Did the St. Louis police have to shoot Kajieme Powell? (Killing mentally ill black men is AOK?)

[Fred Sanders]

My question is, did the maker of the video release it to the public or did the St. Louis police release it in a magnanimous act of transparency as they claim? Who is buying the tripe that this killing was justified? Who can watch this video and claim officer safety required lethal force? Is it because this man had mental health issues, so it is not as bad, good riddance, because that is the vibe I get.

...................

Did the St. Louis police have to shoot Kajieme Powell?

Updated by Ezra Klein on August 20, 2014, 11:13 p.m. ET @ezraklein


We may never really know what happened in the three minutes between when Michael Brown was stopped for jaywalking and when he was shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson.

But we do know what happened on Tuesday during the 23 seconds between when St. Louis police arrived and when 25-year-old Kajieme Powell was shot and killed on Riverview Blvd. We know because police released the video. Powell walks around the sidewalk and a small grass embankment. He ignores police warnings to drop his knife. He advances on police at a normal speed, his arms swinging at his sides. And he is shot nine times, including while on the ground.

The footage is horrifying to watch, in part for the speed with which it turns from comic to tragic. It begins with a man chuckling over Powell's erratic — but seemingly harmless — behavior. Seconds later, Powell is dead.

http://www.vox.com/2014/8/20/6051431/did-the-st-louis-police-have-to-shoot-kajieme-powell

Go to the 2 minute mark and judge for yourself on the clear evidence.

https://m.

[veveto]

1. This is police abuse. The law doesn't say thieves must be killed

The culprit cops need to be brought to justice. Although Powell was a thief, he was unarmed.

[Fred Sanders]

3. Or black men acting strangely in broad daylight in a busy commercial area while you are two

guys with guns behind a police cruiser against lone crazy guy with a paring knife at a distance.

[Cosmocat]

71. On some level they HAD to kill him because of the Brown incident

How would it look if they were trying to justify shooting and killing a completely unarmed man and a few days later NOT killing a man with a knife?

[HooptieWagon]

2. Probably not.

But they knew the DAs office would cover up for them, and they wouldn't face any consequences. Seems to be a long-running pattern.

[world wide wally]

4. It all comes down to our hard on for guns once again

Don't you feel safer now?

[Fred Sanders]

5. The cops could have easily backed off, one with a Taser out...but as you say, both go for the gun..

I can not watch this video and not conclude the cops have not committed at least criminal negligence causing death.

The badge does not give you criminal immunity.

[KurtNYC]

6. Is this a trick question?

At 0:48 Kajieme says "I'm tired of this shit."

One of the by standers says "This is not how you do it bro. You know what I'm saying?" before the cops roll up.

The cameraman moves to a position where he will not be directly down range. Everyone at the scene, including Kajieme, seems to expect the shooting and then Kajieme orders them "Shoot me! Shoot me now!" It seems he was suicidal and knew that if he behaved in a certain way that within minutes the cops would come and kill him. He was right and that's sad.

They could have stayed in the car -- hard to get stabbed through the walls an SUV. The cops could have talked to him and waited for back-up and for a non-lethal way to end this and that might have helped change expectations and perceptions. It might have diffused just a little of the tension in St Louis but no one in this video was expecting THAT.

[Fred Sanders]

25. They had multiple safety options, they aggressively drove up,got out of their armoured vehicle, and

pulled out two guns on a clearly deranged man....the facts.

On HD video, in broad daylight.

[KurtNYC]

32. Researchers studying "suicide by cop" came up with 3 criteria to distinguish

these shooting from other police shootings. This is their strictest set of criteria:

Drylie developed three criteria for determining if an officer-involved shooting was a suicide by cop: The subject had to voluntarily enter into a confrontation with police; to communicate suicidal intent, either through words or gestures (like putting a gun to his head); and to act in a threatening manner toward police.

http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/how-to-stop-suicide-by-cop-27758/

This shooting meets all three of those.

In contrast the Mike Brown shooting meets NONE OF THEM. Ignoring those differences does not help utilize this opportunity for the residents of Ferguson to get the changes they need.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

103. Assisted suicide is illegal in something like 48 states

and even where legal has to meet very strict standards.

Is there some specific reason police should simply be given a 'pass' in assisting the mentally ill in committing suicide?

