Does it make sense?

[Beiruty]

Police and witnesses offered differing accounts Saturday of a shooting by police that killed an unarmed man and wounded an 11-year-old boy in an East Oak Cliff apartment complex.


http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... 6cbf4.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Hoi Polloi]

It sounds like Erik Scott-Texas style.

He was standing there with his hands in his pockets, had the cops approach him with guns drawn based on their knowledge of the crimes going on in the area, was told to reach for the sky, said he didn't have anything, and was shot and killed. In this case, a nearby child was also struck.

[G.A. Heath]

If we're lucky there's a recording somewhere that will shed light on the situation. People make terrible witnesses due to their own agenda or interest in the outcome, poor position to see/hear what is happening, lack of focus until the event is almost over, ect. The bad thing about this is that an 11 year old boy will probably grow up hating police because he was shot by one.

The article doesn't have enough facts to base a theory on, the fact that the original subject of attention was unarmed might not even come into play because he may have acted in a manner that made the police feel threatened (such as charging at them).

[WildBill]

If we're lucky there's a recording somewhere that will shed light on the situation. People make terrible witnesses due to their own agenda or interest in the outcome, poor position to see/hear what is happening, lack of focus until the event is almost over, ect.

Isn't it interesting that many people expect every crime or police encounter to have a video and/or audio recording to serve as evidence and they view any situation without electronic surveillance to be a cover-up or an illegal or suspicious act?

[G.A. Heath]

If you will note I said "If we're lucky..." I don't expect anything to be recorded but it does help sort things out in a situation like this. Perhaps one of the police vehicles were parked just right with their camera on so that their camera caught the events in question, or maybe that department have has body mics on their officers that recorded the situation, or maybe one of the residents had their video camera or cell phone recording it, or maybe the apartment complex has security cameras. IMHO its always a good idea to act as if you are being recorded because you never know when you are.

[PBratton]

If we're lucky there's a recording somewhere that will shed light on the situation. People make terrible witnesses due to their own agenda or interest in the outcome, poor position to see/hear what is happening, lack of focus until the event is almost over, ect.

Isn't it interesting that many people expect every crime or police encounter to have a video and/or audio recording to serve as evidence and they view any situation without electronic surveillance to be a cover-up or an illegal or suspicious act?

You would be amazed how many cameras there are out in the wild now.

We even have cameras on Tazers, giving a barrels end view of the encounter.

It is always good to have the video, it keeps both sides honest. Heck, look at what it's done for Football...

[WildBill]

If we're lucky there's a recording somewhere that will shed light on the situation. People make terrible witnesses due to their own agenda or interest in the outcome, poor position to see/hear what is happening, lack of focus until the event is almost over, ect.

Isn't it interesting that many people expect every crime or police encounter to have a video and/or audio recording to serve as evidence and they view any situation without electronic surveillance to be a cover-up or an illegal or suspicious act?

You would be amazed how many cameras there are out in the wild now.

We even have cameras on Tazers, giving a barrels end view of the encounter.

It is always good to have the video, it keeps both sides honest. Heck, look at what it's done for Football...

Not to mention camera and video on cell phones.

[puma guy]

We should wait for all the facts before drawing any conclusions, however, I must question why officers would be walking around with weapons drawn based on no obviuos information of a crime actively being commited. The only thing alluded to in the article is activity you could expect many apartments in any given city. Sort of your standard fare for a "Cops" episode. It will be nice to learn what "move" the kid made.

[Beiruty]

More info.

From the video, it looks the deceased is a gang banger.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/Family-o ... 76108.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ddurkof]

Checking Tobias Arthur Mackey on Publicdata reveals, if it is the same person, several weapons, resisting arrest and assaultive offenses as well as a local warrant for Mr. Mackey's arrest.

Again, if this is the same person, it appears that he may have had a propensity for violence and resisting arrest.

Puma, there are some places that you are going to have your gun out no matter what the call is. Is it PC? No, but there is a survival aspect in some "war zones."

[puma guy]

Checking Tobias Arthur Mackey on Publicdata reveals, if it is the same person, several weapons, resisting arrest and assaultive offenses as well as a local warrant for Mr. Mackey's arrest.

