Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, September 22, 2016

The district attorney of Tulsa, Oklahoma, has filed manslaughter charges against officer Betty Shelby in the death of Terrence Crutcher six days ago. "We reviewed the facts of the allegations, it is our responsibility to determine if the filing of a criminal charge is justified under the law," District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler said. Crutcher was not armed and had walked slowly back to his stranded SUV with his arms upraised. "We are happy that charges were brought," said Damario Solomon-Simmons, an attorney for Crutcher's family.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

From the story:

Tulsa's police chief, Chuck Jordan, has said that Mr. Crutcher was unarmed and did not have a weapon in his vehicle.

Officer Shelby's lawyer, Scott Wood, has said that Mr. Crutcher was behaving erratically and had refused to comply with police commands. He said that Mr. Crutcher had been reaching through the vehicle's window when he was shot, and that Officer Shelby believed he had a weapon.

The family's lawyers, who include Benjamin L. Crump, who represented the relatives of Michael Brown, the unarmed black teenager who was killed in 2014 by a white police officer in Ferguson, Mo., have challenged Mr. Wood's account. Mr. Crump displayed photos at the news conference showing that the window of the S.U.V. had been rolled up.

#1 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2016-09-22 05:12 PM | Reply

About damn time one of these shootings actually resulted in more than a slap on the wrist. Here's hoping.

#2 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2016-09-22 05:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's still a long shot that she'll be found guilty because of the way the laws are written that give immense discretion to the police officer's judgment over the actual facts of any officer involved shooting. I myself don't believe that Shelby had any animus toward Crutcher and she probably believed that he was likely tripping on PCP. But what an officer thinks should not carry more weight than what both she and the victim actually did or didn't do. It simply isn't reasonable to believe that Crutcher was an imminent threat to her as the other officers surrounded her. The main factor which could justify a conviction is that Shelby was carrying a taser too, and could have used it like the other officer did beside her. Lethal force was not justified by the immediate circumstances imo.

#3 | Posted by tonyroma at 2016-09-22 05:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

NW post, TONY

#4 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2016-09-22 05:27 PM | Reply

#3 I heard the same theory about the Taser mix up. Next will be a hormonal theory. We are just going to have to wait to see how this plays out.

#5 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2016-09-22 05:49 PM | Reply

It's still a long shot that she'll be found guilty because of the way the laws are written that give immense discretion to the police officer's judgment over the actual facts of any officer involved shooting.

I think she will be thrown to the wolves, female officer? she won't get much support from the Union.

It simply isn't reasonable to believe that Crutcher was an imminent threat to her as the other officers surrounded her. - TonyRoma

I don't agree, why would the other officer fire his taser if there was not an imminent threat, they had plenty of time as they meandered towards the SUV, so why then?

The main factor which could justify a conviction is that Shelby was carrying a taser too, and could have used it like the other officer did beside her. Lethal force was not justified by the immediate circumstances imo.

I agree with this, the Taser should be the go to weapon, not the exception. I suppose she might have felt threatened before getting out of the vehicle.

One thing I learned that should change is the camera doesn't go on until the lights/siren are on. This should change, it should be all the time, anytime answering call ....... its technically doable.

#6 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2016-09-22 05:56 PM | Reply

#3

I don't think her attorney ever stated that she thought she was going for her taser. That was the 73 yo reservist found guilty in a shooting also in OK.

#6

Crutcher wasn't an imminent threat unless you believe the judgments of both the firing officers that him splayed across his vehicle put them in danger. The fact that Shelby claimed he was reaching into his vehicle through a closed window certainly doesn't help when considering her perceptions either. They deemed him a threat because he didn't follow their orders, but being impaired should not subject you to any attacks from police when you are completely docile. Again, they were worried about what he MIGHT do, not what he was doing when he was shot. And the other officer(s) with weapon(s) drawn didn't fire at all, which again calls into question the judgment of the two who did. Why didn't the non-firing cops not feel like the others?

