The liberal media and the police Killing of Sonya Massey
I didnt give much thought on the title but I wanted to see if people actually took the time to watch the police body cam footage. I mentioned the media because nobody seems to want to talk about the obvious. This cop is still locked up as far as i know and everyone seems to be villainizing him. I actually took the time to watch the video in slow motion and you can clearly see that the lady 100% intended on throwing boiling water on him. There is no dispute on that yet nobody wants to say it for fear of upsetting an all too familiar narrative. If you watch the video you will clearly see that the woman drops to floor holding only her oven mitts. The pot is sitting on the counter. The officers arm obstructs the bodycam up until the last second where you see the woman holding the pot and throwing it at the cop. I just dont understand how in the freeist country in the world not a peep is being mentioned about this. You can say well the cop should have dropped back or ran and thats a valid argument but what you dont do is pretend that this lady was innocent when it seems to be an instance of a very troubled lady choosing to die at the hands of a cop. I will try to link the video below if that is cool with mods. It's not graphic. It will be the last 5-6 seconds and you obviously need to watch it in slow motion. It is the bodycam of the cop who shoots her. You have to realize he is only about 5 feet from her and his arm blocks a good chunk of the crucial 5-6 seconds. He is lucky his arm didnt block the whole thing or he would be spending the rest of his life in prison.
Nate, I’m not defining the word “rebuke”. I’m defining the phrase in context and its meaning.
I see the cop shooting her while he is about four feet or more from the counter and I don’t see that she threw any water out of the kitchen area.
This. These guys make good money and retire at 50 with a HS education cuz they are expected to navigate difficult situations.
All kinds of people are in these situations, like teachers, postal workers, Uber drivers, clerks at stores...
Only cops wet their pants and start spraying bullets every time they think k there is a 1% chance they might possibly be in danger.
When I was a sub I had a pretty big kid who, in that neighborhood could easily have a weapon, get in my face repeatedly shove me whi
what a ****in gem this one is.
So is it you or is it all of us?
Even if everything you said was true, I doubt this will happen. Once things get politicized like this, all bets are out the window IMO. Whoever is on the jury will feel tremendous pressure to give a guilty verdict, even if the evidence goes the other way. Because they know the liberal media and far left activists will put a target on their backs if it goes any other way. And this is even assuming they would go into the trial not already deciding the cop was guilty regardless of the evidence.
he'll get off. Not everybody's full of ****. it wont go to trial. justice prevails 99% of the time. People dont like rioting but they'll will chose rioting over injustice most of the time.
On July 17, 2024, a grand jury indicted Grayson on five counts, including three counts of first-degree murder, one count of aggravated battery with a firearm, and one count of official misconduct. Grayson is being held in jail without bail.
i'm no legal expert, but i think it's going to trial, m8
OP's name checks out.
And if this thread is representative of what evidence the jury are going to see and the conclusions they are likely to draw, it's unlikely to go well for him.
Maybe OP should volunteer to be his defense counsel, he's done such a cracking job getting people on side here with his thoughtful responses and willingness to listen to others' views.
Cop shootings always show the degeneracy of political ideology.
When you've got right wingers defending straight up murder and lefties demanding LWP for a cop who didn't take one to the aorta before firing, its time to bring AI into the courtroom. There isn't anything to argue here.
he'll get off. Not everybody's full of ****. it wont go to trial. justice prevails 99% of the time. People dont like rioting but they'll will chose rioting over injustice most of the time.
You actually think believing some lady might throw hot water on you is a license to shoot someone in the face?
You've either led an incredibly sheltered life, or you've killed a lot of people.
I'm a complete square who hasn't been in a fight since I was 12 and that situation wouldn't be in the top 20 times I've felt threatened or scared.
Miraculously I've never shot, or even punched anyone in those situations.
Have you thought through what society would look like if every time someone imagined they were threatened, even with something like hot water, they just executed other person?
Maybe OP should volunteer to be his defense counsel, he's done such a cracking job getting people on side here with his thoughtful responses and willingness to listen to others' views.
yeah i was gonna say ..... buddy's gonna need some help in court. get on it, op
3 cops vs a woman with a pot of hot water, no choice but to blast her in the face amirite
he'll get off. Not everybody's full of ****. it wont go to trial. justice prevails 99% of the time. People dont like rioting but they'll will chose rioting over injustice most of the time.
My hypothetic was assuming your interpretation of events was correct, which I dont personally think it is. Regardless, you have more faith in the justice system than I do, especially when it pertains to racial culture war issues.
I am skeptical the officer will receive a fair trial, but even if he did I suspect he is guilty of something serious.
A white cop who wrote "you're fcked" on his gun because he couldn't wait to kill someone, executed another white guy as he begged for his life on camera and skated.
Police are def being unfairly persecuted when they face consequences for killing someone like 1 in every 4,000 times.
You actually think believing some lady might throw hot water on you is a license to shoot someone in the face?
You've either led an incredibly sheltered life, or you've killed a lot of people.
I'm a complete square who hasn't been in a fight since I was 12 and that situation wouldn't be in the top 20 times I've felt threatened or scared.
Miraculously I've never shot, or even punched anyone in those situations.
Have you thought through what society would look like if every time someone imagined they
First off it was boiling water and secondly she DID throw it at him. Why dont you ask Marquez Tolbert what he thinks about your theories on life.
My hypothetic was assuming your interpretation of events was correct, which I dont personally think it is. Regardless, you have more faith in the justice system than I do, especially when it pertains to racial culture war issues.
I am skeptical the officer will receive a fair trial, but even if he did I suspect he is guilty of something serious.
Thats fine. I realize my suggesting it was a case of suicide by cop is just what I believe happened but there's no question on her intentions to throw the boiling water on him. That's beyond dispute.
Thats fine. I realize my suggesting it was a case of suicide by cop is just what I believe happened but there's no question on her intentions to throw the boiling water on him. That's beyond dispute.
As evidenced by this thread, the bolded doesn't mean what you think it means.
Also, you have yet to explain whom he's going to sue and what he's going to sue them for.
It's not limited to one outlet. The coverage I have seen so far has been pretty universal. I mean you guys are perfect examples of that. There hasnt be any people that agree with me and I'd say that's because of the media coverage and the lack of detail. I question why the lady clearly throwing boiling water at the cop is a detail that hasnt been discussed AT ALL demonstrates clear bias. That answer your question bud?
I am familiar with this story. This might shock you, but the fact that one person who had negative press coverage had a legitimate reason to sue the outlet does not mean that every person who has negative press coverage has a legitimate reason to sue the outlet. Very, very few, in fact. So, I'll ask you again: using your own words, whom is he going to sue and what is his cause of action?
I am familiar with this story. This might shock you, but the fact that one person who had negative press coverage had a legitimate reason to sue the outlet does not mean that every person who has negative press coverage has a legitimate reason to sue the outlet. Very, very few, in fact. So, I'll ask you again: using your own words, whom is he going to sue and what is his cause of action?
You want me to list media outlets?