Saying that someone is attempting 'suicide by cop' is no excuse for police to help them succeed.

[Lee-Lee]

7. My post in another thread

erratic man comes at you with a knife.

What would you do?

Keep in mind a person acting so erratically that he ignored two officers with guns drawn.

At the point he was shot he was too close for the taser to be used safely, and moving toward the officers- a taser is questionable at best in that situation, and the result if it failed was a stabbed officer.

Same goes for the idiotic "shoot him in the leg" crap. I challenge any of you to hit a moving leg on a person accurately under stress, a leg moves much faster than a torso and is much smaller. Ohh, and if you miss you get stabbed. And if the hit isnt enough to stop him you get stabbed.

This all went down in a space of about 12-15 seconds. Not enough time to deploy less lethal options from the trunk, not really fast enough to communicate between officers and use a taser because you have to tell your partner you are switching so they cover you. Had he stayed in one place a little longer and not lunged at them, then the taser would be a good option. But going from police arriving to having a man with a knife come at them in around 15 seconds? Too quick for that.

Sorry, good shoot. Would have been a good shoot had they been police officers or somebody grandmother. If you come after people with a knife in hand, and they have a gun, you are going to get shot. sometimes doing stupid shit is fatal. Based on his actions its likely he wanted to provoke a shooting.

I would love to put a bunch of you out in a training exercise with simunitions and rubber knives and let you actually try and actually do all these things you say the cops should do. Just various scenarios where a suspect has a knife to show you just how quick you can get stabbed and give you some real world perspective.

[Fred Sanders]

10. The man was of little danger, the response of lethal force was criminal....training videos do not

account for all situations.

Why did both cops emerge with guns drawn?

Because they were trained to, guns are much more fun and too many cops consider themselves immune from the silly law.

[Lee-Lee]

17. A man acting erratically with a knife

And coming toward you is not "of little danger"

[BaggersRDumb]

29. If he was white they would have tazed hiim or done something else, that he is BLACK means instant

death for him.

If he was white he would AT LEAST not have been shot that quickly, white cops DONT see BLACK people as having the same value as white people.

BLACK or LATINO people are "less than" in the eyes of most white people including cops.

[Laelth]

50. Perhaps it is broad and racist.

Last edited Thu Aug 21, 2014, 01:57 PM - Edit history (1)

It's also true, and it is becoming very difficult to deny the truth to which the above poster attests.

-Laelth

[arcane1]

55. Some people are itching to make racist statements n/t

[world wide wally]

12. Huh?

Not safe to shoot him with a taser?

Do you think it might hurt him?

[Lee-Lee]

16. Not a good taser situation

Because he was moving toward the officer with a knife- so had the taser not worked he would have been close enough to stab.

[world wide wally]

20. And what would be the odds of two tasers not working. The same or better than two guns not working?

[Lee-Lee]

21. Here is how tasers work

Tasers are a lot less reliable against a moving person.

If you are not familiar with how a taser works it shoots out two wires simultaneously with barbed hooks. The hooks have to both hit the subject and penetrate clothing enough to stick in the skin, then the electric shock is delivered.

Hitting a person and getting both barbs in is much, much harder when they are in motion.

And you only get one shot, reloading a taser takes quite a while. You miss and you are done.

And your partner will have a gun, just in case because tasers are less reliable. But no time for him to follow up in this case, so the taser wasn't viable.

Had he just been standing there, taser is viable. Coming toward officers? Not viable.

[bluesbassman]

34. The point you are strenuosly avoiding is they did not even try for less than lethal.

The entire scenario was agressive on the part of the LEOs. They had many options to diffuse up until the time they pulled the trigger, yet chose agression.

Not a good shoot.

[Lee-Lee]

42. They never had time to try for less lethal

Tell me how you do it.

Call comes in for theft/disturbance.

You pull up and open doors, at that point suspect pulls out knife and walks toward you, veers away from you briefly, then comes toward you knife in hand and is within less than 2 seconds of being in stabbing range..

Total elapsed time under 15 seconds. You have to in that time asses the situation, check your surroundings in case anyone else is involved, try and get the suspect to comply with verbal commands, call for backup on the radio, and make a life or death decision.

