CO - Jessica Hernandez, 17, killed by police after LEO struck by stolen car

Discussion in 'Up to the Minute' started by al66pine, Jan 26, 2015.

  1. Yoda

    Yoda Master

    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Posted up thread MSM reported that a call was received for loud noise coming from alley. LE ran plates, found out it was stolen, called for back up.
     


  2. Yoda

    Yoda Master

    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Posted up thread MSM reported that a call was received for loud noise coming from alley. LE ran plates, found out it was stolen, called for back up.
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/01/27/police-shoot-denver-teen-who-struck-officers-with-stolen-car/
     
  3. Fred Hall

    Fred Hall New Member

    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    sbm,bbm

    Thinking further, I find it unlikely that EMTs would load a casualty onto a stretcher and carry them some distance only to then place the stretcher on the ground and wander off. If there were any EMTs on the scene, I think they would be have been seen surrounding the wounded driver.
     
  4. al66pine

    al66pine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,087
    Likes Received:
    23,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    bbm
    Subsequent Fred Hall post:
    "The blur box can be seen to spill over the edge of the smart-phone. This suggests that it was applied by the TV station."

    If TV staff applied blur box, what did they want to conceal -
    - ID of person shot?
    - ID of LEO?
    - LEO's actions wrt person shot?
    - both?
    - other? If so what?

    Why?
    - privacy of person shot, general principle?
    - privacy of person shot, bloody & injured or partially unclothed?
    - prevent family from learning of casualty or fatality from TV broadcast?
    - conspiracy w LE to conceal LEO's actions, before or after shooting?
    - combo of above?
    - other? If so, what?

    Anyone? Thx in adv.
     
  5. Fred Hall

    Fred Hall New Member

    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The video is so distant and blurry that I don't think that the officers would be identifiable even if they stood and looked directly at the camera. I suspect that in the uncensored original it would have been difficult to even make out the driver's body, much less determine who she was. She also would not have been unclothed due to there being no EMTs on the scene. Note that the smart-phone recording is not an original, but a secondary recording made by pointing the phone at another phone belonging to the original recorder. The end result is triple duplication — the TV camera recorded the phone which recorded another phone which recorded the incident. This all guarantees a very indistinct video, yet the TV station still saw it necessary to place a blur box over not just the body but an officer as well. Why? And they did not blur out both officers; they only blurred the one who is leaning over the body. With all this done, they didn't play more than a fraction of a second out of a video that presumably goes on for several minutes. This is all strange behavior on the part of the TV station. Stranger still is the fact that the video has disappeared so completely it is now difficult to even verify it existed. Why has it not been aired since? Initially there may have been concerns about inadvertently identifying the people in the video, but all the people in the video were named within days of the event. Why would the video still be withheld two months later?
     
  6. al66pine

    al66pine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,087
    Likes Received:
    23,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    sbm

    Good questions.
     
  7. Woodland

    Woodland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,491
    Likes Received:
    1,773
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Can't help but think that the shooting of Walter Scott by a SC officer will put more pressure on this case - in that a meaningful, unbiased, plausible report needs to be produced based on the known evidence and various eyewitness accounts.

    The conduct in SC is commendable imo - no riots, looting, arson etc, just people voicing their opinions. There is a video of that shooting that can be produced in court and people have chosen to let it play out - people just want the truth imo. No video exists, that we know of, for the actual moment JH was shot, but do think people will look any reports very carefully to compare evidence as if there was a video. Imo everything will have to line up now more than before - no ignoring what is there or should be there, based on 'initial' reports by LE.

    Find myself more hopeful now than before that the truth will have to prevail here - makes me happy for JH family.
     
  8. Kimberlyd125

    Kimberlyd125 Softball is for everyone. Fast pitch is for athlet

    Messages:
    16,169
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The truth. That's what everybody wants.
    But I don't think JH's family will be happy if the truth isn't what they think it is.

    I guess it could go either way.

    As long as everybody has an open mind and takes the evidence for what it is, all should be well.

    What's bad is when people see evidence that goes against what they want to believe and they refuse to believe it. That's when riots and protests seem to happen IMO.
     
  9. Jersey*Girl

    Jersey*Girl Active Member

    Messages:
    10,266
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Two totally different cases... Cop in SC obviously wrong, had anger issues prior, bad cop all together it appears. This case Jessica is an obvious criminal, not the other way around. No matter how it's sliced, the girl was bad news proving she couldn't even listen to the authority of her mother the night she rolled out, took a car, and the rest is history. I'm so sick and tired of race being made an issue when it was never an issue in the first place and that's exactly what her family was doing. It's disgusting.
     
  10. Woodland

    Woodland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,491
    Likes Received:
    1,773
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not sure how anyone can say the JH family will not be happy if the truth isn't what they think it is - that would have to come from them. Claiming to know what someone is thinking is easy - rarely accurate though.

    Same for the JH family used the race card - never saw that posted anywhere, other than someone else attributing it to the family.

    Let's hope the evidence will be lined up here - accurately and truthfully, not ignored or glossed over. That's my wish anyway.
     
