AutomaticAron wrote:atomic41 wrote:So as the facts come in, will any of you judge/jury/executioners change your minds?

Turns out they were pulled over because they fit the description of armed robbers. If you are pulling them over, and there is a chance that they are recent violent criminals and one of them announces they have a gun and is now going for it, what would you super tier 21 Navy Seal ninjas do different?
Because of a "wide set nose"? Really? That's all it takes to "fit the description? I guess I fit the description too. Would big lips also mean he fit the description? I mean, it's absolutely possible to have respect and trust in law enforcement and not bend over backwards trying to justify a fatal mistake made by an officer. They're human. They mean well. And the also screw up royally at times. You're not anti-cop by accepting these realities.
Edit to clarify: I'm not referring specifically to the poster quoted. But to people who, were the shoe on the other foot would likely be a bit more confident in the details provided by the evidence received this far.
I agree that the matching description thing sounds pretty lame, the transcript from the radio seemed fishy.
That said,
The arguments (from gov dayton, et al) that he got shot because of a broken taillight are totally disingenuous.
When one gets stopped, WHY he got stopped, is the least important aspect of the moment. Unless the cop planned shooting this guy, how the motorist behaves will have a major impact on how well things go, or don't.
Given we don't know what happened yet, it's a fool's errand to speculate.
One or more of the parties screwed up big time, and what seems to be an OK guy is dead.