There is another controversy involving a police shooting. Jermane Reid was shot and killed after the Jaguar in which he was riding was pulled over for running a stop sign by Bridgeton officers Braheme Days and Roger Worley in a Dec. 30 traffic stop. When one officer reported seeing a handgun in the glove compartment, things got tense and ultimately led to the fatal shooting of the unarmed Reid. [Warning: the video and text includes foul language]
Driver, Leroy Tutt, is seen showing his hands throughout the encounter.
The officers are heard screaming over and over “Don’t you fucking move!” and “Show me your hands!” at the driver and passenger. Days repeatedly warns Reid not to move, screaming “I’m going to shoot you . . . You’re going to be … dead. If you reach for something, you’re going to be … dead.” However, Reid is heard saying “I ain’t got no reason to reach for nothing, bro, I ain’t got no reason to reach for nothing.” He then says, “I’m getting out and getting on the ground.” Days tells him not to move, but decides to step out of the Jaguar with his hands raised to shoulder height. He is then shot.
Clearly he should have obeyed the officer but his hands appear to be in clear view and Reid made clear that he was going to get out. Both officers appear to have fired at least six times. It is not clear if it was Reid or Days who opened the door. Under Tennessee v. Garner, there would be no justification for the use of lethal force in such a circumstance.
Reid, 36, had a record, including 13 years in prison for shooting at New Jersey State Police troopers when he was a teenager. He was also arrested last year on charges including drug possession and obstruction. Notably, Days was one of the arresting officers in the later arrests. That record however does not factor into the shooting if his hands were visible and there was no threatening behavior. Disobeying an order to remain in the car is obviously not sufficient cause for the use of lethal force under the controlling standard.
Nick Spinelli does not speak truth. He is a police lap dog with nothing of value to add to any reasonable conversation
A gun in the glove compartment does not justify lethal force. Nick is a lying, hateful racist.
Having been born and raised in Wisconsin am I responsible for my mental illness?
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:38 PM, JONATHAN TURLEY wrote:
> Donovan commented: “Nick Spinelli does not speak truth. He is a police > lap dog with nothing of value to add to any reasonable conversation A gun > in the glove compartment does not justify lethal force. Nick is a lying, > hateful racist.”
Dang..I failed to mention another with whom I frequently disagree…that is Issac…however, I never avoid his remarks either, for the same reasons. He posts in good faith, IMO, and I’m willing to listen….again for the same reasons, I just might learn something.
Aridog – me either. My gravatar went nuts on that other thread and I hope everyone doesn’t think I am insane lol
Svoogle …yeah, heaven forbid we have diverse opinions here or anywhere else. I do wonder how Nick manages to tweak so many people, and I consider it a good thing as a discussion point. Wish I could have such impact. Nick and I do not always agree, but I do support what HappyPappies said. I frequently don’t agree with rafflaw says either, but I’d never skip any post of his, nor fail to consider his viewpoints as worthwhile…e.g., I am an old dude, but I can still learn. Hope you get to that point someday.
The fact that this disgusting racist individual Nick Spinelli is a frequent guest on this blog is very unfortunate.
Svoogle – what Nick said is true and it is not racist. It is not a racist thing to say if it is the truth. Nick helps poor people black and white.
Tyger, thank you, but there are good people everywhere. We put some of them in Congress. I donate to candidates, not the party. The Democrats are where they are because of party control. I’ve seen Manchin several times acting like a Senator. Why is he a Democrat? I don’t want McConnell to be like Reid. Do
the country’s business, a good score card will get the votes. Ignore Dem leadership, but talk with the newest people. The control of their big money folks (Soros, Steyner) is hurting them.
I think a group of people who just left congress would be good to go over the tax plan and make suggestions. Not by party, but by those who had experience in how the system works and how to change it. No lobbyists. I’m convinced lobbying started as a good thing, and deteriorated to lessening the work of congress. Your constituents are your lobbyists. Get some stupid stuff out. Get rid of dumb laws and ridiculous spending. No pork! Seriously. Every dime of our money must be discussed in committee and limited debate. Just for one year, no pork.