She will get the full cooperation of the police union and appointed counsel. Her husband was one of the cops in the helicopter above the scene. The blue line doesn't recognize sex unless it's a female claiming harassment or discrimination, then you're more likely right.

#7 | Posted by tonyroma at 2016-09-22 06:08 PM | Reply

#3 response should have been for #5

#8 | Posted by tonyroma at 2016-09-22 06:09 PM | Reply

Good. Now we need that bodycam tape from Charlotte.

#9 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2016-09-22 06:17 PM | Reply

I'll go with my officer buds opinions who have actually had to walk up to a vehicle and worry about not making it home that night over people sitting around hashing around what they would have done or what an officer should have don

reality is funny that way........

#10 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2016-09-22 06:24 PM | Reply

It's still a long shot that she'll be found guilty because of the way the laws are written that give immense discretion to the police officer's ...

I don't see a material difference between the statutes governing "Justifiable Deadly Force by Officer" and "Justifiable Homicide by Other Persons". In both the operative provision is the reasonable belief that use of force is necessary to prevent great bodily harm or injury. (I can't get the pages to hyperlink. Copy and Paste this: http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/Index.asp?ftdb=STOKST21&level=1 Then scroll down about a third of the page to sections 732 and 733.)

Although I can't find a jury instruction applicable to officers, here is the instruction for "other persons" together with committee comments regarding case law.

#11 | Posted by et_al at 2016-09-22 07:14 PM | Reply

Well Et_Al ... I do....

"Justifiable Deadly Force by Officer" - Deadly force by a law enforcement officer may be justifiable: The officer is in the performance of his legal duty or the execution of legal process and reasonably believes the use of the force is necessary to protect himself or others from the infliction of serious bodily harm;

This argument cannot be used by a civilian
www.lawfirmofoklahoma.com

Crutcher wasn't an imminent threat unless you believe the judgments of both the firing officers that him splayed across his vehicle put them in danger.

Are you saying they were working together at the point of the "shooting"? I find the officers firing at the same time, too much of a coincidence.

They deemed him a threat because he didn't follow their orders

Thats not true, they let him meander back to his SUV without incident.

Why didn't the non-firing cops not feel like the others?

Fair question, from the cam view I had one officer was trying to figure out where to go he was behind the SUV and didn't see a thing, the other was behind the other officers, training I would think, would dictate not to shoot with fellow officers or innocents in front of you, or the line of fire..

The blue line doesn't recognize sex unless it's a female claiming harassment or discrimination, then you're more likely right.

So your position is that they recognize the racial lines but not the sexual? IMO Cops are a good ole boyz club, they protect their own, then they within that they protect their kin. They are human.....

#13 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2016-09-22 07:48 PM | Reply

Let me get this straight. The legal structures the old white man told me were built separate but equal, they turned out to be different?

I feel like I've received an entire Board of Education's worth of learning in this thread.

#14 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-22 07:54 PM | Reply

www.drudge.com

5:10PM

#15 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2016-09-22 07:54 PM | Reply

"Justifiable Deadly Force by Officer" - Deadly force by a law enforcement officer may be justifiable: The officer is in the performance of his legal duty or the execution of legal process and reasonably believes the use of the force is necessary to protect himself or others from the infliction of serious bodily harm;

Pretty much what I stated above. I had seen this written in another article on why cops are rarely prosecuted, much less found guilty at trials. It's an extremely high burden to overcome.

Thats not true, they let him meander back to his SUV without incident.

Officer Shelby said precisely that and so did the cop on the helicopter right before the shots were fired. They had asked him to probably stop and he continued to walk with his hands up. Shelby said through her attorney that Crutcher never responded to a single thing she said from the beginning of the encounter nor did he say a word.

So your position is that they recognize the racial lines but not the sexual? IMO Cops are a good ole boyz club, they protect their own, then they within that they protect their kin. They are human.....