  11. Fred Hall

    Fred Hall New Member

    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    sbm
    Walter Scott was an equally obvious criminal, having been caught on camera in the act of running from an arresting officer. He was a bona fide "fleeing felon", yet prosecutors don't seem to think that this fact justified shooting him. In contrast to Walter Scott, the Hernandez case has no footage of the actual shooting, as the DPD doesn't have dash-cams for some strange reason. As a result, the exact circumstances of the Hernandez shooting will probably be impossible to determine with certainty. However, investigators will be able to ID the recovered bullets and reconstruct their trajectories, and this information will indicate where each officer was standing relative to the car when he fired. What if the bullets that struck Hernandez are found to have come from two different guns?
     
  12. Woodland

    Woodland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,491
    Likes Received:
    1,773
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Post #1, first and second paragraph - two cops opened fire.
     
  13. Fred Hall

    Fred Hall New Member

    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But they didn't necessarily both strike the driver. If one of the cops was in front of the car when he fired, his bullets could have been stopped by the dashboard or the steering column. In all the photos I've seen, the far left of the car's windshield is somewhat obscured by branches, so it's possible that there are bullet holes there.
     
  14. al66pine

    al66pine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,087
    Likes Received:
    23,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    bbm sbm

    If bullets came two diff guns, then??? Which implies what?
    1.
    LE lied about only one officer shooting???? No, first post in thread said LE stated both LEOs fired guns.
    .
    "... officers then "approached the vehicle on foot when the driver drove the car into one of the officers."
    ...both officers then opened fire. The officer hit by the car was taken to a hospital with a leg injury." sbm bbm
    http://www.stltoday.com/news/nationa...796acbde4.html
    "

    2. Not following implication of both firing. Anyone pls? Thx in adv.

    ETA: Just read Fred Halls' newer post - emphasizing (I think) -maybe bullets that hit her may have come from 2 diff guns
    (not just that both officers fired.)
    Still not getting implication. Anyone pls? Thx in adv.
     
  15. Fred Hall

    Fred Hall New Member

    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The medical report determined that all the bullets that struck the driver came from her left. If these bullets were fired from different guns it would indicate that both officers were standing on the left side of the car.
     
  16. Woodland

    Woodland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,491
    Likes Received:
    1,773
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hmmm, the three month mark is approaching and all that is missing is an official report of the sequence of events.

    Autopsy and bullet trajectory (including tox report) - check
    Officer involved reports - must be a check given the time lapse
    Witness Reports - check
    Crime Scene Photos - check (non-official and official)
    Ballistics - firing the weapons of both officers and comparing to bullets retrieved from JH or the vehicle - have to think there has been enough time for a check

    So, LE, what happened in your opinion?
     
  17. SwampMama

    SwampMama Insomniac Extraordinaire

    Messages:
    3,354
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    38
    As a first responder (as is my husband), law enforcement's FIRST job in a volatile scene is to secure the scene, secure the suspects, tape off the area, crowd control, etc and ensure that first responders are safe. OUR safety come's first, we don't come onto the scene until it is safe to do so. We are not required to put our lives in danger.

    JH is the one who caused that danger. So JH is handcuffed and searched and then LE still has 4 other suspects to deal with, as well as a quickly escalating scene. LE has their hand's full with all of that. Sorry that it seems callous to handcuff and search a dying girl but JH created this mess with her repeated bad choices. If that makes me a pr*ck to not put MY life in danger to rush onto an unsecured scene to save her, so be it. I can live with that.
     
  18. al66pine

    al66pine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,087
    Likes Received:
    23,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    From Fred Hall's post:
    "Originally Posted by Fred Hall
    [​IMG]
    This clip shows about a half second of censored amateur video taken of the mouth of the lane. A blur box has been applied over what I presume is the driver's body. According to google earth she is about 100 feet from where the stolen car rests. Did an officer carry her?"
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

     
  19. SwampMama

    SwampMama Insomniac Extraordinaire

    Messages:
    3,354
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    38
    We would have just used the backboard, grabbed her quick, got her onto the gurney and brought to the ambulance. I can see them not wanting to contaminate the scene with an ambulance and first responders tracking thru everything. I don't know why LE would have moved her though. They don't usually have a backboard or gurney for the patient so the patient just stays in place in the scene and we can easily extract them and carry them out even if an ambulance or gurney can't get in there.

    I'm curious how long it took for the first responders to get there and perhaps Jessica was moved from the scene as a safety measure. We can't go into a scene unless it is secure so perhaps LE thought it best to move JH because they were concerned about the safety of the first responders down that alley, not knowing the mood of the crowd or how family members would react or retaliate.

    I could see a crazed person reacting by waiting till the LE and 1st responders are concentrated in the alley with few options for escape and shooting at them. People do crazy stuff in the heat of the moment and don't always see the first responders as "good guys". So I can see LE moving JH for that reason. We have had scenes where we had to go to a staging area and wait for LE to give the ok that they have the scene secured ( like domestic violence situations which are often unpredictable).
     
  20. katydid23

    katydid23 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    60,273
    Likes Received:
    155,729
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I also wonder if they wanted to search them all for weapons. Getting her out of the car was probably the best way to do that. JMO
     

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice