Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, July 17, 2017

Justine Damond, aged 40, was shot dead in Minneapolis about 11:30 pm local time on Saturday after two officers responded to a report of a possible assault. Her stepson Zach Damond, 22, said she called police after hearing a noise in the alleyway near their house in the suburb of Fulton. Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges said in a statement that she was "heartsick and deeply disturbed by the incident". "I'm seeking answers to the questions we all have, and will make sure to keep the communication flowing," she said. Ms Hodges said she understood the police body cameras and squad camera, which were introduced to the Minneapolis Police Department last year, were not switched on when the shooting occurred. The two officers involved have been placed on paid administrative leave, which is standard procedure.

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.

Another tragic loss of life.

As a minimum, when police officers do not switch on body cams and/or the camera in the squad car, their pay should be placed in escrow until the matter is resolved. If they are eventually terminated, they lose that money. If they face no disciplinary procedures, they get MOST of the money back except for some small amount for not having turned on their cameras. If they face disciplinary procedures, the severity of the procedures should dictate the amount of money they get back.

#1 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2017-07-17 06:04 AM | Reply

Sorry but I disagree Fedup, in any other line of work if you failed to switch on your body cam you would automatically be fired. These cops should immediately be fired and prosecuted.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2017-07-17 07:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 7

Cool, now that it's a hot blond woman instead of a black teenager, maybe something will get done.

#3 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2017-07-17 07:47 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Sorry but I disagree Fedup, in any other line of work if you failed to switch on your body cam you would automatically be fired. These cops should immediately be fired and prosecuted.

I am very sympathetic to your position and that was my initial reaction. However, upon reflection, everyone is entitled to due process; hence being placed on administrative leave. What we know they did wrong was not turning on their cameras and for that they should be punished immediately (i.e. while on administrative leave) by not being paid their salaries or any other benefits to which they might be entitled.

Putting the officers on unpaid administrative leave until the matter is resolved is almost as good as firing yet allows for the investigative process to play it self out.

#4 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2017-07-17 10:14 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"What we know they did wrong was not turning on their cameras and for that they should be punished immediately (i.e. while on administrative leave) by not being paid their salaries or any other benefits to which they might be entitled."

I could agree with that.

#5 | Posted by danni at 2017-07-17 10:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Cool, now that it's a hot blond woman instead of a black teenager, maybe something will get done.

Cops have enough experience with shooting black teenagers that they know what they can get away with. If cops were held accountable when black teenagers were being shot, "a hot blond woman" might still be alive.

These cops should be quaking in their boots because if this ever goes to trial, a jury will not be as willing to give the cops the benefit of the doubt because they will be able to empathize more with the victim.

#6 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2017-07-17 10:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yawn.

#7 | Posted by fresno500 at 2017-07-17 04:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Putting the officers on unpaid administrative leave until the matter is resolved is almost as good as firing yet allows for the investigative process to play it self out.

The police officers likely have a contract with the city that dictates the steps that are taken before a possible job termination.

It looks like the police haven't provided an explanation for why this woman was shot. Either they know what the cop said to justify his actions and aren't releasing that information or they haven't asked him yet. Either way it's ridiculous. Police have so little accountability these days. The whole system is designed to protect them, right or wrong.

#8 | Posted by rcade at 2017-07-17 05:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 6

We literally just found an officer not guilty of shooting a black guy for no reason other than he had a conceal and carry weapon that he even notified the officer of.

Now this...

#9 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-07-17 05:38 PM | Reply

"the police body cameras and squad camera, which were introduced to the Minneapolis Police Department last year, were not switched on when the shooting occurred."

They need to make this a termination offense.

#10 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-07-17 05:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I would think a monstrous wrongful death lawsuit would compel the city to made the cameras an absolute requirement and a termination offense for failure to adhere to policy.

#11 | Posted by eberly at 2017-07-17 05:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I would think a monstrous wrongful death lawsuit would compel the city to made the cameras an absolute requirement and a termination offense for failure to adhere to policy.

#11 | POSTED BY EBERLY

And you would be dead wrong. The camera would likely have proven how wrong the shooting is. Oops, forgot to turn it on, will reduce the settlement by about 10-20%.

#12 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-07-17 06:07 PM | Reply

Fire them. If you can't be trusted to work a camera, you can't be trusted to work a gun.

#13 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-07-17 06:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Take that, Aussies. That's how we do it here in America. Shoot first; ask questions later.

FREEDOM!

#14 | Posted by cbob at 2017-07-17 06:12 PM | Reply

Apologies for the sarcasm.

