Now see.. THAT is police brutality. He moved a little too quickly while going for the license, so I could understand the officer perhaps drawing his weapon. But firing before actually SEEING a weapon is bullspit. This cop needs to spend time in jail.
What I found particularly disturbing was that at least one of the shots that was fired came after the "suspect" had his hands up over his head. Also: the first shot fired might have been in the "suspect's" back.
My take on this is that it is the triumph of the dash cam. Were it not for the dash cam this story would very likely have had a different outcome. As it is, the officer has been fired and also charged with felony assault, a charge that has a possibility of a 20 year sentence. A vest cam would have been even more enlightening but the dash cam was enough to capture virtually all of the shooting, the behavior and dialogue of the "suspect" and the officer.
My other feelings (after having seen the video several times) is that this law enforcement officer has either been poorly trained (and I mean really, really poorly trained) or he is an idiot or both.
Here is a tactical and legal analysis from Andrew Bacca at
LegalInsurrection:
It’s important to remember that reasonable errors are allowed under the law of self-defense. The question is whether Groubert’s conduct was that of a reasonable and prudent person under the same or similar circumstances, possessing the same or similar capabilities, training, and knowledge.
(For example, the situation would be an entirely different one if Groubert had pulled Edward over on a felony warrant stating Edward was armed and dangerous. That is not, of course, the case here, as Edward was pulled over for a seatbelt violation.)
On the other hand, if Groubert’s training or experience reinforced in his mind that motions of the type and speed made by Edward are to be interpreted as a suspect reaching for a weapon, that would obviously contribute the the reasonableness of Groubert’s conduct.
An important factor that may help defense counsel Giese spin a favorable narrative for the jury is the swiftness with which Edward turned back into his vehicle–some might say lunged back into the vehicle. Doing so is not, of course, a crime, especially when it appears it was in direct response to Groubert’s demand for identification. Nevertheless, it seems very much identical to the motion a dangerous suspect would make if reaching for a weapon.
Also favorable to Groubert, I think, is his demeanor immediately before and after the shooting, in which he demonstrated no unusually aggressive conduct or apparent malice. It was, to all appearances, a routine traffic stop until Groubert perceived—reasonably or not, the jury will decide—Edward lunging back into his vehicle for a weapon.
I also believe that this is an outlier, that this is not typical of law enforcement either locally or nationally. However, I do believe that law enforcement has ALWAYS attracted a certain percentage of people who have an axe to grind from an inferiority-complex mindset. I can't tell you the number of law enforcement people I have run into who are inordinately abusive and are also physically short in stature...connection? Yeah, I think so. That's one example that's kind of easy to spot and from which a connection can be drawn. That is not to say that all short law enforcement officers have an attitude problem, that would be untrue and unfair. But a lot do. Again, just one example that I can easily point to.
But I don't think that this is the norm. Not by any stretch of the imagination. This particular guy is just plain stupid and/or poorly trained.
