Philando Castile Thread

[Blizzard]

@Blizzard "Disagree" with your post above because everything about the pain-in-the-ass his sister, mom, etc are all non-factors. At the time, the officer did not know any of this.

Agree. I didn't imply they were a factor in the shooting. I just said she's f'n vile, which she is. It was really intended to be a separate statement. It becomes more relevant as she tells stories after the fact.

 

[Blizzard]

Him saying he perceived a threat isn't good enough in this situation. The responsibility is on the officer to make his instructions clear, which he did not do. "Oh well, his hand was set wider than it should have been for a wallet." GTFO with that lame ass argument. This dude was so far into blackout mode that he let go of 7 rounds, then started screaming and cursing. He didn't have the mental acuity to process that type of minute detail.

I don't think I can make that leap. Having an officer perceive a threat is exactly why they take an action. However, where I agree with you is that he absolutely could've taken a different approach to the situation; ie. asked him directly to keep his hands on the wheel, tell him where the weapon was located, etc. He does that and maybe we never have this story. That said, it doesn't mean he didn't see or perceive a serious threat.

 

[CDG]

I don't think I can make that leap. Having an officer perceive a threat is exactly why they take an action. However, where I agree with you is that he absolutely could've taken a different approach to the situation; ie. asked him directly to keep his hands on the wheel, tell him where the weapon was located, etc. That said, it doesn't mean he didn't see or perceive a serious threat.

I don't really care what he perceived. It was wrong. If you're a cop, or a military member, or a CCW holder, or whatever, and you make a bad judgment call and kill someone, then that's on you. If you can't apply critical thinking properly, and you mistakenly perceive a threat, and you kill someone, you should be criminally and civilly liable for that. That perceived threat has to be justifiable, and in this case it wasn't even close.

 

[Blizzard]

I don't really care what he perceived. It was wrong. If you're a cop, or a military member, or a CCW holder, or whatever, and you make a bad judgment call and kill someone, then that's on you. If you can't apply critical thinking properly, and you mistakenly perceive a threat, and you kill someone, you should be criminally and civilly liable for that. That perceived threat has to be justifiable, and in this case it wasn't even close.

If Castile had his hands up, kept them on the wheel, or never moved them in the direction of his visible weapon, I'd completely agree. But that wasn't the case.

 

[CDG]

If Castile had his hands up, kept them on the wheel, or never moved them in the direction of his visible weapon, I'd completely agree. But that wasn't the case.

The cop asked for his license and registration. Is Castile running the stop, or is Yanez? The officer allowed it to go where it went through poor decision making, then he panicked and killed the man. It baffles me that people can defend Yanez in this situation and say Castile being killed is fine because his hands weren't on the steering wheel.

 

[Blizzard]

The cop asked for his license and registration. Is Castile running the stop, or is Yanez? The officer allowed it to go where it went through poor decision making, then he panicked and killed the man. It baffles me that people can defend Yanez in this situation and say Castile being killed is fine because his hands weren't on the steering wheel.

Why did he panic?

I've stated Yanez absolutely could've done better and it's possible (probable) that he may very well have been in the wrong careerfield; he's no longer with that department (or any that I'm aware of). However, I don't see his actions rising to the level of being criminal.

 

[DocIllinois]

Agreed with @CDG 's last post.

The people inside the car are not the ones who are intimately familiar with what should be done in the event of numerous contingencies, or what they should be doing with themselves to best prevent those situations.

 

[Blizzard]

Agreed with The people inside the car are not the ones who are intimately familiar with what should be done in the event of numerous contingencies, or what they should be doing with themselves to best prevent those situations.

I generally agree with this as well, even though how to respond to a traffic stop is taught as part of basic drivers education. The officer still needs to control the stop, which is why I also agree with @TLDR20 's comment about training/escalation of force. Hopefully FTOs everywhere revisit this scenario with their officers to ensure a higher standard.

 

[Gunz]

The cop wigged the fuck out like Barney Fife.

 

[CDG]

Why did he panic?