More information here, including this perplexing bit:

"Three sources with knowledge of the incident said Sunday that two officers in one squad car, responding to the 911 call, pulled into the alley. Damond, in her pajamas, went to the driver's side door and was talking to the driver. The officer in the passenger seat pulled his gun and shot Damond through the driver's side door, sources said."

www.startribune.com

#15 | Posted by cbob at 2017-07-17 06:25 PM | Reply

What was she doing recklessly approaching a police car and speaking without permission? She should have been face down on the ground with her hands behind her back, preferably nude. She should have know that anything less than total submission to the police is justification for your execution.

#16 | Posted by bored at 2017-07-17 07:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Shooting from the passenger side through his partner's door? That's either a cop with an uncontrollable urge to kill...or an accident.

#17 | Posted by cbob at 2017-07-17 07:43 PM | Reply

I don't see the facts of the case:

Was she ever charged with a criminal conviction?
Was she respecting the officers enough?
Did she approach the officers?
Did they think she had a gun?
Was she moving toward them?
What were her grades in school?
Had she ever done marijuana?
Did she reach for anything?
Did she resist some request?

These are all grounds for execution without trial.

#18 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-17 08:15 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Damond, in her pajamas, went to the driver's side door and was talking to the driver.

This would probably be normal behavior under these circumstances in a civilized country, like Australia.

#19 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-07-17 08:59 PM | Reply

You'd have to see something awfully life threatening to shoot that close to your partners face...or think you did.

The drivers ears are probably still ringing...

Dash cams and interior car cams seem like something that could easily and unobtrusively be implemented. It's time.

The cams the cops wear generally suck, but are better than nothing.

Last thought...I'd think that no matter what, forgetting to turn on your cam seems like a pretty easy thing to do. Especially for spur of the moment things (not the case here necessarily...).

#20 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2017-07-17 09:16 PM | Reply

You'd have to see something awfully life threatening to shoot that close to your partners face...or think you did.

Or it was an accident.

#21 | Posted by rcade at 2017-07-17 09:50 PM | Reply

I know what you're saying, but the negligence involved in a scenario where they're in the car goes beyond "accident".
I

#22 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2017-07-17 10:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I'd think that no matter what, forgetting to turn on your cam seems like a pretty easy thing to do."

Hence the need for disciplinary reinforcement, but long before that happens, there should be a culture of accountability where if you don't see your partner's camera off, you tell them it's not on and ask them why it's off.

Probably easy for a surgeon to forget to wash their hands too. But why would you accept that?

No matter what, that part of your statement is just a cop-out.

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-07-17 10:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Hence the need for disciplinary reinforcement, but long before that happens, there should be a culture of accountability where if you don't see your partner's camera off, you tell them it's not on and ask them why it's off.

If a USC Dean isn't held accountable for the death of someone, why should a cop?

Where is the CultureOfAccountability you are talking about?

Look I agree with you on this, but you aren't consistent in your PoV or arguement ......

#24 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-07-17 10:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

If a USC Dean isn't held accountable for the death of someone, why should a cop?

A USC Dean shot and killed an unarmed woman?

#25 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-07-17 10:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Where is All Lives Matter?

#26 | Posted by fresno500 at 2017-07-17 11:16 PM | Reply

"If a USC Dean isn't held accountable for the death of someone, why should a cop?"

Because the cop killed them.

Next stupid question?

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-07-18 12:15 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

They killed a white woman for no reason???

Who ever pulled the trigger is ****** and they may have ruined the party for all cops.

It's different when it happens to white people. If you don't think so read an article about the "opioid epidemic." Now that they are white people on drugs they are victims. Anyone remember the news stories about black "victims" of drugs in the way back? I don't either. The prison population just kept growing.

It's different now though. Gotta get some funding written I to every law that's passed to help the poor "victims" of the "epidemic."

#28 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2017-07-18 04:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's sad to say but I've lost all respect for Law enforcement and it's not so much with the individual officer but mostly with their leadership that covers for them. I hope I'm wrong but if this goes the way of the norm these days, the mayor, police chief, DA and the court will whitewash this incident and exonerate the officer. I'm trying to keep in mind that everyone is innocent until proven guilty but the chain of events over the past few years prevents me from unbiased in my thinking.

It wasn't that long ago we watched a video of a man getting shot to death in his car for nothing more than telling the officer he had a conceal carry weapon.

It's time to hold officers accountable because if they're not, I have a feeling that we will see more of what we saw in Baton Rouge last year. It's not that I want to see that, Its just a fact that the crazy wing of the public does exist.

#29 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2017-07-18 07:04 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I would think a monstrous wrongful death lawsuit would compel the city to made the cameras an absolute requirement and a termination offense for failure to adhere to policy.

#11 | Posted by eberly at 2017-07-17 05:42 PMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

Why stop at wrongful death if in fact it was murder?