Which is exactly what I said. I never mentioned race at all. Police protect police. One of my attorney friends, that I used for my own DUI back in 2001, represents all the local FOP cases and usually wins. As it relates to sexual or harassment charges against male cops toward female cops, the good ole boys typically circle the wagons and the usual attorneys don't represent the women, they defend the men. Of course there are exceptions to every rule and if the male's conduct is beyond the pale, all bets are off.

#16 | Posted by tonyroma at 2016-09-22 08:12 PM | Reply

I sort of wonder at times about women cops carrying guns.

This video I linked to, you just have to wonder if the man would still be alive if the first cop that came on board hadn't been this woman but had been the second cop instead.

www.youtube.com

Come on...someone has to say it.

#17 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2016-09-22 08:16 PM | Reply

I sort of wonder at times about women cops carrying guns.

Blaming this on the cop's gender is ridiculous.

#18 | Posted by rcade at 2016-09-22 08:42 PM | Reply

Rcade,

"Blaming this on the cop's gender is ridiculous."

Obviously you see and read what you want to see.

I did not say her gender is the sole reason for his death (the man in this story)...

Acting like that's what I said and then disagreeing what your own statement is...well...ridiculous.

No...it's tiring reading that same kind of logic all the time from people.

#19 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2016-09-22 08:53 PM | Reply

You brought up gender in response to this case. What other conclusion are people supposed to draw? Own your words.

#20 | Posted by rcade at 2016-09-22 08:59 PM | Reply

Even you can't disagree that a weaker person (even men) are more dangerous with a gun especially out in public.

I am concerned someone who is weaker may be more inclined to pull the trigger instead of using their physical attributes.

This is not a blanket statement against ALL women.

Some women could certainly take me down.

But cops should be a little more physically qualified to carry guns than obviously the system is currently.

And for the most part women are not as physically strong as men.

I think all these attempts at integrating women into military special forces is proving just that.

#21 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2016-09-22 08:59 PM | Reply


@#3 ...But what an officer thinks should not carry more weight than what both she and the victim actually did or didn't do....

In this case, and many similar cases, the victim is not able to offer the reason for or intent of his/her actions. Because the victim is dead.

So the judicial actions turn out to be a police officer justifying that she/he felt "at risk" and had to shoot to kill. There is no one to counter that argument. Because the victim is dead.

#22 | Posted by LampLighter at 2016-09-22 09:00 PM | Reply

Yes...partially to blame.

No...not entirely to blame.

#23 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2016-09-22 09:00 PM | Reply

Again...I wonder about women cops carrying guns on the street.

#24 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2016-09-22 09:01 PM | Reply

Well Et_Al ... I do....

That's because you're reading an article that quotes an old version of 21-733, you'll never learn will you? The statute was amended in 2014. The operative provision reads,

2. When committed in the lawful defense of such person or of another, when the person using force reasonably believes such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to terminate or prevent the commission of a forcible felony; or ... law.justia.com
That language is substantially similar to that applicable to officers. http://law.justia.com/codes/oklahoma/2014/title-21/section-21-732/

#25 | Posted by et_al at 2016-09-22 09:27 PM | Reply


@#24 ...I wonder about women cops carrying guns on the street.

You say generic things about women like that. Yet you also say, ...Even you can't disagree that a weaker person (even men) ...

So why not just say 'weaker people' and leave the gender completely out of it?

...This video I linked to, you just have to wonder if the man would still be alive if the first cop that came on board hadn't been this woman but had been the second cop instead....

And how do you know that Ms Shelby was not one of those women who, as you say, could take you down?

#26 | Posted by LampLighter at 2016-09-22 09:34 PM | Reply

Blaming this on the cop's gender is ridiculous.

I agree but it is not an entirely implausible inference from the probable cause affidavit allegation, "... becoming emotionally involved to the point she overreacted." heavy.com

#27 | Posted by et_al at 2016-09-22 09:36 PM | Reply

when the person using force reasonably believes such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself

Worked for George Zimmerman.

#28 | Posted by REDIAL at 2016-09-22 09:37 PM | Reply

becoming emotionally involved to the point she overreacted.

