Terence Crutcher

[Ibanez]

From what I've read, they said he had a criminal record.  Carrying a concealed weapon....in 1996.  Twenty years ago.  He was 20.  Also, they made sure to note he had some traffic violations...some as recent as....wait for it...2005. Really?  Bring up traffic stops from 11 years ago.

SMFH.

Man, I'm in trouble if they ever find out about my failure to yield in 2011.


Seriously though, days like this are why I avoid Facebook. My wife can't and is always trying to show me the posts the stupid, mouth-breathing, racist trolls roll out at times like this. Personally I'd rather have a hot poker shoved up my chocolate starfish than be exposed to that intellectual diarrhea.

[swake]

Man, I'm in trouble if they ever find out about my failure to yield in 2011.


Seriously though, days like this are why I avoid Facebook. My wife can't and is always trying to show me the posts the stupid, mouth-breathing, racist trolls roll out at times like this. Personally I'd rather have a hot poker shoved up my chocolate starfish than be exposed to that intellectual diarrhea.

The Tulsa World comments are downright depressing.

[Ibanez]

The Tulsa World comments are downright depressing.

[Conan71]

Man, I'm in trouble if they ever find out about my failure to yield in 2011.


Seriously though, days like this are why I avoid Facebook. My wife can't and is always trying to show me the posts the stupid, mouth-breathing, racist trolls roll out at times like this. Personally I'd rather have a hot poker shoved up my chocolate starfish than be exposed to that intellectual diarrhea.

Same with the Eric Harris case, talking about how Robert Bates had done society a favor by taking out a felon.

It's as if these people don't have a clue that due process applies to everyone, even people with a criminal past.

[swake]

Same with the Eric Harris case, talking about how Robert Bates had done society a favor by taking out a felon.

It's as if these people don't have a clue that due process applies to everyone, even people with a criminal past.

The World said his only criminal record was possession of an illegal gun in the mid 90s and traffic violations more than 10 years ago. Not much of a record and nothing recent.

[Conan71]

The World said his only criminal record was possession of an illegal gun in the mid 90s and traffic violations more than 10 years ago. Not much of a record and nothing recent.

I was actually referring to Harris' criminal past.  I was of the same impression on Crutcher's past as you.

[Ed W]

The Tulsa World comments are downright depressing.

Rule of thumb: NEVER read the comments after aNY news story.

[Vashta Nerada]

I think the national media is expecting us to start rioting
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-tulsa-fatal-police-shooting-20160918-snap-story.html
but we've been there, done it... and were better than that.

My instincts lean towards an accidental discharge they just dont want to own up to.

The tragedy isnt so much a man being killed out of negligence, but the fact that every damn one of them conspired to lie about it.
Having all accountability coached out of them has resulted in too many cops these days having their finger on the trigger -- literally and figuratively.

[cannon_fodder]

Any criminal history is irrelevant as the officers didn't know about it when responding. Their reactions were not based on any such knowledge.  No reason to be nervous around a stalled motorist unless you had knowledge that he was likely to cause trouble.


A predominant view appears to be:  he didn't comply with orders, what do you expect?

That's sad for several reasons. First, we have no idea what orders they may be talking about.  Second, the video doesn't support the contention that he presented an imminent threat justifying the use of deadly force. And most troubling, it represents the attitude that you will do what the government tells you at all times or you should rightfully expect to be executed.

Remember when we rebelled with the greatest empire on earth because they raised taxes on tea? We have regressed to the point now that shooting a citizen in need of assistance is acceptable to many people if they fail to obey unspecified government orders. That's ugly, either the person is utterly ignorant of our founding ideals or because it implicitly support the racist narrative that I don't want to believe (not that police are intentionally killing black people, but rather than many people don't take it seriously because it "isn't me or mine").

Give me compliance, or give me death! #smallgovernment #protectandserve

I'm not making a full judgment on this matter, but rather the perception that is being expressed. On the matter at hand, my current theory is that the female officer was scared of dealing with an angry big black man and so she drew her gun (lets face it, big black guys are more intimidating to many people). The other officer sees a smaller female officer confronting a large black man and runs in for backup, not really clear on whats going on.  For whatever reason (I'm assuming because the guy isn't complying with whatever request they are making) the backup officer believes he needs to deploy his taser and does so. This appears to startle the female officer, so she fires one shot and jumps to the side nervously. 

It looks to me like she was nervous/scared, got startled, and accidentally shot the guy to death. That's my best guess. If she intended to execute him she could have done it before more cameras were on the scene.  If she intended to shoot him because she perceived a threat, Officers are trained to fire more than one shot to eliminate the threat. And, generally speaking, when an Officer fires on a suspect they don't shy away as she appears to.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Any criminal history is irrelevant as the officers didn't know about it when responding. Their reactions were not based on any such knowledge.  No reason to be nervous around a stalled motorist unless you had knowledge that he was likely to cause trouble.