#30 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2017-07-18 07:06 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Or it was an accident.

#21 | Posted by rcade at 2017-07-17 09:50 PM | Reply | Flag

Then it would be a manslaughter charge.

#31 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2017-07-18 07:07 AM | Reply

He was in fear of thier lives.

Case closed.

#32 | Posted by fresno500 at 2017-07-18 07:29 AM | Reply

12

Yeah.....you don't understand what I meant.

color me shocked. I was referring to how lawsuits are typically handled and how the defense is paid for as well as the settlement.

sychophant.....take your fake law degree back to the toilet where you found it.

#33 | Posted by eberly at 2017-07-18 08:38 AM | Reply

Or it was an accident.

#21 | POSTED BY RCADE AT 2017-07-17 09:50 PM | FLAG:

I don't see how that is possible.

#34 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-18 08:58 AM | Reply

34

It's never possible that the police shoots someone by "accident"? That a firearm was discharged by accident?

#35 | Posted by eberly at 2017-07-18 09:11 AM | Reply

It's never possible that the police shoots someone by "accident"? That a firearm was discharged by accident?

#35 | Posted by eberly at 2017-07-18 09:11 AMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

Its called manslaughter. that's what killing someone by accident is.

#36 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2017-07-18 09:12 AM | Reply

#36 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

You two are talking around each other ....

The police don't shoot someone by accident, but it could be an accidental shooting .....

#37 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-07-18 09:14 AM | Reply

36

I'm not disagreeing. If the law allows for criminal prosecution then fine.

#38 | Posted by eberly at 2017-07-18 09:15 AM | Reply

The police don't shoot someone by accident, but it could be an accidental shooting .....

#37 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-07-18 09:14 AMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

Sure it could be, I actually agree. But it still remains, if it were an accident it would involve negligence and the officer needs to be charged with manslaughter and stand trial or just own up.

#39 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2017-07-18 09:17 AM | Reply

Personally I'm going with "I thought it was my taser" defense.

We're at the stage where there is almost zero information past the initial information.

The few facts I know
She called 911
She approached the police vehicle
She spoke with the driver through the window
The passenger shot her multiple times, across the body of the driver.

That is about all I've seen so far and I think they are scrambling like mad to figure out WTF happened and how they are going to spin it.

Usually they just do a background check and find whatever nugget of "bad guy" they can find and I think that is proving difficult in this case.

#40 | Posted by Lohocla at 2017-07-18 09:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Or it was an accident.
#21 | Posted by rcade at 2017-07-17 09:50 PM | Reply | Flag
Then it would be a manslaughter charge.
Its called manslaughter. that's what killing someone by accident is.

I had a traffic accident where I killed a man standing in a 4 lane highway. It was an accident, but I wasn't charged with manslaughter. I think there is a different standard with manslaughter.

#41 | Posted by boaz at 2017-07-18 09:35 AM | Reply

I had a traffic accident where I killed a man standing in a 4 lane highway. It was an accident, but I wasn't charged with manslaughter.

#41 | Posted by boaz at 2017-07-18 09:35 AMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

That's because a 4 lane highway isn't a sidewalk and isn't for pedestrian use.

#42 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2017-07-18 09:55 AM | Reply

We are all watching.

#43 | Posted by fresno500 at 2017-07-18 10:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Maybe now that a blonde white woman is the victim they will do something about coward cops who fear for their life every day on the job in spite of the fact that police have never been LESS likely to die on the job.

Police in America have killed 664 people so far this year

www.killedbypolice.net

So far 69 police have been killed on the job this year. 25 by firearm, 28 in traffic accidents and 16 by other causes.

www.nleomf.org

In the UK the crime rate is very similar to ours. Police in the UK have killed 42 people SINCE 1979

#44 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2017-07-18 10:42 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Well now.. a white woman get killed by a black Somali cop... I would like to know why White Lives Matter is not out protesting and creating havoc. I have yet to see a highway/freeway shut down or for that matter not a single thing looted. And for the life of me I still can't figure out why White Lives Matter has not yet handed the worthless governor mumbles a list of demands..

#45 | Posted by euclid606 at 2017-07-18 11:08 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

If it was an accident, they should have called The Wolf.

#46 | Posted by JimDuncan at 2017-07-18 11:38 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Any bets on whether the police union goes all out for the new Somali cop or do they sacrifice him to make it look like they're getting a handle on the "problem"?

#47 | Posted by morris at 2017-07-18 12:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The drivers ears are probably still ringing...
#20 | POSTED BY 101CHAIRBORNE"

This reminds me of Archer. (You do watch Archer, right? Because if you don't, you need to. It is effing hilarious.)