When people who aren't cops do that, it's called a crime of passion, and it's called murder.

#29 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-22 09:45 PM | Reply


@#27 ...becoming emotionally involved to the point she overreacted...

I would hope that all police officers are trained to not become "emotionally involved" to the point that they may not be able to perform their duties properly.

So I'm wondering what your [unstated] point is?

#30 | Posted by LampLighter at 2016-09-22 09:57 PM | Reply

So I'm wondering what your [unstated] point is?

My point is evident from what I wrote and the context to which I responded.

WTF is your "[unstated][sic]" point?

#31 | Posted by et_al at 2016-09-22 10:09 PM | Reply


@#31 ...My point is evident from what I wrote and the context to which I responded....

In your mind, maybe so.

But when I read your messages, I don't see it. (shrug)

So, in the interest of discussion, I'll ask again, what is the point you are trying to make?

#32 | Posted by LampLighter at 2016-09-22 10:46 PM | Reply

Even you can't disagree that a weaker person (even men) are more dangerous with a gun especially out in public.

This is a silly premise. All that matters is whether the female cop knows how (and when) to use a gun. That has nothing to do with gender. She was as capable of learning and employing proper gun use as a male cop.

#33 | Posted by rcade at 2016-09-22 11:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The whole point of the gun is you don't have to be Hercules and use brute strength to win a fight.

She won the fight.

She also seems to have been the one who started it, but that's not really my point.

#34 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-22 11:45 PM | Reply


@#34 ...The whole point of the gun is you don't have to be Hercules and use brute strength to win a fight.

She won the fight....

Wow, simply wow.

So you are saying that "might makes right," and not "justice makes right."

#35 | Posted by LampLighter at 2016-09-22 11:51 PM | Reply

A gun is a tool which empowers its operator to deliver a debilitating and potentially lethal blow to nearly any uncovered human target in close range.

Whether one chooses to make might or right with that capacity is entirely at the discretion of the operator.

As this story shows, guns are remarkably effective in that capacity, empowering a smaller, weaker human to dispatch an otherwise unassailable foe, for whatever purpose.

They're so effective we haven't invented a better close combat weapons platform in about a half a millennium.

#36 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-23 12:03 AM | Reply


@#36 ...They're so effective ...

OK, I missed the point in the "she won the fight" comment.

So you think the "might makes right" aspect is correct on a micro level?

#37 | Posted by LampLighter at 2016-09-23 12:11 AM | Reply

I don't know what you're asking.
Should this guy have been killed?
I very strongly doubt it.

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-23 12:14 AM | Reply

...and worry about not making it home that night...
#10 | POSTED BY AFKABL2

If their number one concern is their own safety and not mine, then I suggest they do the safest thing and just stay home.

#39 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2016-09-23 12:34 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I think she has a good chance of getting off unless the fix is in. She's a cop which means the prosecutor would normally pull his punches. And the jury is more likely to believe her. If she really gets desperate she can cry when talking about how scared she was too.

The wild card is that it is very out of the ordinary for a cop to be charged for something like this, especially so quickly. This shooting was pretty bad but departments have certainly circled the wagons around an officer who did worse. They didn't even try in this case. So it may be that the powers that be have decided that they don't want women on the force and are making an example of her.

I think she is mostly guilty of panic, impatience and horrible training/guidelines/police culture. If they fired her and made some serious changes to training and guidelines, that might be more productive. But if the threat of jail is the only thing we're going to use to keep cops from shooting people when they shouldn't, then I hope she goes to jail.

#40 | Posted by sully at 2016-09-23 09:35 AM | Reply

...worry about not making it home that night...

Cops aren't special in wanting to go home. Anybody non suicidal wants to make it home. Some people, when confronted by what they believe are killer cops that will shoot you even with your hands up, may shoot first or even go looking for cops to kill (ala dead cops in Dallas, etc.).

reality is funny that way........

