Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 2/3/2006 6:32:16 PM EDT
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stcharles/story/31C0F0DCE07E2E508625710A001E44DB?OpenDocument­

Bad Situation
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 10:46:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By whofan:

Deputy Charged is Shooting





Grammar can be your friend, sir. Or is this ebonics on honor of Black History Month????????
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 10:58:33 AM EDT
^ Not going to go there......
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 11:10:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 11:10:54 AM EDT by Chairborne]
Charged with shooting?
Charged in shooting?

Who knows, well here is the link (hot this time so it actually works).

www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stcharles/story/31C0F0DCE07E2E508625710A001E44DB?OpenDocument­

And the article:



Deputy is charged in killings
By Tim Bryant
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Thursday, Feb. 02 2006

TROY

A Lincoln County sheriff's deputy acted recklessly when he fired shots through
a pickup's rear window and killed two men last fall, authorities said Thursday
after filing felony charges against the officer.

Nicholas Forler, 26, of Troy, is charged with two counts of involuntary
manslaughter. Accompanied by his lawyer, Joe McCulloch, Forler surrendered to
authorities and was released after posting $30,000 bail. Involuntary
manslaughter carries a maximum sentence of seven years in prison.

After a brief chase that ended in a driveway, Forler shot Tyler Teasley, 22, of
Silex, and Michael Brown, 23, of Troy, on the night of Oct. 23 as they sat in
Teasley's extended-cab pickup. Both men died of head wounds.

Teasley's father, Brent Teasley, said Forler should have been charged with a
more serious crime.

"Obviously, whenever you shoot somebody in the back of the head, it's
first-degree murder," Teasley said.

Lincoln County Sheriff Dan Torres, who dismissed Forler after the charges were
filed, said that before the shooting, the deputy had been "a very good
employee." Forler had been a deputy for three years.

"He was an extraordinarily good detective," Torres said, adding that Forler had
been promoted to supervisor of a road patrol.
Missouri Highway Patrol Sgt. J. Sam Steward said in a court document that the
shooting happened after Forler tried to stop Teasley's truck for speeding. The
Highway Patrol investigated the shooting. After the chase, the truck stopped in
a driveway just off Highway 47, a short distance west of Troy. Forler got out
of his patrol car, which he had stopped behind the pickup, and stood between
the vehicles.

Steward gave this account:

As the truck began to roll slowly backward, Forler shouted for it to stop, then
"recklessly fired" a shot from his .40-caliber Glock pistol at the driver's
side of the truck's tinted rear window. He shouted a second time, then fired
again. Forler then moved out of the way of the truck, which rolled into the
front of the deputy's patrol car.

Brown had been seated behind Teasley, the driver. The deaths outraged the men's
family and friends, who have demonstrated regularly outside the sheriff's
office.

Torres said Thursday that authorities owed the families and Forler a "complete
and thorough investigation in order to determine all the facts." The sheriff
declined to discuss the shooting in detail because of what he said were pending
civil suits filed by the families against his department.

Brown's mother, Donna Brown, said she preferred more serious charges against
Forler but was satisfied with involuntary manslaughter.

Misty Brown, 22, a cousin who had identified Brown's body for authorities,
said: "I'd like the cop to know that's the last image in my head of my cousin
and it's his fault. I'd like to eventually sit down and talk to him face to
face - see if he has any remorse."

Janice Spires, an aunt of Brown's, said her family is "terribly disappointed"
and "shocked" with the decision to charge Forler with manslaughter instead of a
more serious crime.

"Our family has been in agony for months, and we feel this is a slap in the
face," Spires added.

Teasley and Brown had been among six people - three men and three women - in
the truck. Two of the women have said the deputy fired into the truck without
warning. They added that the truck rolled backward because Teasley had left the
vehicle out of gear.

One of the women said the six friends were "freaking out" over being pulled
over because they had alcohol in the car. They were celebrating the 18th
birthday of the third woman in the vehicle.

Attorney General Jay Nixon's office filed the charges in Lincoln County Circuit
Court. Nixon's office took over the case after the county prosecutor, John
Richards, recused himself from the matter.