I've stated Yanez absolutely could've done better and it's possible (probable) that he may very well have been in the wrong careerfield; he's no longer with that department (or any that I'm aware of). However, I don't see his actions rising to the level of being criminal.

Who cares why he panicked? As a cop, the ability to perform under stress is expected. You don't get to panic and start unloading rounds, and then come back and say "Well, you know, I didn't know what was going on. I said a couple things, didn't like the response, and the shot the dude 7 times."

Dude, he fucking killed a guy. For no discernible reason. So losing his job doesn't cut it.

 

[DA SWO]

@Blizzard "Disagree" with your post above because everything about the pain-in-the-ass his sister, mom, etc are all non-factors. At the time, the officer did not know any of this.

Regarding the case, I've listened to enough lawyers to understand that in many cases a jury feels helpless. They want to convict a person of 'something', but following the strict rule-of-law that the judge spells out during instructions, the evidence often does not allow a conviction for the crime that the prosecutor went with.

In a case like this, I believe that the prosecutor is often pressured to "go for it" on a charge, knowing it is a long shot, and wishing they could get away with charging a lesser offense and be more likely to get a conviction on it. It's lose/lose for them, because if they don't charge a strong enough crime, the "outraged" will protest that he's being too easy on the cop. A shitty situation all around.

Money shot.
Elected DA's swing for the fence to get votes (see Duke lacrosse case).
Some states allow the jury to convict on a lesser charge, but most states/judges (per my resident JAG) don't allow this (form of double jeopardy?)

Him saying he perceived a threat isn't good enough in this situation. The responsibility is on the officer to make his instructions clear, which he did not do. "Oh well, his hand was set wider than it should have been for a wallet." GTFO with that lame ass argument. This dude was so far into blackout mode that he let go of 7 rounds, then started screaming and cursing. He didn't have the mental acuity to process that type of minute detail.

Did the Officer give himself a mental escape route if things took a shit? standing by the door pillar and moving backwards makes it harder for a shooter to engage without exiting the car. Did the Officer think the situation through that far.

Hell, the dud knew disclosing the gun probably meant he was getting arrested.

 

[Blizzard]

Who cares why he panicked?

I do. That's at the heart of the case. The fact that Yanez told him several times not to pull it out and reached into the car before shooting tells me something was going on. If Castile was just chillin' with hand on the wheel or completely stopped his movement when repeatedly told "don't pull it out", would we be talking about this? Plenty of hardship to go around.

Now, if there was consensus that Castile had his hands up (during her interview, his girlfriend later said that they both hand their hands up; conflicting with her earlier statements that he has reaching for his seatbelt buckle and/or his wallet), was not making any movement with his hands, and still got lit up, then I'd be right there with you on this but it's not nearly that cut and dry.

As a cop, the ability to perform under stress is expected. You don't get to panic and start unloading rounds, and then come back and say "Well, you know, I didn't know what was going on. I said a couple things, didn't like the response, and the shot the dude 7 times.

I don't think that's an accurate assessment of what took place. Yanez never said he didn't know what was going on; quite the opposite actually.

 

[CDG]

I do. That's at the heart of the case. The fact that Yanez told him several times not to pull it out and reached into the car before shooting tells me something was going on. If Castile was just chillin' with hand on the wheel or completely stopped his motion when told "don't pull it out", would we be talking about this? Plenty of hardship to go around.

Now, if there was consensus that Castile had his hands up (during her interview, his girlfriend later said that they both hand their hands up; conflicting with her earlier statements that he has reaching for his seatbelt buckle and/or his wallet), was not making any movement with his hands, and still got lit up, then I'd be right there with you on this but it's not nearly that cut and dry.


I don't think that's an accurate assessment of what took place. Yanez never said he didn't know what was going on; quite the opposite actually.

Philando Castile shooting: Dashcam video shows rapid event - CNN.com

Yanez: And then it was just, getting hinky, he gave, he was just staring straight ahead and I was getting (expletive) nervous and then, I told him, I know, I know, (expletive) I told him to get his (expletive) hand off his gun.
Yanez gives a brief explanation of the events to a supervising officer on the scene. Yanez says he told Castile not to reach for the gun and that Castile's "grip (was) a lot wider than a wallet." Yanez continues, saying, "I don't know where the gun was. He didn't tell me where the (expletive) gun was."