A predominant view appears to be:  he didn't comply with orders, what do you expect?

That's sad for several reasons. First, we have no idea what orders they may be talking about.  Second, the video doesn't support the contention that he presented an imminent threat justifying the use of deadly force. And most troubling, it represents the attitude that you will do what the government tells you at all times or you should rightfully expect to be executed.

Remember when we rebelled with the greatest empire on earth because they raised taxes on tea? We have regressed to the point now that shooting a citizen in need of assistance is acceptable to many people if they fail to obey unspecified government orders. That's ugly, either the person is utterly ignorant of our founding ideals or because it implicitly support the racist narrative that I don't want to believe (not that police are intentionally killing black people, but rather than many people don't take it seriously because it "isn't me or mine").

Give me compliance, or give me death! #smallgovernment #protectandserve

I'm not making a full judgment on this matter, but rather the perception that is being expressed. On the matter at hand, my current theory is that the female officer was scared of dealing with an angry big black man and so she drew her gun (lets face it, big black guys are more intimidating to many people). The other officer sees a smaller female officer confronting a large black man and runs in for backup, not really clear on whats going on.  For whatever reason (I'm assuming because the guy isn't complying with whatever request they are making) the backup officer believes he needs to deploy his taser and does so. This appears to startle the female officer, so she fires one shot and jumps to the side nervously.  

It looks to me like she was nervous/scared, got startled, and accidentally shot the guy to death. That's my best guess. If she intended to execute him she could have done it before more cameras were on the scene.  If she intended to shoot him because she perceived a threat, Officers are trained to fire more than one shot to eliminate the threat. And, generally speaking, when an Officer fires on a suspect they don't shy away as she appears to.

It's called a "police state" for a reason.  

Just one of the reasons "1984" should be required reading in schools....


Another one for the list of of troubling things is now the videos have been pulled.  I have no doubt they intend to continue to follow the 'company line' of lies about the situation and the videos just showed a completely different story.  This is much more rotten than the imitation deputy situation under the Glanz regime!!

[heironymouspasparagus]

Helicopter video still there...found it!


http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/graphic-video-tulsa-police-footage-from-fatal-shooting-of-unarmed/article_76ef2a0c-adf6-51c2-a3ae-83794a48b2c5.html



Anyone know how to copy that or post it permanently on another site so can't be erased?

[Cats Cats Cats]

I'm not making a full judgment on this matter, but rather the perception that is being expressed. On the matter at hand, my current theory is that the female officer was scared of dealing with an angry big black man and so she drew her gun (lets face it, big black guys are more intimidating to many people). The other officer sees a smaller female officer confronting a large black man and runs in for backup, not really clear on whats going on.  For whatever reason (I'm assuming because the guy isn't complying with whatever request they are making) the backup officer believes he needs to deploy his taser and does so. This appears to startle the female officer, so she fires one shot and jumps to the side nervously.  

On one of the audio with dispatch videos that was posted she made some comments before backup arrived.  She said something like "I have a suspect who won't she me his hands".  Or something very similar.  So it was, guy shows up with his hands in his pockets I guess.  Didn't show his hands.  Then she escalated it by drawing a gun.  Then it went from there.  Oddly her dashcam video wasn't part of what we have seen anywhere to show this interaction.

[AquaMan]

Any criminal history is irrelevant as the officers didn't know about it when responding. Their reactions were not based on any such knowledge.  No reason to be nervous around a stalled motorist unless you had knowledge that he was likely to cause trouble.


A predominant view appears to be:  he didn't comply with orders, what do you expect?

That's sad for several reasons. First, we have no idea what orders they may be talking about.  Second, the video doesn't support the contention that he presented an imminent threat justifying the use of deadly force. And most troubling, it represents the attitude that you will do what the government tells you at all times or you should rightfully expect to be executed.

Remember when we rebelled with the greatest empire on earth because they raised taxes on tea? We have regressed to the point now that shooting a citizen in need of assistance is acceptable to many people if they fail to obey unspecified government orders. That's ugly, either the person is utterly ignorant of our founding ideals or because it implicitly support the racist narrative that I don't want to believe (not that police are intentionally killing black people, but rather than many people don't take it seriously because it "isn't me or mine").

Give me compliance, or give me death! #smallgovernment #protectandserve

I'm not making a full judgment on this matter, but rather the perception that is being expressed. On the matter at hand, my current theory is that the female officer was scared of dealing with an angry big black man and so she drew her gun (lets face it, big black guys are more intimidating to many people). The other officer sees a smaller female officer confronting a large black man and runs in for backup, not really clear on whats going on.  For whatever reason (I'm assuming because the guy isn't complying with whatever request they are making) the backup officer believes he needs to deploy his taser and does so. This appears to startle the female officer, so she fires one shot and jumps to the side nervously. 