Link Posted: 2/4/2006 11:59:48 AM EDT
I guess they should have just stopped?!?!?!

Travis
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:11:50 PM EDT
Don't run from the Po-Po.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:15:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Don't run from the Po-Po.





EXACTLY!!!

Travis
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:18:35 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:26:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Don't run from the Po-Po..............



................................it pisses them off and gives them the justification they need to execute you.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:29:11 PM EDT
Does running from the po-leese warrant a death sentance for driver and passengers alike?
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:29:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 12:29:44 PM EDT by TheKill]
But, the truck was coming RIGHT AT HIM!!!

This is why the practice of shooting at people in vehicles who are doing nothing but trying to get away is screwed up. It is human nature to take a mile when given an inch. So we say....well, it is OK to shoot this guy because he drove his car toward me when he tried to flee, and the car is a deadly weapon!!! Never mind the fact that it's generally not real hard to get out of the path of a car when it is just starting to move. Or that the person can be moving for a number of different reasons. It has become precadent that vehicle = deadly weapon + moving toward LEO = use lethal force. Like everything else, this is a concept that sooner or later someone will abuse, as in this case.

If we are indeed innocent until proven guilty, and we indeed enjoy protection from various infringements via the Constitution (both are debatable, unfortunately), then affected LE policies should err on the side of the citizen, not the LEO.

Oh yeah...for the guys that will throw out various SC decisions........the SC has fucked up a lot of issues, including coining the term "officer safety". It's one of the many incremental things that led to this officer thinking he could shoot these people.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:32:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 12:33:10 PM EDT by yekimak]

Originally Posted By TheKill:
But, the truck was coming RIGHT AT HIM!!!

This is why the practice of shooting at people in vehicles who are doing nothing but trying to get away is screwed up. It is human nature to take a mile when given an inch. So we say....well, it is OK to shoot this guy because he drove his car toward me when he tried to flee, and the car is a deadly weapon!!! Never mind the fact that it's generally not real hard to get out of the path of a car when it is just starting to move. Or that the person can be moving for a number of different reasons. It has become precadent that vehicle = deadly weapon + moving toward LEO = use lethal force. Like everything else, this is a concept that sooner or later someone will abuse, as in this case.

If we are indeed innocent until proven guilty, and we indeed enjoy protection from various infringements via the Constitution (both are debatable, unfortunately), then affected LE policies should err on the side of the citizen, not the LEO.

Oh yeah...for the guys that will throw out various SC decisions........the SC has fucked up a lot of issues, including coining the term "officer safety". It's one of the many incremental things that led to this officer thinking he could shoot these people.



Come on, we all know that the life of a police officer is worth ten times that of a civilian. They are more important than the bulk of society and their safety cannot be mitigated, even if it means lead induced incapacitation of every suspect.

Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:36:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TravisJ1:
I guess they should have just stopped?!?!?!

Travis


Nope. Thats too simple. Gotta run then blaim everything that happens after that on the police and then sue the taxpayers. Personal responsibility is long dead.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:37:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By yekimak:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Don't run from the Po-Po..............



................................it pisses them off and gives them the justification they need to execute you.



...EXACTLY.....only the guilty RUN!.....at least that's what the coppers think......
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:37:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 12:39:39 PM EDT by AR15fan]

Originally Posted By DnPRK:
Does running from the po-leese warrant a death sentance for driver and passengers alike?



Better driver and passengers than uninvolved motorists and pedestrians. Pursuits present a continueing risk to everyone else on the roadway (and sidewalks). State laws should be amended to reflect that.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:39:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By TravisJ1:
I guess they should have just stopped?!?!?!

Travis


Nope. Thats too simple. Gotta run then blaim everything that happens after that on the police and then sue the taxpayers. Personal responsibility is long dead.



Who is at fault when everyone fucks up? Yes, they should have stopped, but they should also be alive now. Nothing went right here.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:41:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By TravisJ1:
I guess they should have just stopped?!?!?!

Travis


Nope. Thats too simple. Gotta run then blaim everything that happens after that on the police and then sue the taxpayers. Personal responsibility is long dead.