Everybody says it’s the money you being back that counts.mwell, I have no idea what my Congressman brought back and don’t care. Do his job and be honest. Get rid of the automatic budget increases. Try reducing every item money is spent on by a Dollar.
Start reeling in the process. Too much time on voting for rules to approve rules, and just vote on bills that deserve being brought to the floor.
Basic stuff, not as hard as everybody thinks. Do what companies do. No coffee and rolls at morning meetings. They all have coffee pots, bring one from your office.nthat’s my last bandwagon today!
Pleasant dreams!
What is relevant here is whether the criminal records pops up on computers during the traffic stop.
Tyger, there are cases with eye witnesses, they know who did it. They confess to get execution off the table. Why we do that I don’t know. If you kill someone the price is your life. Not on circumstantial evidence, only eye witnesses. In CA we’ve been giving killers satellite TV, law libraries, good food, showers. They live better than homeless veterans! Oh, and drugs are all over prisons.
Every time I see a motel empty I think “why can’t we use these rooms.” Give homeless vets a room. Let them have a dog. Sentence minor offenders to help, set up a kitchen, teach them how to cook. Or they could do the laundry, not clean sheets everyday, but at least once a week.
A social place to play cards, games, etc. Drug tests required. Volunteers could repaint to get ready. Ask for help from community construction, plumbing, electrical guys. Maybe a doctor would volunteer to visit one day or two a month. Hire vets who need a home and put them in charge, decent pay. I think this would be a good way to use empty buildings that are eyesore.
Kind of like a run down senior center.
If I wasn’t just a week away from 73 I’d try to get something started, but my volunteer days are behind me. I gave a lot of hours to community things, made things to sell for money to help whatever. I’m sure the powers that be will say too many details, need insurance, need approvals. I’ve found it better to do it. Then someone says you didn’t get a permit, but it’s already done.
Sandi, you’re a reflection of the good side of humanity. More good, less bad is needed overall. Instead, things seem to be going the other way.
Tyger Gilbert … though I understand your sentiment vis a vis the death penalty, I’m hesitant to recommend it widely. The whole one innocent executed versus 10 set free thing. It becomes very gray when the convicted is innocent of the specific charge, but otherwise has lead a life of violent crime. Karma may be real.
I have lived in a country where summary execution was the rule post homicide conviction within 30 days. Due to the very low homicide rates there, at the time, I agree it was likely effective as a deterrent to some extent (due to the certainty of it)….however this was the same country whose Marines posed to me the matter, culturally, of the right to kill …e.g., that westerners presume it and debate the means, while his culture didn’t presume the right, but once debated & determined, the means were immaterial. They did have a point.
That said, a death sentence in the USA is not very certain of outcome(s).
Aridog, I recognize the assumed validity of the “one innocent executed versus the ten guilty set free” argument against the death penalty. I’ve often thought it would be interesting to see the stats on the flip side: Of 1000 murderers, how many have escaped or been set free only to commit murder again? Compare that to how many innocent of murder were executed in 1000 convicted of it? The data might reveal that by not executing the murderers, there were many more innocent people killed than the few who were wrongly convicted. Executing a murder guarantees he or she won’t do it again. By not executing, the deaths of innocent people caused by the escapee or released murderer should be blamed on those in society who are against execution.
Your story about living in that other (unidentified) country where execution was quickly carried out tends to add credence to my theory. Add that punishment to other violent crimes, and the incidence of those crimes likely would go down. Execution of a few who were innocent of the crime would be the price society would have to pay in order to have less violent crimes due to fewer criminals in existence. Fewer victims, and more peaceful lives for everyone. Instead, there is greater surveillance, limitations on travel, security scanning, and many more assaults on individual freedom that people simply accept as “necessary”.