Tell me, in those 15 seconds, what less-lethal will you try, how many seconds will it take you to employ it (you won't even be starting until at least 5 seconds in as it takes time to realize what is happening and size up the situation) and how will you employ it so that there is time for other options if it fails and he is still coming at you?

As I said in another post, i would love to put some of you in training scenarios where you actually had to try and do the things you claim cops should be able to.

[bluesbassman]

47. You might have a point if it was midnight in a dark alley.

Broad daylight, lots of space to maneuver, no these two cops were aggressive from the start and escalated without thought of diffusing.

I don't know what kind of "training" you're involved in, but if it produces the kind of LEOs filmed gunning down a man in braod daylight on a sidewalk, I think you may want to re-evaluate the techniques being taught.

[Lee-Lee]

49. Like I said- tell em what you would have done?

Don't just say "something different".

Tell me- you are already out of the car when the knife appears, you have about 13 seconds between then and when he is so close and coming forward so close you are seconds from being stabbed.

What do you do?

[polly7]

52. Get back in the car?

and give the man a chance to calm down if he indeed was agitated ...... assess and try to understand the situation?

[Lee-Lee]

60. There are bystanders around

And they are staying close.

Once on scene the officers had a responsibility for their safety too. Had they retreated to the car and he harmed someone else they would have been liable, and the same people screaming about him getting shot would be screaming about "coward cops letting people get stabbed while they hid in the car".

If this dude was out in a field with nobody around, maybe that was viable.

is it such a hard concept to think that the person to blame when a man with a knife comes after cops and gets shot is.... the person who came after cops with a knife?

[polly7]

62. Those bystanders were not bothered one bit by that man.

He made no threatening motions towards anyone - including the cops. Try harder.

[Lee-Lee]

64. In what world is coming at someone waving a knife "not threatening"?

[polly7]

65. He was 'waving' a knife?

Could you link to the video you saw that shows that, because in the one I saw his arms didn't move from his side.

TIA.

[smokey nj]

69. I watched the video, he was not waving a knife.

[Lee-Lee]

72. Watch the video again full screen

he pulls the knife out of his pocket at 1:26 just after police arrive, choosing to escalate the encounter, and has it in his right hand until he is shot.

[uppityperson]

106. His arms are down, he did not Wave a knife or Lunge at the cops. And yes, I watched full screen

Your argument here is they needed to kill him before he hurt anyone since he was waving a knife and lunging at people.

Since neither of those actions show up on the video, are you one of the police or spectators there as you seem to be drawing conclusions of actions not on that video?

[Lee-Lee]

73. watch it again full screen

he pulls the knife out of his pocket with his right hand at 1:26 just after police arrive, choosing to escalate the encounter, and has it in his right hand until he is shot.

[smokey nj]

78. I watched it full screen, his arms were down the whole time. At no point did he wave the knife.

[FrodosPet]

111. Every call should be answered by 4 officers

Every police officer should be big enough, strong enough, and fit enough to be able to wrestle down and control 99% of non-gun weapon bearers.

Time to get rid of the fat donut eaters and people too small to take physical charge of almost any suspect.

[bluesbassman]

56. Get back in the car?

Call for additional support because obviously these two cops were no match for that hulking black man with a paring knife.

No, these two did exactly what it is becoming all to apparent in these situations. They "stood their ground" and executed a suspect. So if that is the type of "training" that is being promoted throughout the LEO community, we haven't seen the last of this type of incident.

[Lee-Lee]

61. See my above post

because there were bystanders there, and close, they cops had a responsibility to ensure he didn't harm them once they were there.

Can't do that from the car.

Had they retreated to the car and he stabbed the guy with the phone for recording him we would be hearing about the coward cops who hid in the car and let somebody get shot...

[bluesbassman]

67. They didn't seem too concerned about the safety of the bystanders when they unloaded on him.

So the possibility of one of their rounds missing the target or ricocheting and striking a bystander was outweighed by the need to "protect" those bystanders from a paring knife?

You really need to decide which narrative you want to stick with in your defense of this execution.

[Lee-Lee]

70. When he came at them that changed the dynamic

they would have shot just the same had he turned and tried to stab a bystander.

It was a bad situation, with no good choices that could be made. Sometimes that happens in police work and in life.