+100.

Even better the officer should have just "taken the hit" from the truck....afterall his life isn't worth anymore than anyone else....

ps. 'course standing bet vehicles is a poor tactical decision......


This blows all around.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:41:57 PM EDT
If i read this right, the people shot were in the back of the cab, not the driver
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:42:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By yekimak:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By TravisJ1:
I guess they should have just stopped?!?!?!

Travis


Nope. Thats too simple. Gotta run then blaim everything that happens after that on the police and then sue the taxpayers. Personal responsibility is long dead.



Who is at fault when everyone fucks up?



Which is why I dont care at all about any of them. Boo hoo, two punks are dead and a poorly trained excitable cop's life is ruined. Oh well, I guess I'll have some pizza.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:44:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mcantu:
If i read this right, the people shot were in the back of the cab, not the driver


The driver and the person seated directly behind the driver. (Think extended cab truck with limo tint on the rear window).
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:46:01 PM EDT
Simular story:

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=433400

See a trend. you run from the police in a vehcie, then try to run them over, you might get dead.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:46:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By easy610:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By TravisJ1:
I guess they should have just stopped?!?!?!

Travis


Nope. Thats too simple. Gotta run then blaim everything that happens after that on the police and then sue the taxpayers. Personal responsibility is long dead.



+100.

Even better the officer should have just "taken the hit" from the truck....afterall his life isn't worth anymore than anyone else....

ps. 'course standing bet vehicles is a poor tactical decision......


This blows all around.


I don't think it's in the Missouri POST cirriculum to stand between the vehicles, EVER. In fact, I recall being trained to avoid that situation whenever possible.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:47:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
Simular story:

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=433400

See a trend. you run from the police in a vehcie, then try to run them over, you might get dead.


How do you know they tried to run him over? Maybe the emergency brake failed. There isn't enough information here to go on.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:48:17 PM EDT
This won't last long.


IBTL
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:51:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 12:54:41 PM EDT by mcantu]
The Houston PD has rules saying that an officer cannot shoot at a vehicle that is moving towards him if he could just step out of the way. The article says the truck was 'slowly rolling' and the officer had no problem stepping out of the way
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:52:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DnPRK:
Does running from the po-leese warrant a death sentance for driver and passengers alike?


When they started traveling towards the officer, they were no longer running. I'm often critical of the actions of many cops, but I don't see how this could be considered anything but the correct response by the officer.z
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:52:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
Simular story:

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=433400

See a trend. you run from the police in a vehcie, then try to run them over, you might get dead.


How do you know they tried to run him over? Maybe the emergency brake failed. There isn't enough information here to go on.



I hope I never get pulled over on an incline, I'd be screwed. I guess I'd better tighten them brake cables.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:53:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mcantu:
The Houston PD has rules saying that an officer cannot shoot at a that is moving towards him if he could just step out of the way. The article says the truck was 'slowly rolling.'



OMG, sounds like an outbreak of common sense occured!
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:53:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By yekimak:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By TravisJ1:
I guess they should have just stopped?!?!?!

Travis


Nope. Thats too simple. Gotta run then blaim everything that happens after that on the police and then sue the taxpayers. Personal responsibility is long dead.



Who is at fault when everyone fucks up?



Which is why I dont care at all about any of them. Boo hoo, two punks are dead and a poorly trained excitable cop's life is ruined. Oh well, I guess I'll have some pizza.



Dude, I generally like what you have to say, but you are out of your lane in calling the dead punks. The driver sounds like a fuckup, but the passenger didn't break any laws and we have no reason to believe he was a punk, other than the company he kept. Even so, being a punk does not warrant death.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 12:56:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By yekimak:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By TravisJ1:
I guess they should have just stopped?!?!?!

Travis


Nope. Thats too simple. Gotta run then blaim everything that happens after that on the police and then sue the taxpayers. Personal responsibility is long dead.



Who is at fault when everyone fucks up?



Which is why I dont care at all about any of them. Boo hoo, two punks are dead and a poorly trained excitable cop's life is ruined. Oh well, I guess I'll have some pizza.



