21–30 of 51 posts
It was not an assassination, only an assassination attempt; the trooper has survived being shot by the domestic terrorist.
We've had to ask you this before.
Title: ‘Assassinated in cold blood’: activist killed protesting Georgia’s ‘Cop City’ Reality: Activist was "protesting" (ie. camping out) at the future site of a police training facility, cops arrived to kick them out, and there was a shoot-out that resulted in the activist being shot dead and a cop being injured. I'm not sure how the title got past the editors, considering how misleading it is. It's technically true…
Except that it doesn't: the fact that a cop was shot doesn't imply that Teran shot first. In terms of evidence of that specific claim, the evidence is exactly as it stood at the time of publication (and at the time of me writing this.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That still doesn't mean he shot first.
If the police shot first, he would be dead before he shot the officer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There isn't any bodycam footage, but I find it extremely hard to believe that Teran managed to shoot a police officer after he had been shot several times.
You've reduced it down to a single scenario, but that's one of many: it seems just as plausible that the police shot at him, he shot back, and then they hit him multiple times. It also seems plausible (although less likely) that his gun was fired by someone else. Either way, the important fact is that we do not know more because there is no bodycam footage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've reduced it down to a single scenario, but that's one of many: it seems just as plausible that the police shot at him, he shot back, and then they hit him multiple times. It also seems plausible (although less likely) that his gun was fired by someone else. Either way, the important fact is that we do not know more because there is no bodycam footage.
If someone else had shot the gun, there would have been physical evidence of another person in the immediate area, which we would have heard about by now.
But again, that's the less likely scenario. I still think it's more likely the cops shot at him, he shot back, and then they killed him in a second volley. This would be compatible with all public facts about the case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This doesn't materially conflict the statement in the article, which links to that press release: the police have provided no evidence that the victim short first. As TFA points out, there is conveniently no police bodycam footage.
Ballistics evidence and likely residue on the hands of the deceased will almost surely support the thesis that he shot at the cops. If you point a gun at a cop, it’s not surprising that you get shot by them. (There’s no legal obligation for the police to shoot second.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There isn't any bodycam footage, but I find it extremely hard to believe that Teran managed to shoot a police officer after he had been shot several times.
You've reduced it down to a single scenario, but that's one of many: it seems just as plausible that the police shot at him, he shot back, and then they hit him multiple times. It also seems plausible (although less likely) that his gun was fired by someone else. Either way, the important fact is that we do not know more because there is no bodycam footage.
I think for something to be deemed “just as plausible”, you would need to demonstrate that by in large police fire on subjects first when unprovoked at a greater rate than when provoked. I am not saying that police never act unprovoked, but I’d bet it is statistically higher that when there is a weapons discharge involving police, there was a provocation from someone first.
From the other side of the story: https://gbi.georgia.gov/press-releases/2023-01-20/gbi-invest... >UPDATE > > Atlanta, GA (January 20, 2023) – We are releasing a photo of the handgun that was in Manuel Esteban Paez Teran’s possession when a Georgia State Patrol trooper was shot on January 18 at the site of the future Atlanta Public Safety Training Center. The handgun is described as a Smith & Wesson M&P Shield 9mm. F…
This doesn't materially conflict the statement in the article, which links to that press release: the police have provided no evidence that the victim short first. As TFA points out, there is conveniently no police bodycam footage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I basically stopped reading the original article here: >>Officials say Manuel shot first at a state trooper “without warning” and an officer or officers returned fire, but they have produced no evidence for the claim. Except of course…for the trooper with the bullet wound in the hospital that is communicated in the very next sentence… >>The trooper was described as stable and in hospital Thursday. How does this story…
A bullet doesn't guarantee your chronology. The article's factual basis is correct: the police claim he fired first, and an officer was shot, but we lack the bodycam footage to actually verify the chronology.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A bullet doesn't guarantee your chronology. The article's factual basis is correct: the police claim he fired first, and an officer was shot, but we lack the bodycam footage to actually verify the chronology.
I’d suggest that you are more likely to be shot by the police if you provoke them first than the other way around. Especially if other folks were also arrested in the same police operation without provoking the police and managed to avoid being shot and killed in the process.
I don't dispute this. But "provocation" is not a capital crime in this country.