And the responsibility for it falls upon the one person who could have avoided the whole thing or de-escalated it instead of escalating it- but he paid the ultimate price for his decisions.

He could have not pulled the knife out when police arrived.

He could have dropped the knife when ordered to at gunpoint.

He could have not continued to come at a person, any person, swinging a knife.

[bluesbassman]

75. I'll correct your statement to "no good choices made".

By anybody on that day (with the possible exception being the citizen who had the presence of mind to record the incident).

But you are right that Kajieme Powell could have made different decisions.

He could have decided to be raised in an environment that provided him with a decent education and opportunity.

He could have decided to be afforded proper medical and psychiatric care.

He could have decided to be born white.

No, wait a minute, Mr. Powell didn't get to make any of those decisions did he?

[uppityperson]

107. They could have backed up.

right? Backed up, talked more with him, etc?


"he needed to be killed before he hurt a bystander"? So I guess anyone witth a knife, or a stick, or how about a plastic bag that you could asphixiate or strangle someone with, or a tie or belt or shoe lace, is at risk of being shot and killed because they "could hurt someone"?

This reminds me of the Seattle cop who shot and killed a man who turned to see who the cop was yelling at. That cop put himself so close that if the man had chosen to hurt him he could have. Yet the shot dead man threatened no one, was walking down the street with a legal knife, bothering no one.

If I am carving an apple in public with my knife, you might shoot me because, after all, if I decided to, I could hurt people?

what the fuck?

[Lee-Lee]

109. lets go through your ideas point by point

hey could have backed up.

right? Backed up, talked more with him, etc?

No, want to know what happens when you try and back up when somebody is coming toward you? A great likely hood you can fall, and it puts you at a significant disadvantage even if you don't. In addition studies have shown that backing up in the face of aggressive behavior encourages the aggressor to be more bold.

They were under no legal obligation to back up, and tactically it wouldn't have been wise.

Powell, however, had no cause to come toward them with the knife.

At any point he could have dropped the knife or stopped coming toward them, and he would be alive.

But you want the police to jump through all kinds of unreasonable hoops putting themselves more at risk while absolving the man who instigated, escalated and could have stopped all this at any time of any responsibility for what happened- and that is Powell.

"he needed to be killed before he hurt a bystander"? So I guess anyone witth a knife, or a stick, or how about a plastic bag that you could asphixiate or strangle someone with, or a tie or belt or shoe lace, is at risk of being shot and killed because they "could hurt someone"?

Well, no. Anyone with a working brain knows the difference between just that and a person behaving like he did, pulling a knife out just as police arrived and going toward them yelling. Can you not comprehend the difference?

This reminds me of the Seattle cop who shot and killed a man who turned to see who the cop was yelling at. That cop put himself so close that if the man had chosen to hurt him he could have. Yet the shot dead man threatened no one, was walking down the street with a legal knife, bothering no one.

Not sure how that is relevant thousands of miles away, each case is different.

If I am carving an apple in public with my knife, you might shoot me because, after all, if I decided to, I could hurt people?

No, as I said anyone with a working brain can tell the difference between someone carving a pumpkin and a person who just committed a theft and is acting erratically, who pulls a knife out on police as they arrive and comes toward them yelling refusing orders to drop the knife and stop approaching. That is why they have minimum standards and entry exams for police, to weed out people like you who lack the ability to discern between such clearly different cases.

what the fuck?

Indeed. How can anyone think this mans behavior is the same as someone carving a pumpkin?

[uppityperson]

110. At least I can tell the difference between an apple and a pumpkin. And I can walk backwards without

falling down. His arms were at his side, he did not "come at" anyone on the video.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5429049

[BainsBane]

95. That would require not wanting to kill

If we listen to their defenders, it would appear that killing is the goal and that everything is about justifying that end. Yeah, walk away. Step aside. Do what you or I would have done, what any normal human being who did not SEEK to kill would do.

Her defense of this is scarier than the shooting. I assumed this was bad behavior by rogue cops. If this is really standard procedure, police have become death squads.

[bluesbassman]

96. It's a little mind boggling to me.

LEOs are presumably trained how to; 1) diffuse tense situations, 2) take appropriate measures to ensure their safety, the publics safety, and yes even the suspects safety, 3) and of course to defend themselves.