Dude, I generally like what you have to say, but you are out of your lane in calling the dead punks. The driver sounds like a fuckup, but the passenger didn't break any laws and we have no reason to believe he was a punk, other than the company he kept. Even so, being a punk does not warrant death.


IBT"laydownwithdogsdefense"
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 1:41:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By easy610:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By TravisJ1:
I guess they should have just stopped?!?!?!

Travis


Nope. Thats too simple. Gotta run then blaim everything that happens after that on the police and then sue the taxpayers. Personal responsibility is long dead.



+100.

Even better the officer should have just "taken the hit" from the truck....afterall his life isn't worth anymore than anyone else....

ps. 'course standing bet vehicles is a poor tactical decision......


This blows all around.


I don't think it's in the Missouri POST cirriculum to stand between the vehicles, EVER. In fact, I recall being trained to avoid that situation whenever possible.



Yeah....that might be his downfall in court.....
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 1:58:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 1:59:34 PM EDT by pv74]

Originally Posted By zoom:

Originally Posted By DnPRK:
Does running from the po-leese warrant a death sentance for driver and passengers alike?


When they started traveling towards the officer, they were no longer running. I'm often critical of the actions of many cops, but I don't see how this could be considered anything but the correct response by the officer.z



Oh I sure do...

Driver had his foot on the brake and the truck in Neutral... While looking for his vehicle registration, his foot slips and the truck rolls.

Officer asshat, who could have stepped out of the way, shoots...driver is now dead

Vehicle continues to roll, dickhead continues to shoot...now the asshole has killed a passenger...

Premeditated murder? Probably not....just a VERY BAD over-reaction...

Manslaughter? Hell yes it is...

This guys lawyer should just give him a large tub of anal lubricant... He's gonna need it where he's going.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 8:53:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DnPRK:
Does running from the po-leese warrant a death sentance for driver and passengers alike?





Yes, stupid people need to be thinned from the herd, IMO.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 8:59:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/5/2006 9:00:06 AM EDT by billclo]

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By DnPRK:
Does running from the po-leese warrant a death sentance for driver and passengers alike?





Yes, stupid people need to be thinned from the herd, IMO.



Remember that next time you ride with a friend in a vehicle. If he, for whatever reason, decides to do something stupid and he is the one controlling the vehicle, you deserve to be thinned too, according to your logic.

Riding with a guy you know is a thug is one thing, and you shouldn't be associating with him. Say your friend who you know has no record/is a whitebread kinda guy is driving and just wigs out for whatever reason? Road rage?
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 9:00:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By billclo:

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By DnPRK:
Does running from the po-leese warrant a death sentance for driver and passengers alike?





Yes, stupid people need to be thinned from the herd, IMO.



Remember that next time you ride with a friend in a vehicle. If he, for whatever reason decides to do something stupid, and he is the one controlling the vehicle, you deserve to be thinned too.

Riding with a guy you know is a thug is one thing, and you shouldn't be associating with him. Say your friend who you know has no record/is a whitebread kinda guy is driving and just wigs out for whatever reason? Road rage?



Reach over, cut the ignition, jam the transimission, hit the brakes. You can do something. If you do nothing you are along for the ride.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 9:05:31 AM EDT
If the officer had shot a 6 month old baby situated behind the driver because he could not see thru the windows would people defend the officer then? Know what you are aiming at BEFORE you pull the trigger. If the engine revved up and the truck was put in reverse I can see shooting IF I can see what I am shooting at. If it rolled, it won't be good for the cop.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 9:07:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fxntime:
If the officer had shot a 6 month old baby situated behind the driver because he could not see thru the windows would people defend the officer then? Know what you are aiming at BEFORE you pull the trigger. If the engine revved up and the truck was put in reverse I can see shooting IF I can see what I am shooting at. If it rolled, it won't be good for the cop.



Would be very sad and tragic. But it was the driver who is running from the cops who put the baby in jeopardy, not the cop.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 9:08:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Dude, I generally like what you have to say, but you are out of your lane in calling the dead punks. The driver sounds like a fuckup, but the passenger didn't break any laws and we have no reason to believe he was a punk, other than the company he kept. Even so, being a punk does not warrant death.