Jim N. said …
Heck, a baseball bat would have served, and left the guy alive to stand trial, alive being the more important element.
See my comment at 1:35 PM 23 January, including the link provided. Only a flashlight was used, dude still died, and the officers served time. I knew one of them personally, unfortunately he has passed due to a long fight with cancer. Thumping anyone directly on the head with a blunt object, be it ball bat or baton, can have unintended consequences. It is why the MP’s in my day were trained to use their baton to take a solid swipe up the side of the head, across the ears…not directly on the skull as a bludgeon. A black jack is also a non-lethal tool if used properly on known pressure points, like a shoulder, but not directly on the head. Given many of our US police are forbidden to carry batons or black jacks, they are left with little but lethal force. I don’t know if bear-strength pepper spray (10%+) would be allowed in NJ, but it would be an alternative, as are tasers….though both are of uncertain results. As for a ball bat…that would be construed as illegal and possible implication of intent…e.g., I doubt officers are allowed to carry them. However, I do realize that your suggestion was mostly tongue in cheek.
That said, I’d really like to know about who edited the tape and what was edited out…there are a couple harsh/sharp transitions as presented. Things may not be what they seem as presented. One officer I knew well, also now deceased, was shot in the thigh at point blank range with a .44 Magnum, through a door…he was the door guy who was to enter first after the guy with the door opener got the door opened and stepped aside. This was before the days of everyone-swat geared up. Dude inside didn’t wait, and the ribs of the door likely saved my friend’s life…that and the shattered bullet did not hit his femoral artery. He was back riding his Harley the next day and came over to re-assure me he was all right (I’d called his wife)…news reports being rather unclear on the subject.
Questions of use of lethal force are always a hard to discern. Those who’ve criticized the movie about Chris Kyle don’t get it…every time you shoot you consider your options. The movie makes that clear, even in just the trailers. One thing missing from all the commentary, until today when Robert O’Neil cited it, is that reconnaissance is the primary focus of snipers in the US Military with sniping being a second role in force protection….first and foremost is the job of forward reconnaissance.
My impression watching the video was that the cops were tailing the car, probably for some time, and the car rolled through the stop sign to prevent the cop car from running into them. The cops picked this fight early and so the game proceeded.
Tyger,
Maybe if we hadn’t criminalized everything and weren’t putting people in jail for pot and untaxed cigarettes there would be more room for violent and dangerous criminals.
Yeah, Bailers, governments are criminal themselves in the ways they limit the freedoms of their citizens and make non-violent, victimless behavior into crimes. Doing drugs, or prostitution, for example, used to not be illegal in this country. Alcohol became prohibited, which bankrolled organized crime, and then people got a little smarter and repealed those laws. The Drug War has done the same thing. Disastrous consequences with little positive results. Big drug cartels got rich, tens of thousands are dead, and tens of thousands more are incarcerated and had their lives destroyed. Colorado and Washington are getting the right idea. Tax and regulate drugs just like alcohol and tobacco. Spend some of that tax money on educating people on what a bad idea getting addicted to drugs, alcohol, or tobacco is, and provide medical assistance and rehabilitation to those who need it. But let people choose what they want to smoke, drink, or otherwise put in their body freely. If they rob others to support their habits, or any other aspect of their daily living, lock them up for a period of time, enough to let them get the idea they need to earn an honest living. If they go back to a life of violent crime, execute them. No further problem to society.
And, what’s scarier to me is that your society tolerates violent crimes with such minimal punishment as a few years of incarceration, then lets the criminals loose to do their crimes all over again and again. And they say the budgets for fighting crime is limited, while sending billions in foreign aid to other countries where it never is spent on what it is intended for, and at the same time spending billions more on sending military forces to still other countries to fight in wars the country should never be involved with. I feel like I’m in a hospital for the blind and insane, I’m the only one with eyesight, and the whole asylum is being run by the rest of the inmates.