How we've gotten to the point where TWO LEOs feel compelled to unload their weapons into a suspect as their first option is a sad state of affairs.

[ALBliberal]

76. shoot but not to kill? maybe in leg?

Sounds barbaric but not as barbaric as nine? shots some after he had fallen? Cuffing a dead man? What were cops thinking?

[pnwmom]

81. They could have tasered him through an open car window.

[hack89]

23. Tasers work about 70% of the time

due to a variety of factors

The problem with the TASER, however, is its effectiveness. In a Department of Justice-commissioned study by the Florida Gulf Coast University Research Institute the TASER was 69 percent effective the first time it was deployed. It became more effective in its second and third iteration.

There are a number of reasons for the TASER’s failure – the most common is that both probes do not make it directly into the subject’s skin.

http://www.tricitytribuneusa.com/tasers-not-always-100-percent-effective/

[GitRDun]

31. Rubber bullets, bean bags, mace, pepper spray?

I think we should stop going to deadliest force as the first option.

[Lee-Lee]

33. When there is time, sure

In 15 seconds there was no time to get the less lethal options like bean bag guns out and deploy them.

In this situation pepper spray wasn't an option- the situation went down too fast and he was too close and still approaching. A person sprayed can still close with you and stab you if they are determined or on something.

[BaggersRDumb]

36. There wasnt time to taze him? Really?

[Lee-Lee]

38. No, among other issues

I've typed out a bunch already, see my other posts on it.

[BaggersRDumb]

40. And you are wrong, clearly...woulda been time if he was a white kid in Beverly Hills

wearing nice clothes, etc.

PERIOD

[Lee-Lee]

44. No, not really

but what do I know, I am probably one of only a handful of people here who has actually been certified to use a taser, used one, and been tased....

[BaggersRDumb]

51. absolute reality is if rich white kid he

Is not shot , he is tazed 190% of the time

[Logical]

37. Pure BS, stay behind the hood,try the taser first, other cop has gun ready. Nt

[Logical]

39. Fucking cops want NO RISK so just shoot! Nt

[GitRDun]

66. That is the best description of the problem I've heard.

The police chief stood there and talked about the officers right to go home safely to their families, etc.

To me it boils down to just police departments being to damned lazy to train vigorously to use non-lethal means first. They want little or no risk, grab the gun....and it costs lives.

[Logical]

41. This video is pure bullshit.....

So in every situation cops should pull their weapon?

[okieinpain]

45. I agree 100%. n/t.

[pnwmom]

80. Why didn't they taser him from the safety of their vehicles?

[Lee-Lee]

82. Its hard enough to reliably employ a taser when standing in the open

From inside a vehicle? Very hard. The suspect would have to walk to just the right place at just the right distance. Part of using a taser and the training is you position yourself relative to the person at the right distance and angle, from a car you would have to wait for him to go to just the right spot.

And they were already out of the vehicle. If you watch the tape they got out of then vehicle, then he pulled the knife out of his pocket. at that distance from him trying to get back in is a poor choice, and then if they got back in that left him free to run and possibly attack bystanders if he wanted- and since his intent seems to be to provoke police until they shot him that is quite possiblyy what the next escalation to get that would have been.

Once they were out of the vehicle he escalated the encounter by pulling a knife. Once he did that they couldn't retreat and leave him to possibly harm bystanders.

Had he dropped the knife, he would be alive. had he stayed at a distance and not approached the officers with a knife he probably would have been tazed and be alive.

[pnwmom]

83. They never had to get out of their vehicle. They could have called for back up

and engaged in conversation with him through the open window.

They lied when they said he raised his arm with the knife. As even you can plainly see, his arms stayed down the whole time. They could have retreated to their vehicle and continued to engage him verbally, while waiting for a chance to taser him -- and waiting for backup. They didn't have to kill him.

Also, they didn't have to shoot multiple times. They could have shot him in the leg and disabled him. Instead, they shot to kill, and they shot him over and over. There was no reason to do that. He had no gun. If he'd been hit in the leg, he and his knife wouldn't have posed any risk to them. He wasn't even close to them.

[Lee-Lee]

84. They got out of their car BEFORE he pulled the knife

There was no reason as they pulled up for what was supposed to be a theft call to hide in a vehicle.

I have already debunked the taser him and shoot him in the leg nonsense from all the folks who have never used a taser and probably never fired a gun.