We know nothing of these men except that they thought MIP laws did not apply to them, the driver thought it was okay to run from the police and he either tried to back over the cop or was incapable of safey operating and maintaning his vehicle.

That article says they ran because they had booze in the car. What was the original reason for the attempted car stop?
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 9:09:16 AM EDT
Again, another demonstration of the double standard that police and prosecutors live by. If you parked behind a vechicle and it started rolling back I think I would get out of the way. What was a officer who had just been in a chase doing, standing alone behind a truck full of ocupants? Why did he have his weapon drawn? Why didn't he wait for back-up? Why did he shoot two people dead? I wasn't there to see what really happened but, if he's is being charged it means there is probable cause to find him guilty of murder not manslaugter. The old double standard at it's best. The very thing that makes a lot of people lose respect for PO PO .
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 9:11:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By johnthreesixteen:
Again, another demonstration of the double standard that police and prosecutors live by. If you parked behind a vechicle and it started rolling back I think I would get out of the way. What was a officer who had just been in a chase doing, standing alone behind a truck full of ocupants? Why did he have his weapon drawn? Why didn't he wait for back-up? Why did he shoot two people dead? I wasn't there to see what really happened but, if he's is being charged it means there is probable cause to find him guilty of murder not manslaugter. The old double standard at it's best. The very thing that makes a lot of people lose respect for PO PO .




Not if you are already anti-LEO.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 9:23:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:

Originally Posted By billclo:

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By DnPRK:
Does running from the po-leese warrant a death sentance for driver and passengers alike?





Yes, stupid people need to be thinned from the herd, IMO.



Remember that next time you ride with a friend in a vehicle. If he, for whatever reason decides to do something stupid, and he is the one controlling the vehicle, you deserve to be thinned too.

Riding with a guy you know is a thug is one thing, and you shouldn't be associating with him. Say your friend who you know has no record/is a whitebread kinda guy is driving and just wigs out for whatever reason? Road rage?



Reach over, cut the ignition, jam the transimission, hit the brakes. You can do something. If you do nothing you are along for the ride.



True enough. I was just responding to the sentiment that because you're a passenger in a vehicle, and the driver does something stupid, that you deserve to be thinned from the herd. For all we know, a passenger could have been trying to stop the driver from backing up. Because of the tinted window, we don't know for sure. The deputy should have just moved out of the way if the vehicle was moving that slowly.

I believe that if most of us non-LEOs were in the same position, we would be screwed because we didn't attempt to get out of the way.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 9:26:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:

Originally Posted By fxntime:
If the officer had shot a 6 month old baby situated behind the driver because he could not see thru the windows would people defend the officer then? Know what you are aiming at BEFORE you pull the trigger. If the engine revved up and the truck was put in reverse I can see shooting IF I can see what I am shooting at. If it rolled, it won't be good for the cop.



Would be very sad and tragic. But it was the driver who is running from the cops who put the baby in jeopardy, not the cop.



Very true, right up to the point of the officer shooting BLIND into the vehicle tho. They should not have ran. They should not have been drinking. They should have stopped immediately. But if they did finally pull over and the truck merely rolled [note: thats why I said what I did in the original reply] backwards that does not constitute a good shoot and killing a passenger is criminal unless they are attempting to help the driver or constitute a threat to the officer.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 9:28:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By billclo:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:

Originally Posted By billclo:

Originally Posted By BobCole:
Originally Posted By DnPRK:
Does running from the po-leese warrant a death sentance for driver and passengers alike?





Yes, stupid people need to be thinned from the herd, IMO.



Remember that next time you ride with a friend in a vehicle. If he, for whatever reason decides to do something stupid, and he is the one controlling the vehicle, you deserve to be thinned too.

Riding with a guy you know is a thug is one thing, and you shouldn't be associating with him. Say your friend who you know has no record/is a whitebread kinda guy is driving and just wigs out for whatever reason? Road rage?



Reach over, cut the ignition, jam the transimission, hit the brakes. You can do something. If you do nothing you are along for the ride.