Not to worry, rafflaw, in the world you live now it will never happen. My logic is that violent crimes like burglary, armed robbery, murder, attempted murder, and similar acts are intentional and meant to harm people. “Oh, I accidentally burglarized that home,” and “I didn’t mean to hold him up at gun point,” are not valid excuses for these crimes. Obviously this does not apply to disobeying the direct orders of a policeman, but could apply to attacking one with a weapon. Statistically, the world would be better off without these types of criminals. No one knows that the death penalty for these crimes would not work, at least better than imprisonment does now, since it has not been tried for them. Even for first degree murder, it is applied unevenly, if at all, and even then it is only after years of delay. Give them a fair trial, let them appeal once, and do it all within three to six months. Then take them out and execute them. I would be willing to be one of the executioners. For free. Less expenses for court costs, less for imprisonment costs, no execution costs. What more could society want? You would get rid of the bad apples by removing them from the barrels. Instead, they remain and spoil lots of good apples too, as it is now.
dryack, yours was the best post I’ve ever seen on this subject.
Darren, I’d like to think you would have handled this situation differently. Heck, a baseball bat would have served, and left the guy alive to stand trial, alive being the more important element.
Wow. The death penalty for robbery and disobeying the police! The death penalty has worked so well in the past, why not use if for all crimes. Scary.
rafflaw – the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony was that the felony got you the death penalty. Ah, for the good old days. 🙂
Gigi, The fundamental problem w/ many, maybe most cop shootings is the lack of fathers in the black community. Only a man can teach a boy how to be a righteous man. When raised by women, many grandmothers, boys and young men have huge chips on their shoulders w/ older men. They think the slightest thing is a HUGE disrespect. When deciding to “buck up” w/ a cop, it can be deadly. I play a game watching sports. I like to guess, by watching a players demeanor, if he had a father in the home. I then research. My batting average is pretty high.
Law Enforcement Officers.
What are LEO’s?
This is why cops are killed. Abuse by LEOs is out of hand.
Tyger Gilbert, California attempted “three strikes, you’re out” which was supposed to get rid of repeat offenders. Not enough prison cells to handle the stampede. I have no idea if it still applies.
I wonder if Sheriff Arraipo has any ideas since he’s the only rational law enforcement official around. I like his requiring work from his prisoners.
If these repeat offenders were given harsher sentences? There are places in every state that need cleaning up. Think Detroit. While serving they should work 8 hours a day on cleaning these messes. Give them the minimum wage, held in trust for when they get out. Years of that, along with completing HS if haven’t already, and learning what they’re best suited for and training them provides opportunity when they leave.
Work with potential employers, give them an incentive, tax breaks, and follow them for a period of time.
The problem is we’ve lost control of the prisons. There are places in CA prisons, reportedly, that the guards won’t go. You would have to hose them out! The better you work, the nicer surroundings.
Veterans would be great as prison guards, they are no nonsense people.
Getting anything done in these bureaucies would be difficult. Punishment with help to improve would be good for society. After a period of years, if no problems and a tax paying citizen, give them back their right to vote.
Sandi, in a more perfect world, one other than where I have been condemned to spend my life, your ideas and ideals about rehabilitating criminals would be the way to go. I think much of current society is trying various versions of them, but without as much success as might be hoped for. In reality, the here and now, most criminals don’t rehabilitate, even with help. Once they get out, they return to committing their crimes. That’s just the kind of animal they are. They have been shaped in their thinking and behaviors early on by the rejections, pressures, and demands of their society and its governments and the people who run them, and they just can’t be reeducated or behavior-modified sufficiently enough to get them to change their spots. From a statistical standpoint, with some exceptions perhaps, that’s the way it is.
What I would disagree with in the “Three Strikes” approach is that confinement is the punishment. The only effective way to stop the repeat criminals is to get rid of them completely and permanently. Drastic, but very effective.