When you shoot, you shoot until you are sure the threat is stopped. That is what they did.

Wasn't even close to them? When he was shot he was at a distance that could have been closed in under 2 seconds.

There is one person responsible for Mt Powells death- Mr Powell. He made all the choices that lead to it, he had the ability to de-escalate at any moment but chose the opposite path. When you pull a knife out on cops as they arrive, you are looking for trouble.

[polly7]

86. He was shot, and then fell down the hill he was up on 'placing'

him that close - and obviously, not able to threaten anyone or anything. Yet they still kept shooting - and then just rolled him over even closer to slap on the handcuffs! Is that also proper protocol for a dead or dying man filled with 9 bullets? Did they take a pulse, call for medical aid - anything at all besides jumping out of their vehicle and shooting him down? It was all, like - over .. done, nothing to see here folks, move along now. Very, very sad. I also read here somewhere he'd just lost his mother and was suffering from depression, which makes it all the more tragic.

[pnwmom]

87. This man was clearly mentally ill. The police are SUPPOSED to be trained to deal with mentally ill

people without resorting to unnecessary shooting.

There could be a reason for the police to keep shooting another shooter. But he was only holding a knife, and then he fell to the ground -- and they kept shooting! The threat from that little knife was over with one shot. There was no excuse for them to continue. They were no longer in danger.

And why would they handcuff someone with 9 bullets in him, instead of doing what they could to save his life while waiting for an ambulance?

[treestar]

90. So the old saw about bringing a knife to a gun fight can be retired

As the knife is so dangerous to the gun wielding person.

We had a local case where a person a cop was chasing killed the cop with a knife. It was disconcerting, to say the least.

http://www.odmp.org/officer/20973-lieutenant-joseph-lawrence-szczerba

I actually wonder if this case could have affected other police departments. The cop here may have had his gun but he didn't use it. He was simply chasing the suspect.

[JEB]

8. The cops here are so sadistic, cruel and brutal

to take a young man's life. I'd say those cops are the mentally ill ones in that picture. Do they hire them that way or do they grow into it on the job?

[Lee-Lee]

9. So I assume had you been them you would have allowed yourself to get stabbed?

[Fred Sanders]

11. Watch the video...you would have killed him, with your partner also killing at the same time?

Takes all kinds.....

My kind would serve and protect not lock and load.

[Lee-Lee]

19. Yes, I would have shot also

And I would hope any partner I had would have my back.

If you come at cops with a knife drawn, you are going to get shot.

I am no longer a cop, but if you come after me with a knife, you are going to get shot.

Moral of the story- don't come after people with a knife.

[Fred Sanders]

22. Bullets would close the distance in .02 seconds....x a second shooter in case you missed from 10 ft.

I am familiar with police training videos...cough.....and their extensive criminal and constitutional law training videos.....cough....and their in depth understanding of mental health issues....hack....

Gun training and killer training, that part is the best!

[Lee-Lee]

24. Tell me, Mcgyver, what would you have done?

Man with a knife, acting irrationally, you have a gun, he is about 2-3 seconds max from being withing striking range.

You have to make an instant decision.

Cop or citizen, either way what would you do?

[pnwmom]

88. Why should police shoot multiple times -- when the victim had no gun to shoot back with?

The police disabled him with one shot. That's when they should have stopped. His knife was no threat to him once he collapsed, and yet they kept shooting.

[LannyDeVaney]

13. Unless the guy was a super ninja ...

or had a 6' foot long magic katana , he wasn't close to stabbing those cops.

And nevermind the police report was embellished to make the guy seem more threatening. If the cops were justified, why did they lie on the report?

[Lee-Lee]

18. He could close that distance in under 2 seconds.

[frylock]

63. they lied on the report..

to reiterate: they lied on the report.

[JEB]

15. The guy taking the video has more sense

about how to handle the two soda guy than both cops combined.

[LanternWaste]

58. Seems rather dogmatic to emphatically imply the only two options available were...

Seems rather dogmatic and closed-minded to emphatically and authoritatively imply the only two options available were shoot-to-kill and allow oneself to be stabbed.

But, as you've advertised (with dramatic irrelevance) you've been shot with a taser, I imagine you believe you have all relevant knowledge, and will maintain that same pretense regardless.

