are agreeing with what the terms of the convo are

Shit like this makes me want to die, and I don't even live there.