So, he's staring straight ahead and it was "getting hinky". He didn't know where the gun was, because he never bothered to ask. The dude told him he had a gun, and Yanez said "Ok." Then he starts screaming about no reaching for it, and shoots him. So he doesn't even know where the gun is, but decides Castile is reaching for it. If the cop hadn't been incompetent, and had handled the stop like a professional, would we be talking about this?

 

[Blizzard]

Again, not completely accurate and out of context. Read the rest of Yanez' statement about his comment to his supervisor. The CNN story conveniently left that out. Yanez says the comment was said meaning he didn't know where the weapon was prior to seeing it.

If the cop hadn't been incompetent, and had handled the stop like a professional, would we be talking about this?

I agree. If the stop were handled differently, we probably wouldn't be discussing it but it doesn't make what took place criminal.

Also, as FYI, listen to the interview with Castile's girlfriend starting at like 2:45:
BCA interview with Diamond Reynolds after Castile shooting

 

[CDG]

Again, not completely accurate and out of context. Read the rest of Yanez' statement about his comment to his supervisor. The CNN story conveniently left that out. Yanez says the comment was said meaning he didn't know where the weapon was prior to seeing it.


I agree. If the stop were handled differently, we probably wouldn't be discussing it but it doesn't make what took place criminal.

Also, as FYI, listen to the interview with Castile's girlfriend starting at like 2:45:
BCA interview with Diamond Reynolds after Castile shooting

So you mean after Yanez calmed down and realized he was in a world of shit, he decided to say that. Is that also when he came up with the whole "I could smell weed, and if he would endanger a little girl by smoking weed, who knows what he would do to me?" defense?

 

[Blizzard]

So you mean after Yanez calmed down and realized he was in a world of shit, he decided to say that. Is that also when he came up with the whole "I could smell weed, and if he would endanger a little girl by smoking weed, who knows what he would do to me?" defense?

Did Castile in fact have a gun? Was it in the location where Yanez says he saw it? Was Castile fiddling with that side of his pants? Yes to all.

 

[Red Flag 1]

I don't think I can make that leap. Having an officer perceive a threat is exactly why they take an action. However, where I agree with you is that he absolutely could've taken a different approach to the situation; ie. asked him directly to keep his hands on the wheel, tell him where the weapon was located, etc. He does that and maybe we never have this story. That said, it doesn't mean he didn't see or perceive a serious threat.

I can understand how he felt uncomfortable, he had put himself right in the line of fire by walking straight up to the door. My sense is that if Officer Yanez had kept station closer to the door post, at the driver's left shoulder, he would not have been quite so exposed. As the driver moved his hand, the officer moved into an even more exposed position near the side view mirror. Granted the officer's firing position probably saved the passenger's life and directed all his rounds towards the driver.

 

[CDG]

Did Castile in fact have a gun? Was it in the location where Yanez says he saw it? Was Castile fiddling with that side of his pants? Yes to all.

And that equals justification for a kill? Come one man. That's not a defensible position, and you should know that. This was 100% on Yanez. The justice system screwed the pooch on this case. Yanez should be behind bars.

 

[757]

"The Unwritten Law That Helps Bad Cops Go Free" -David French

I recommend reading the above article. I have worked with Mr. French before and he is a good legal analyst.

 

[Devildoc]

And that equals justification for a kill? Come one man. That's not a defensible position, and you should know that. This was 100% on Yanez. The justice system screwed the pooch on this case. Yanez should be behind bars.

Although I do not necessarily disagree, the jury believed the state did not meet the burden of proof of the charge. The state charged him after a grand jury indicted him, the part of the system that that failed was in overcharging him (that's not on the jury, that's on the DA). The family can still sue in civil court.

I think he is guilty, but not of the crime with which they charged him.