[frylock]

59. do the police not have the ability to use evasive manuveurs?

are they obligated to remain in place as the actor advances? of course, if the police were to retreat in this scenario, it likely wouldn't reflect too well on their masculinity.

[Fred Sanders]

14. Criminal negligence, or their training was pathetic.

[Fred Sanders]

27. Truth always draws flame, amazing how even the clear video gets the outrage response...I would

let a real jury decide, I would have these cops charged and let a jury of the community decide.

[sub.theory]

28. Doesn't look like it

From the video it doesn't appear so. The fact that the man was armed is not disputed, but whether he was an imminent threat is far less clear. It appears from the video that the man was agitated, probably suicidal, and looking for the cops to shoot him. He was not rushing towards the officers or raising the knife. It seems that non-lethal force was called for here. With two officers present, it's difficult to see why one of them couldn't grab his pepper spray and end the situation with the man alive and unarmed. I understand that this situation happened quickly and the man was indeed armed, but I don't think shooting was warranted and certainly was not the proper course of action.

[Quayblue]

74. I agree; THIS was the appropriate time to use pepper spray

[JEB]

30. Why couldn't the cops have approached with caution?

Nobody including the guy taking the video seemed in danger. Give him some space, watch, contain if necessary and come up with a sensible plan. Brutal overwhelming force seems to be these cops first choice of action. It was the last for Powell. No chance to make amends for Powell or the cops. Sickness and death.

[Iggo]

43. No, they didn't have to. They wanted to. (n/t)

[JTFrog]

46. ^^ this ^^ n/t

[Laelth]

48. k&r for exposure. n/t

-Laelth

[Horse with no Name]

54. the glaring point to the one afraid the cops were going to get stabbed

there were several people walking around this man and not ONE of them felt threatened.

ONLY the cops felt threatened. Why is that?

[moriah]

68. Because unlike the innocent bystanders, it was their job to approach the dude....

.... who was telling everybody to "get the fuck away from" him.

The one guy who got close to the dude who was pacing and agitated made the guy get more upset, expressing delusions of grandeur ("I'm on Instagram, I'm on Twitter. You know who I am?&quot and another expression of frustration, that he was "tired of this shit".

He decided to just keep walking, try to keep steady and not make eye contact, because it wasn't his job to subdue the guy.

I do think that when getting a call about a mentally ill individual, they should send cops armed with tasers more than other weapons. But the dude was walking around the square with his hand stuck in his pocket, and then when the cops told him to get his hands out of his pocket, that's when they start saying "Drop the knife!".

So it's also quite possible that no one else saw the knife, because it was held in the hand that was in the pocket (his right hand).

[still_one]

57. as more of this story comes out the answer is definitely not

[ALBliberal]

79. i agree

Why shoot to kill? Makes no sense to me. Still shooting when he's on the ground? They just had no regard for his humanity. They knew he was dead. Their objective.

[LostInAnomie]

77. Looks fine to me.

The guy was acting erratic, yelling at the cops to shoot him, and then came at them with a knife. Police shouldn't be required to use pepper spray or tasers when someone is coming at them with a lethal weapon.

[Lee-Lee]

85. Wow, someone else with some common sense.

Thank you

[treestar]

89. Looking at that, the police shot him awfully quickly

There must have been something else they could have done.

[Fred Sanders]

91. Not quickly, almost instantaneously...I repeat, it was criminal negligence.

[LostInAnomie]

92. Yes, he did come at them with a knife almost instantaneously.

[Fred Sanders]

97. You perhaps do not know the meaning of instantaneous? Let me help.

The young man was instantaneously dead by cops with bullets to the chest having just exited their armoured vehicle to do so....against a steak knife.....

[LostInAnomie]

98. Sure, I do. I'll use it in a few sentences for you.

Once the cops pulled up, Kajieme Powell instantaneously started yelling at them to shoot him. He then, instantaneously pulled a knife from his pocket. After this instantaneous knife pulling, he instantaneously charged at the police.

A steak knife can kill a person just as easily as any other knife. The fact that they are used to cut meat is a pretty good hint.

