Where exactly do you see this vehicle with no front end damage?
CO - Jessica Hernandez, 17, killed by police after LEO struck by stolen car
- Thread starter al66pine
- Start date
Where exactly do you see this vehicle with no front end damage?
katydid23
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 66,801
- Reaction score
- 226,892
How did it 'come' to a stop? Wasn't the driver incapacitated?'
http://media.thedenverchannel.com/p...r-2_1422284088460_12810922_ver1.0_640_480.jpg
http://content-img.newsinc.com/jpg/1529/28449664/18842476.jpg?t=1422473520
no significant front end damage visible although you cant see the entire front.
does not look like there was much of an impact tho, fence not damaged.
http://content-img.newsinc.com/jpg/1529/28449664/18842476.jpg?t=1422473520
no significant front end damage visible although you cant see the entire front.
does not look like there was much of an impact tho, fence not damaged.
if i had to guess, i would say it rolled to the wall and fence and stopped, not accelerated into, not at a high rate of speed.
but since you dont know exactly where the shots were fired in relation to where the vehicle is at the end, you cant really deduce much from these things anyway.
but since you dont know exactly where the shots were fired in relation to where the vehicle is at the end, you cant really deduce much from these things anyway.
This Denver Post article reads:
A later story states this:
The fact that the journalist had apparently seen the video implies that it was in the Denver Post's possession, but I suppose he could have viewed it informally on someone's smartphone. The DP doesn't state who has custody of the video now.
CoolJ
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2012
- Messages
- 4,241
- Reaction score
- 2,132
When was the last time any information was released in regards to this case?
As of now, we don't know what happened. We haven't even really heard the story of the officers involved. Any conclusions made about whether this shooting was justified or not would be based purely on emotions and bias.
This case needs to be investigated by an independent body. As do all LE involved shootings. JMO
As of now, we don't know what happened. We haven't even really heard the story of the officers involved. Any conclusions made about whether this shooting was justified or not would be based purely on emotions and bias.
This case needs to be investigated by an independent body. As do all LE involved shootings. JMO
If the officers rolled JH back and forth on the ground after she was shot, will not be impressed with their actions. Will find it not only disrespectful, but also bordering on an attempt to make sure she didn't live. Suspect others will view it the same way - might account for the silence from LE? How does one explain the need for that - if it happened?
well depending on exactly how it was done it may just be standard protocol, it is never easy to watch but the police do search and handcuff people that they have shot as regular procedure, and they do not provide first aid.
but if for some reason they were particularly rough or something then that would be an issue.
bbm sbm
W the admittedly sketchy information publicly avail ATM, each of us is entitled to form or make up our own opinions about
whether these LEOs were or were not justified in firing their weapons in this situation. And to change our opinions as more info is avail.
But imo, not entitled to misstate law by omitting important parts, and posting only selected parts as being the law.
Hoping if there is any judicial proceeding that ppl deciding will read entire statute (or jury instructions summarizing it) and
not ignore important parts of the law. Have a nice day, everyone.
ETA:
CO statute 18-1-707....
"(2) A peace officer is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person for a purpose specified in subsection (1) of this section only when he reasonably believes that it is necessary:
(a) To defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be theuse or imminent use of deadly physical force; or...". bbm.
http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/colorado/ (If link does not work, pls try search w CO statute 18-1-707)
He may use deadly force to defend himself or other, from what he reasonably believes to be imminent use of deadly force.
IOW, to justify LEO's use of deadly force, he does not have to have already sustained deadly force used against him.
bbm
Appears to me fence was not knocked flat, but was damaged (yes, could be preexisting damage, but seems consistent w stolen car impact pix).
1. Front bumper touchestwo fence panels (~right angle to ea other), attached to corner post, which may h/bn knocked askew a bit.
2. Short fence panel touching bumper is split from corner post ('listing to port') from bumper on up & is no longer at 90 deg. angle to brick wall.
^Both are consistent w car's impact being more than a mere car tap into fence.
3. Look at fence panels 'vertical seams' where (probably 6' or 8') sections are attached, esp. gap 1'-2' to left of garbage can in alley.
That 'vertical seam' gap or split is bigger than other seams to right of garbage can.
Fwiw, appears fence on lot car ran into is newer (lighter-colored, less-weathered) than fence at lot to left & behind car.
Agreeing, car's impact was not strong enough to knock corner post to ground, did not flatten fence panels to ground,
but appears to have impacted enough to cause damage to fence at that corner, imo.
Just observing fence features in pix. Looking forward to high res photos, forensic reports, whether in court or through other public info release.
Anyone here ready to stand in alley in front of a car (same kind as stolen car) moving toward you at a 'slow' rate of speed?
You may pick the speed at which it will run over you standing either -
---w no obstacle behind you, to prevent your fall to ground.
---in the the up-against-the-fence position.
Just curious, cause I'm not raising my hand for this.
Anyone who thinks a smallish, slow-moving car does not present imminent deadly physical force can show us how safe it is. Or not so safe.
You may pick the speed at which it will run over you standing either -
---w no obstacle behind you, to prevent your fall to ground.
---in the the up-against-the-fence position.
Just curious, cause I'm not raising my hand for this.
Anyone who thinks a smallish, slow-moving car does not present imminent deadly physical force can show us how safe it is. Or not so safe.
well first i wouldnt be standing in front of the car , and second even if i was and was armed i would not shoot at the car, but third and most importantly none of that has anything to do with what law enforcement should do or is required to do in that situation.
liljim post said "no significant impact damage of any sort can be seen in the fence."