#41 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2016-09-23 09:54 AM | Reply

Shelby was too trigger-happy in my opinion. Whether her hormones played a part I guess we will never know for sure but the fact her husband was piloting the helicopter overhead the scene and was an eyewitness to events on the ground might have influenced her reactions to some degree.

eavy.com/news/2016/09/dave-shelby-betty-husband-jo-family-terence-crutcher-terrence-terrance-
terance-tusla-police-officer-chief-chuck-jordan-helicopter-audio-video-latest-david/

#42 | Posted by CalifChris at 2016-09-23 10:47 AM | Reply

Sorry for the lousy link in #42. Still trying to figure out this new HP computer and Windows 10.

#43 | Posted by CalifChris at 2016-09-23 10:51 AM | Reply

California

Have you checked out Classic Shell?

Makes Windows 10 not suck as bad.

#44 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2016-09-23 03:06 PM | Reply

I guess we are just entering into a new arena of law and order. A command by a Police offer is just a suggestion and if you think their command is not valid you just walk back to your car and grab your weapon or hop in and take off. I highly doubt the Police said "put your hands up and walk back to your car" where we have no idea what is in there. I'm not saying deadly force was warranted and I'm not saying it wasn't. The lesson here, regardless if you think the Police are correct or not, you need to suck it up and let the process play out in court, not on the side of the road where Police have to make split second decisions.

#45 | Posted by Phillay at 2016-09-23 06:27 PM | Reply

Phillay.
You have the right to refuse to comply with an illegal order.
But it will certainly get you arrested or possibly killed.
Isn't that the way you want it be?

#46 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-23 06:32 PM | Reply

It appears women can be irrational in times of stress or while under the influence of their hormones. Perhaps they are not well suited to be police or Presidents.

#47 | Posted by visitor_ at 2016-09-24 02:37 AM | Reply

It appears women can be irrational in times of stress or while under the influence of their hormones. Perhaps they are not well suited to be police or Presidents.

Hillary is a bit old to be "under the influence of their hormones".

#48 | Posted by jpw at 2016-09-24 04:20 AM | Reply

"It appears women can be irrational in times of stress or while under the influence of their hormones."

Let's pretend that explains this one shooting. What's your explanation for the other 999 shootings by men?

"Perhaps they are not well suited to be police or Presidents."

My guess is statistically there are a higher percentage of women on the force, as compared to the percentage of female cops who have been in shooting incidents. Does that prove men are not well suited to be police or Presidents?

#49 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-09-24 05:55 AM | Reply

Statistically higher percentage of women on force

Women in policing now make up approximately 13-14 percent of all employees,www.policechiefmagazine.org

Not even close.

#50 | Posted by Crassus at 2016-09-24 08:51 AM | Reply

#50 - you may want to read #49 again. Danforth's point stands.

#51 | Posted by YAV at 2016-09-24 09:08 AM | Reply

Danforth - it appears your supposition is correct (unsurprisingly):
This is quite a long report, so you may want to search for 'Officer's gender'

Officers' gender (reported 69% of the time):

* The officer in a justifiable homicide case is almost always a male (98%).

More stats and data available at:
www.bjs.gov

#52 | Posted by YAV at 2016-09-24 09:22 AM | Reply

3 to 4 % of officer abuse charges are to women cops, with just 12% women cops do the math.

#53 | Posted by Crassus at 2016-09-24 09:27 AM | Reply

Now I agree on certain issues women cops are better at handling and de-escalating some issues but to suggest the percentages are smaller in cop abuse, that doesn't bare the facts.

#54 | Posted by Crassus at 2016-09-24 09:33 AM | Reply

#53 - I would, but I don't understand you or what you're saying.
I don't even know the point you're making in #53.

I do understand Danforth's point. It's crystal clear.
I responded with completely relevant information to Danforth's point.

#55 | Posted by YAV at 2016-09-24 09:34 AM | Reply

Oh, so are we just including homicide? Or from what I gather the real issue is abuse.

#56 | Posted by Crassus at 2016-09-24 09:34 AM | Reply

I am done.

#57 | Posted by Crassus at 2016-09-24 09:36 AM | Reply

OK.
Thanks for the clarification. I was lost on what you were trying to convey.

#58 | Posted by YAV at 2016-09-24 09:43 AM | Reply

My point was pretty clear, and not going to attack, just about ready to kill file. It will be the first one.

#59 | Posted by Crassus at 2016-09-24 09:53 AM | Reply

Oh just kill file me fercrhissakes.
I was polite and you can't even handle that.

#60 | Posted by YAV at 2016-09-24 09:59 AM | Reply

3 to 4% of women cops are brought on charges with abuse, only 13% of the entire country police force are women, the stat is pretty clear.

Don't mean to attack, but feel genuine isn't being used.

Total percent of all abuse versus percent total women on force is glaring! Women may not kill as much but are certain higher in abuse charges.

#61 | Posted by Crassus at 2016-09-24 10:03 AM | Reply

Do you have the stats for males? A link to the data you're citing so I can read it and understand better?
So far what you've asserted is that 3-4% of female officers that make up 12-13% of the force are responsible for abuse.
I'm curious what the percentage of abuse by male officers is per the 87-88% of the force they make up.
If that number is 3-4%, then there's no point.
If that number is 1-2%, then the point you're making is interesting.
If that number is greater than 4%...
Since a total hasn't been cited, I can't put the above numbers in context.

#62 | Posted by YAV at 2016-09-24 10:18 AM | Reply

I recognize that fewer women police get charged with fatal killing but is that because they are more likely to view a threat? It would be common sense that most people even in the courts would view it in such a way.

The actual abuse ratio is almost equal with the men if not a slight bit higher from what I looked up.

Not trying to be argumentative and a simple search bare the numbers out. It makes sense though. This isn't a political party side issue unless one wants to skew the numbers for political bearing.

#63 | Posted by Crassus at 2016-09-24 10:27 AM | Reply

Not interested in the politics - and not sure how I'd relate that anyway.
I'm looking at the statistics in light of the point about "women, hormones, men better under stress" generality/stereotype.
I cited data on homicides (which was the subject originally, however abuse is also an interesting subject).
Let me use the data I cited since the link is there, and assign a number to the "total justifiable homicides" to make the point clearer.

G=Gender of Officer
%oF= Percent of Force
EVa=Expected result
AVa=Actual result
Assume 1000 justified homicides:

G %0F Eva Ava
M 87% 870 980
F 13% 130 20

Which indicates that male offices are much more likely to shoot a suspect than female officers.
Elaborating, we would expect 130 female officer shootings and we see 20. Statistically, female officers are 6.5 times less likely to commit a "justified homicide" than expected.

#64 | Posted by YAV at 2016-09-24 10:54 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"3 to 4% of women cops are brought on charges with abuse, only 13% of the entire country police force are women, the stat is pretty clear."

Yeah, it's pretty clear.

Now the salient issue: do you realize your stat underscores MY point? If women comprise 13% of the force, but only 4% of the complaints of police abuse, that means women are less likely than their male counterparts to commit (or be accused of) police abuse.

At times I get the feeling you don't get how math works.

#65 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-09-25 01:52 PM | Reply

#52

Thanks for the research, Yav. Very interesting, and it bears out my predictions, although it should come as no surprise to anyone.

#66 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-09-25 01:56 PM | Reply

"This isn't a political party side issue unless one wants to skew the numbers for political bearing."

If that's the case, why didn't you attack the original assertion?

When women can be attacked as "hormonal", it's all well and good. But when empirical evidence shows women actually have a better temperament than men, the issue becomes unimportant. Is that about the size of it?

#67 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-09-25 02:01 PM | Reply

Does the 13 percent figure represent front line police like beat, patrol and swat or does it incude everything like 911 attendants and meter maids?

#68 | Posted by visitor_ at 2016-09-25 05:20 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2016 World Readable

Drudge Retort