Again, if this is the same person, it appears that he may have had a propensity for violence and resisting arrest.

Puma, there are some places that you are going to have your gun out no matter what the call is. Is it PC? No, but there is a survival aspect in some "war zones."

This and the other information regarding the victim are after the fact. We don't know what he did to provoke the actions taken by the PO. His history in no cause for shooting him. My point was based on the information included on the artlicle. No active known criminal activity. Information may be brought forth that something was going on. But what you're telling me that PO's walk around apartment complexes with weapons drawn? Is that from experience or supposition? That's far different than the many PO's I knew in the 60-80's. They were dealing with some furry critter's back then; including some very militant activist groups.

[rbwhatever1]

Update from a 2010 shooting post.

DALLAS — Former Dallas police Officer Matthew Tate was on the stand all morning Wednesday, mostly trying to justify why he shot an unarmed man who had not committed a crime. Tate said he saw Tobias Mackey walk around the corner at an apartment complex in South Dallas in October of 2010.

"I thought he was preparing to harm us." "I thought, 'Something isn't right. What could be the issue? Why does he look scared?'" Tate said. Then, he said it appeared Mackey was reaching for his waistband... and a weapon. "[...]Because of a result of his actions, I thought my life was in danger," Tate said. "I used deadly force."

In testimony on Tuesday, Sgt. Kenneth Chapin, who was standing next to Tate, said Mackey posed no threat.

Mackey's mother sued the city, who offered her a settlement worth hundreds of thousands of dollars after they took another look at the case. She turned them down and went to the U.S. Justice Department, which opened a civil rights case. That trial began Tuesday, and is expected to last the rest of the week. The family is asking for more than $5 million in their federal civil rights violation case against the City of Dallas and Matthew Tate.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/Other-of ... 92041.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/Emotions ... 22161.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[jmra]

Update from a 2010 shooting post.

DALLAS — Former Dallas police Officer Matthew Tate was on the stand all morning Wednesday, mostly trying to justify why he shot an unarmed man who had not committed a crime. Tate said he saw Tobias Mackey walk around the corner at an apartment complex in South Dallas in October of 2010.

"I thought he was preparing to harm us." "I thought, 'Something isn't right. What could be the issue? Why does he look scared?'" Tate said. Then, he said it appeared Mackey was reaching for his waistband... and a weapon. "[...]Because of a result of his actions, I thought my life was in danger," Tate said. "I used deadly force."

In testimony on Tuesday, Sgt. Kenneth Chapin, who was standing next to Tate, said Mackey posed no threat.

Mackey's mother sued the city, who offered her a settlement worth hundreds of thousands of dollars after they took another look at the case. She turned them down and went to the U.S. Justice Department, which opened a civil rights case. That trial began Tuesday, and is expected to last the rest of the week. The family is asking for more than $5 million in their federal civil rights violation case against the City of Dallas and Matthew Tate.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/Other-of ... 92041.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/Emotions ... 22161.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Great, the tax payers bear the burden again. And still nothing changes.

[talltex]

[Great, the tax payers bear the burden again. And still nothing changes.

And it's taken 4 years to get it to a jury ?? The city has been paying out legal fees during all that time also. From the limited info in the 4 year old news stories, it appears the only issue in question is, "was it reasonable that the officer felt in fear of his life". The man killed was not armed, and no one has claimed to have "thought they saw a gun in his hand"...the officer said he thought " he was making a move" and shot him four times. The Sergeant who was on the scene next to the officer shooting testified "Mackey posed no threat." That sounds like a death knell for the officer's "in reasonable fear of my life" defense case.

[mamabearCali]

So how do we cultivate a higher degree of respect for human life within our officers? Most are great, but even a few who are willing to take human life so easily is unacceptable. Part of being given higher status in society is because you are assuming more risk. If that risk is not acceptable then I would suggest a different job. A person pulling up their pants should not fear being shot to death by a LEO.

Criminals are always going to be criminals. They will never respect human life. That does not follow that even a few of our law enforcement should adopt a similar mentality.