#48 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2017-07-18 12:33 PM | Reply

34
It's never possible that the police shoots someone by "accident"? That a firearm was discharged by accident?

#35 | POSTED BY EBERLY AT 2017-07-18 09:11 AM | FLAG:

You're reaching here bro. Take a breath and reread. Your badge polishing is making you frantic.

#49 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-18 01:27 PM | Reply

There aren't so many comments, and you're not so stupid that I need to explain the comment more. It can just stand.

#50 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-18 01:29 PM | Reply

when police officers do not switch on body cams and/or the camera in the squad car, their pay should be placed in ... they get MOST of the money back . - #1 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2017-07-17 06:04 AM
if you failed to switch on your body cam you would automatically be fired. These cops should immediately be fired and prosecuted. - #2 | Posted by danni at 2017-07-17 07:20 AM
What we know they did wrong was not turning on their cameras and for that they should be punished immediately - #4 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2017-07-17 10:14 AM
They need to make this a termination offense. - #10 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-07-17 05:41 PM
cameras an absolute requirement and a termination offense for failure to adhere to policy. - #11 | Posted by eberly at 2017-07-17 05:42 PM -Thank you!-
Fire them. If you can't be trusted to work a camera, you can't be trusted to work a gun. - #13 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-07-17 06:07 PM
Dash cams and interior car cams seem like something that could easily and unobtrusively be implemented ... forgetting to turn on your cam seems like a pretty easy thing to do - #20 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2017-07-17 09:16 PM

Everything I've read on this indicates that the department's policy is for officers to turn their personal cameras on when departing their vehicle (which they hadn't yet), and the angle of the participants prevented the view from the working dashboard camera. Are you all so certain we need to fire/penalize these guys even if we find out they were following their camera-use policy?

It's just not as much fun waiting for actual evidence before passing judgement though, right?

#51 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-07-18 01:33 PM | Reply

"Are you all so certain we need to fire/penalize these guys even if we find out they were following their camera-use policy?"

Oh I see you can't read, so let me spell it out for you. The policy needs to make not having your camera on a "go home for the day" offense, like not having your badge or your gun or your uniform.

If they were following policy, then the policy is useless, and needs to be replaced with a policy where any time the police shoot someone it's on camera.

#52 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-07-18 03:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Everything I've read on this indicates that the department's policy is for officers to turn their personal cameras on when departing their vehicle ...

Whatever you read, it was not the actual policy because it says no such thing. 4-223 BODY WORN CAMERAS (06/29/16) www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us

#53 | Posted by et_al at 2017-07-18 05:06 PM | Reply

53

I read some of this and understand that it should have been activated.

#54 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-18 06:29 PM | Reply

On most DR boards relating to similar subjects, "compliance" seems to be the term in question.

From the shield defenders:

Do you believe this 40 year-old meditation instructor, in her pajamas, was out of compliance?

1) If you do, what leads you to believe that she was out of compliance?

2) If you do not, what are the appropriate repercussions for the unnecessary death (by a lethal weapon) of an innocent member of society?

I wish they'd turned on their cameras...I really do. However, what happened, happened, regardless of whether or not it was recorded.

Will the other officer in the vehicle have the balls to stand up, or will his balls be "blue".

#55 | Posted by worldasifindit at 2017-07-18 11:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Apparently there was a loud noise before the woman approached the car. Nother scared police officer

#56 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-07-18 11:59 PM | Reply

"Apparently there was a loud noise before the woman approached the car. Nother scared police officer

#56 | Posted by truthhurts"

From what I read on this the woman was already talking to the officer who was driving the car when the officer in the passenger seat shot her

#57 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2017-07-19 01:36 AM | Reply

"What we know they did wrong was not turning on their cameras and for that they should be punished immediately (i.e. while on administrative leave) by not being paid their salaries or any other benefits to which they might be entitled."

I could agree with that.

#5 | Posted by danni

Well, I think they should face the firing squad before the end of the week. Not having their cameras on should be a capital offense.

#58 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-07-19 09:02 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

That's either a cop with an uncontrollable urge to kill...or an accident.

#17 | Posted by cbob

All 3 shots?

#59 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-07-19 09:04 AM | Reply

Erroneously emptying of entire clips have happened.

#60 | Posted by fresno500 at 2017-07-19 11:49 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

America, your "justice system" is on full worldwide display.

#61 | Posted by fresno500 at 2017-07-19 11:57 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"It's just not as much fun waiting for actual evidence before passing judgement though, right?
#51 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE"

I think it's interesting that the police say they won't reveal their story until they know what video might exist. Kinda sucks to have your lies contradicted by video evidence, I guess.

#62 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2017-07-19 06:25 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 2017 World Readable

Drudge Retort