I agree fence was not knocked down, was not flattened, but I believe the angle of narrow panel suggests fence was struck
(or possibly a pre-existing lean). IDK what force or speed of car, not an engineer.
^ Short fence panel touching bumper is split from corner post ('listing to port') from bumper on up & is no longer at 90 deg. angle to brick wall.
^consistent w car's impact being more than a mere car tap into fence (or possibly a pre-existing lean).
Wish I could circle the tall part of fence, where the gap shows, just in front of bumper & against brick wall.
I agree fence was not knocked down, was not flattened, but I believe the angle of narrow panel suggests fence was struck
(or possibly a pre-existing lean). IDK what force or speed of car, not an engineer.
^ Short fence panel touching bumper is split from corner post ('listing to port') from bumper on up & is no longer at 90 deg. angle to brick wall.
^consistent w car's impact being more than a mere car tap into fence (or possibly a pre-existing lean).
Wish I could circle the tall part of fence, where the gap shows, just in front of bumper & against brick wall.
"1. Front bumper touchestwo fence panels (~right angle to ea other), attached to corner post, which may h/bn knocked askew a bit.
2. Short fence panel touching bumper is split from corner post ('listing to port') from bumper on up & is no longer at 90 deg. angle to brick wall.
^Both are consistent w car's impact being more than a mere car tap into fence."
ok i see what you mean here, but i disagree. this will be my last response on this issue because i think it is irrelevant anyway.
a tap from an unaccelerated car rolling to a stop and hitting that fence could absolutely cause a panel to come loose, or a picket to break, etc
nothing you see in that picture gives any indication that the car hit the fence with any significant impact at all, and regardless - we dont know if the fence was like that already.
the car clearly did not accelerate into the fence and did not hit the fence with any significant force. i think we can agree on that.
2. Short fence panel touching bumper is split from corner post ('listing to port') from bumper on up & is no longer at 90 deg. angle to brick wall.
^Both are consistent w car's impact being more than a mere car tap into fence."
ok i see what you mean here, but i disagree. this will be my last response on this issue because i think it is irrelevant anyway.
a tap from an unaccelerated car rolling to a stop and hitting that fence could absolutely cause a panel to come loose, or a picket to break, etc
nothing you see in that picture gives any indication that the car hit the fence with any significant impact at all, and regardless - we dont know if the fence was like that already.
the car clearly did not accelerate into the fence and did not hit the fence with any significant force. i think we can agree on that.
liljim post said "no significant impact damage of any sort can be seen in the fence."
Look at fence panels 'vertical seams' where (probably 6' or 8') sections are attached, esp. gap 1'-2' to left of garbage can in alley.
That 'vertical seam' gap or split is bigger than other seams to right of garbage can.
Fwiw, appears fence on lot car ran into is newer (lighter-colored, less-weathered) than fence at lot to left & behind car.
Agreeing, car's impact was not strong enough to knock corner post to ground, did not flatten fence panels to ground,
but appears to have impacted enough to cause damage to fence at that corner, imo.
From experience in having had this type of fence installed at two homes, I may be more aware than casual observer about fence defects.
Ditto what a car 'tap' - maybe like this one - can do.
Car 'tap' on wooden fence corner can necessitate expensive repairs (tear out two panels, dig up concrete, pour fresh concrete for new post,
set in new corner post and put up two new panels, have fence re-treated to try to match color.
After a car 'tap' even at slow speed into corner post, in a few months, it starts leaning. Then normal pedestrian gate opening-and-closing later
causes rest of fence to sag, then gate does not open or close properly, looks crappy. Been there, done that.
Look at fence panels 'vertical seams' where (probably 6' or 8') sections are attached, esp. gap 1'-2' to left of garbage can in alley.
That 'vertical seam' gap or split is bigger than other seams to right of garbage can.
Fwiw, appears fence on lot car ran into is newer (lighter-colored, less-weathered) than fence at lot to left & behind car.
Agreeing, car's impact was not strong enough to knock corner post to ground, did not flatten fence panels to ground,
but appears to have impacted enough to cause damage to fence at that corner, imo.
From experience in having had this type of fence installed at two homes, I may be more aware than casual observer about fence defects.
Ditto what a car 'tap' - maybe like this one - can do.
Car 'tap' on wooden fence corner can necessitate expensive repairs (tear out two panels, dig up concrete, pour fresh concrete for new post,
set in new corner post and put up two new panels, have fence re-treated to try to match color.
After a car 'tap' even at slow speed into corner post, in a few months, it starts leaning. Then normal pedestrian gate opening-and-closing later
causes rest of fence to sag, then gate does not open or close properly, looks crappy. Been there, done that.
im not sure what you are debating here, we both agree there is minimal damage that could have been caused by a slow car rolling into and tapping the fence, we both agree that we have no idea what condition fence was in before this.
if it is over my use of the word significant then i guess it is just a matter of opinion and your interpretation.
i have installed many fences and repaired them.
if it is over my use of the word significant then i guess it is just a matter of opinion and your interpretation.
i have installed many fences and repaired them.
Ok, fair enough to disagree, still appreciate your views, liljim.
My point (which got lost in my excruciatingly long posts, LOL) about impact was -
Even if fence was not hit 'hard' enough to flatten, that same force could be deadly force to human.
Judging by caved-in roof of brick outbuilding, owner is not maintenance-obsessive (LOL), so fence could have pre-existing lean, as we said.
sbm
Well, if only you had mentioned ^it^ earlier, wudda asked for your advice about a recent repair, before handyman made a mess of it.
Thx agn.