True enough. I was just responding to the sentiment that because you're a passenger in a vehicle, and the driver does something stupid, that you deserve to be thinned from the herd. For all we know, a passenger could have been trying to stop the driver from backing up. Because of the tinted window, we don't know for sure. The deputy should have just moved out of the way if the vehicle was moving that slowly.

I believe that if most of us non-LEOs were in the same position, we would be screwed because we didn't attempt to get out of the way.[/quote]

Yep. Because it's not your job to chase down drunks who are running from the police.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 2:06:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Dude, I generally like what you have to say, but you are out of your lane in calling the dead punks. The driver sounds like a fuckup, but the passenger didn't break any laws and we have no reason to believe he was a punk, other than the company he kept. Even so, being a punk does not warrant death.



We know nothing of these men except that they thought MIP laws did not apply to them, the driver thought it was okay to run from the police and he either tried to back over the cop or was incapable of safey operating and maintaning his vehicle.

That article says they ran because they had booze in the car. What was the original reason for the attempted car stop?



We know that the officer can follow three of the four rules of firearms safety, AT MOST.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 2:12:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/5/2006 2:16:23 PM EDT by dport]

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Dude, I generally like what you have to say, but you are out of your lane in calling the dead punks. The driver sounds like a fuckup, but the passenger didn't break any laws and we have no reason to believe he was a punk, other than the company he kept. Even so, being a punk does not warrant death.



We know nothing of these men except that they thought MIP laws did not apply to them, the driver thought it was okay to run from the police and he either tried to back over the cop or was incapable of safey operating and maintaning his vehicle.

That article says they ran because they had booze in the car. What was the original reason for the attempted car stop?


We don't know they tried to back over the cop. Nice try at spin, but it rings hollow. Unless you have some proof they tried to back over the cop vice the truck rolling backwards due to any number of factors? I'd like to see it. So you're just speculating, in a manner favorable to the officer, just like the rest of us.

Again with the LEO crowd it's "wait for the facts, unless we're doing the speculating."

ETA: Here is something that is not speculation. The officer put himself in a tactically disadvantageous position. You don't get directly behind or infront of a vehicle if you can help it; the reasons are numerous and obvious. You also approach a vehicle from the blind spot behind the driver whenever possible. This officer didn't do that.

Here is something else; MIP and running from a police officer are not offenses that carry the death penalty. The only way you can justify lethal force is if they intentionally tried to run the police officer over, and the evidence that has been release as of yet, does not support either side of that position.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 2:13:17 PM EDT
IBTL

Link Posted: 2/5/2006 2:19:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/5/2006 6:16:38 PM EDT by geerhed]
Edit for post 666:
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 2:22:08 PM EDT

This answers the question about what they were originally stopped for:



Missouri Highway Patrol Sgt. J. Sam Steward said in a court document that the
shooting happened after Forler tried to stop Teasley's truck for speeding.


This gives me some comfort. I trust the MHP. I find them to be an incredibly professional agency, as a whole:


The Highway Patrol investigated the shooting.


This is extremely interesting and probably why he was charged. He had time to issue a warning, fire a shot, issue another warning, fire another shot, and then get out of the way. Which begs the question, why not just step out of the way in the first place?

As the truck began to roll slowly backward, Forler shouted for it to stop, then
"recklessly fired" a shot from his .40-caliber Glock pistol at the driver's
side of the truck's tinted rear window. He shouted a second time, then fired
again. Forler then moved out of the way of the truck, which rolled into the
front of the deputy's patrol car.

Link Posted: 2/5/2006 2:27:43 PM EDT
Look, the driver getting shot is his fault. If he had been the only one shot it would have been darwinism. But a passenger was shot too, because the officer was negligent. If he had done a couple of things right, the passenger might have lived. That is criminal, IMHO.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 6:57:14 PM EDT
From the description in the article, it doesn't sound like the vehicle was in reverse gear.
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 9:52:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By whofan:

Deputy Charged is Shooting





Grammar can be your friend, sir. Or is this ebonics on honor of Black History Month????????



It is what I would call typo.
Top Top