[Fred Sanders]

99. Now you do not know the meaning of "charged"....watch the video again....

[LostInAnomie]

108. Yep. I'll stick with charged.

Not that it matters. I could have said "briskly walked" or "spryly strolled" and it wouldn't change the fact that he was coming at another human being with a deadly weapon intending to either kill or do grievous harm. You do that to anyone and they are within their rights to defend themselves.

[Fred Sanders]

113. Of course. But to kill? When other perfectly viable options were a available? Do you truly think

that they had no other option but to kill? Really? Watch the video again.

Watch for the cuffs on a corpse....these two people were the ones acting insanely, a badge does not entitle one to kill, the law is equal for all.

[flt rsk]

93. Just thinking.

I just watched the shooting of the man with the knife in St. Louis. Rachel Maddow was covering the shooting. I’ve heard the description of the shooting many times but this was the first time to actually watch. One thing that stood out to me was the movements/actions of the man that was shot. As the police arrive, he is standing near the retaining wall on his left. He backs up and looks over his left shoulder. Not pausing, he then advances on the police and is apparently saying/yelling “shoot me”. He then stops near the lamp/power pole, looks over his right shoulder and seems to notice the people behind him in the line of fire. He takes a jog to his left, which removes those behind him from the line of fire. He then advances on the police and is killed.

To me, it looks as though the man is dancing to a “suicide-by-cop” plan. While his actions might seem to be irrational, the fact that he placed the stolen items in plain sight, did not attempt to get away, and seemed to be waiting for the police, indicate, at least to me, that he knew what he was doing. Who was he looking at when he looked over his left shoulder? Does an irrational person think or even care about the collateral damage their actions cause?

This missive is not an effort to provide the police with justification to kill someone. Fear and adrenalin are powerful motivators but not excuses. Nor is it an attempt to vilify a dead man whose actions I do not understand.

[BainsBane]

94. It turns my stomach that anyone here would justify that murder

If someone is so easily frightened, they have no business leaving the house let alone serving on a police force. those cops didn't break a sweat. They were not afraid. They meant to kill and they committed murder.

When I saw that video I assumed it was the action of rogue police officers abusing their authority. That we have people here claiming to be law enforcement supporting their actions is even more disturbing. If that is standard procedure, we really are in trouble. That means that contempt for human life is the standard and police commonly take no effort to evade danger and choose killing as a first option. It says they see themselves as executioner for even minor violations. If this really is acceptable procedure for law enforcement, that says that they are far worse than people on this board have portrayed. If defenses claiming this is acceptable are true, that says law enforcement have become death squads. That kind of behavior should be acceptable to no one with any sense of humanity. If killing first is now standard policing, I'm stating to wonder if some here are right that the police do more harm than good. Because people here who think they are defending police are instead demonstrating that police are far more deadly and far less concerned for the public than their worst critics ever imagined.

Is it also standard practice to cuff dead corpses? Is covering up homicide also standard police procedure these days?

[Fred Sanders]

100. You cuff corpses for the same reason you kill - your training.

[BainsBane]

101. Training? In case the area is struck with White Walkers?

At the very least it's tampering with evidence. At best it's covering up a homicide.

[Fred Sanders]

102. Agreed, I meant to be sarcastic. These cops must be held responsible, the mass media is too scared

to cover this story much, there is rock sold evidence of a homicide.

[sabrina 1]

104. No, they did not have to shoot him. And it is sad that we are so accustomed to this that there has

been hardly any outrage over yet another police shooting of someone who clearly could have been arrested.

Either we have the most incompetent cops in the world, other countries manage to arrest knife wielding people who are clearly mentally disturbed without blowing them away, or it is simply policy, to shoot to kill minorities and the poor. Race and class, two factors that can you get you killed by law enforcement in the US.

Imagine if that incident had occurred in an upscale neighborhood? That the person yelling at the cops was a member of a prominent family, does anyone think the cops would pull up like that and blow him away, or would there have been negotiators etc there to try to talk him down?

[FrodosPet]

112. Big burly cops capable of manhadling (literally) people is what is needed

The fitness requirement should be high enough to exclude the overweight donut eaters and people too small or weak to be able to physically contain 99% of the suspects that they will encounter.

[hifiguy]

105. Cops don't NEED to do disgusting shit like this

but some do it because they enjoy it.

Nine shots.

More murderers that will walk free still holding the power of judge, jury and executioner.