It looks to me like she was nervous/scared, got startled, and accidentally shot the guy to death. That's my best guess. If she intended to execute him she could have done it before more cameras were on the scene.  If she intended to shoot him because she perceived a threat, Officers are trained to fire more than one shot to eliminate the threat. And, generally speaking, when an Officer fires on a suspect they don't shy away as she appears to.

Well thought out and well said. I wish more people could/would follow your lead. My very first thought, borne out by a post I made without even knowing the details, was that size, color, time of day, and nervousness had a lot to do with this. Unless you spend a lot of time around or in the northside culture (and not spending that time arresting people), you have a hard time with context.

For instance in South Tulsa you don't see people walking on the street much. They don't even have sidewalks. When a car breaks down AAA picks it up and transports. Bars are nestled in nice little shopping areas.

In North Tulsa they have sidewalks but no one crosses at the corners. Cars break down and are on the side of the road for days until they are picked clean. Bars are visible, so are inebriated people.

Then the fat, white, middle aged guy in your office says something stupid like, "he should have complied". And it leaves you speechless.

[Conan71]

It's called a "police state" for a reason.  

Just one of the reasons "1984" should be required reading in schools....


Another one for the list of of troubling things is now the videos have been pulled.  I have no doubt they intend to continue to follow the 'company line' of lies about the situation and the videos just showed a completely different story.  This is much more rotten than the imitation deputy situation under the Glanz regime!!

The videos have not been pulled.  They may have dropped from the Vimeo account linked earlier, but they are available here still:

http://www.tulsaworldtv.com/Graphic-Warning-The-complete-unedited-view-of-Terence-Crutchers-death-31413336?playlistId=15318

This is something which stumps me:

-Cop(s) pass stalled car which is basically in the middle of the road, ostensibly someone radios in there is a motorist in need of assistance.

-Officer Shelby shows up and the first of the video we see from the helicopter and Turnbough's unit is Crutcher with his hands in the air ostensibly being marched back to his vehicle.  Shelby is first shown in the helicopter video coming from the right rear of her unit, gun drawn and pointed at Crutcher.

-On video at least, we see  all this has happened in a mere matter of moments, less than a minute.  But what happened prior to that final minute before Crutcher was shot?  Why was Shelby's weapon drawn on the passenger side of her vehicle in the first place?  She is first shown at about the right rear quarter panel of her car.  What threat did a motorist of a stalled car represent to the first officer on the scene?  We soon realize she obviously had called for backup...lots of it.  The helicopter video shows Turnbough's unit and several others not far behind rushing to the scene moments before the shooting.  Others responded from the west fairly quickly.  Why such a big response?  

-In that time-frame why was the police helicopter dispatched to this scene, or had they just left the airpark west of there, they heard radio chatter and realized it was less than a few miles down the road?  The released video from the helicopter starts just south and west of Mohawk Blvd. & Lewis, a few blocks from the scene.

-This being worthy of the of a police air unit is what I still cannot figure out unless it was just cosmic timing which put air support in the area as this unfolded. I'm assuming the helicopters are still based out of the old Downtown Airpark which is less than three miles west of the scene of Crutcher's shooting.  

-I'm further stumped why none of the responding officers offer any aid to Crutcher as he lays in the ground.  Judging by the blood spatter on his SUV and on his shirt, there likely wasn't much they could do at that point since Shelby ten-ringed him, but they just left him laying there while it appears officers go around to clear the right side of the vehicle.  Is that policy?  Why were they worried there was someone else in the vehicle who was a threat?

-Perhaps the camera in Shelby's unit will reveal how this went terribly wrong so quickly.  Clearly there could have been more restraint shown by officers Turnbough and Shelby.  But, what we still don't know is why was Crutcher perceived as such a serious threat to Shelby in the first place?  What was said, what were his actions which we have not seen nor heard prior to the two videos released thus far?

One scenario which has played through my head is when something goes wrong with Crutcher's car, out of frustration he gets out of the car and walks off to the side of the road to take a leak and call a friend for help.  He gets wound up and is waiving his arms and talking loudly out of frustration.  Or he could have been doing that anyhow, not on his phone, just venting. The cop pulls up and automatically assumes he's on PCP or drunk and starts yelling commands which freaks him out. I know I've been known to go off when something unfortunate and ill-timed happens to me, maybe not to the level of looking like I was on drugs or drunk, but you get the point.

It is easy to judge someone else's job when we have not been in the same high stress situation.  I'm not picking sides here, but I'd like to know what happened to create the response of at least four or five back up units PLUS air support within minutes.  This in itself seems highly unusual but I'm not a cop and I'm not certain how these things work.  I am fairly sure a simple DUI stop or mobile meth lab doesn't warrant this sort of response.

[heironymouspasparagus]

The videos have not been pulled.  They may have dropped from the Vimeo account linked earlier, but they are available here still:

http://www.tulsaworldtv.com/Graphic-Warning-The-complete-unedited-view-of-Terence-Crutchers-death-31413336?playlistId=15318

Yeah...I found it a few minutes after that first post.  It was another link that was missing.