ICE told to get the eff out

[MNW67]

Then on that basis you should be able to see that a car on icy roads accelerating towards the agent and making contact with him was not being driven in a controlled manner and he would have been fearful for his life or injury.

I have already said, many times, that might be true. And that, as a result, the first shot might be justified.

 

[Highway Man]

I have already said, many times, that might be true. And that, as a result, the first shot might be justified.

So your only complaint is the further shots?

 

[motorbiking]

Fired in about 1 second or less. This is going nowhere

 

[Highway Man]

The timing is all-important here. it went..Bang, Bang. Bang. Bang. All above the law and well initiated and executed.
Had it gone. Bang, ....Pause ..bang....longer pause.. Bang.. car now halfway up the street Bang. Then you would have a case.

 

[MNW67]

The timing is all-important here. it went..Bang, Bang. Bang. Bang. All above the law and well initiated and executed.
Had it gone. Bang, ....Pause ..bang....longer pause.. Bang.. car now halfway up the street Bang. Then you would have a case.

That is the point. It didn't go bang, bang, bang. Law enforcement don't go bang, bang, bang. That would be a fire fight in a war. There was a delay between shots one and two whilst the agent assessed the situation. Then he made a deliberate decision to kill Renee with a controlled pair (the second and third shots). When you combine the actual timings with all the research and the training procedure, it is clear that he acted as I have described throughout this thread.

 

[motorbiking]

That is the point. It didn't go bang, bang, bang. Law enforcement don't go bang, bang, bang. That would be a fire fight in a war. There was a delay between shots one and two whilst the agent assessed the situation. Then he made a deliberate decision to kill Renee with a controlled pair (the second and third shots). When you combine the actual timings with all the research and the training procedure, it is clear that he acted as I have described throughout this thread.

It really isn’t and you keep misrepresenting the research.

You can’t prove shot 1 was not the head shot, you can’t prove there was any opportunity for reassessment and you persist in Ignoring case law that prevents the kind of scrutiny you want to apply.

 

[Highway Man]

That is the point. It didn't go bang, bang, bang. Law enforcement don't go bang, bang, bang. That would be a fire fight in a war. There was a delay between shots one and two whilst the agent assessed the situation. Then he made a deliberate decision to kill Renee with a controlled pair (the second and third shots). When you combine the actual timings with all the research and the training procedure, it is clear that he acted as I have described throughout this thread.

You have no knowledge of this other than an Ai bot. I can assure you that the timing of the shots along with the distance of the car traveling is critical in any shooting case, silly meaningless studies using milliseconds and non stressful environments mean nothing and offer no evidence based on the facts of this case

 

[Highway Man]

Also as a side note, the first shot was fired and the delay between the second set of shots could well be attributed to the agent having to get out of the way of the moving car heading towards him, he wouldn't have carried on firing whilst stepping out of the way as his aim wouldl have been compromised and could well result in him shooting his team mate or anyone else in the area.

 

[motorbiking]

You have no knowledge of this other than an Ai bot. I can assure you that the timing of the shots along with the distance of the car traveling is critical in any shooting case, silly meaningless studies using milliseconds and non stressful environments mean nothing and offer no evidence based on the facts of this case

correct - reaction time is not thinking time. Thinking time is 0.5 - 2 seconds.

First to Second Shot: Approximately 399 milliseconds (roughly four-tenths of a second).
Second to Third Shot: Approximately 299 milliseconds (roughly three-tenths of a second).
The entire sequence from the first to the final shot lasted just under 700 milliseconds.

Its a dead argument.

 

[Highway Man]

correct - reaction time is not thinking time. Thinking time is 0.5 - 2 seconds.

First to Second Shot: Approximately 399 milliseconds (roughly four-tenths of a second).
Second to Third Shot: Approximately 299 milliseconds (roughly three-tenths of a second).
The entire sequence from the first to the final shot lasted just under 700 milliseconds.

Its a dead argument.

and why it never saw the light of day in a court room. There was never a case for the ice agent to answer to.

 

[MNW67]

correct - reaction time is not thinking time. Thinking time is 0.5 - 2 seconds.

First to Second Shot: Approximately 399 milliseconds (roughly four-tenths of a second).
Second to Third Shot: Approximately 299 milliseconds (roughly three-tenths of a second).
The entire sequence from the first to the final shot lasted just under 700 milliseconds.

Its a dead argument.

The research shows that, once a threat has ended, the average untrained civilian can stop shooting within 350 milliseconds and a trained officer within 290 milliseconds. Maybe your brain is unusually slow.

 

[motorbiking]

I suspect there will be a 4th amendment civil claim for excessive force.

 

[motorbiking]

The research shows that the average untrained civilian can stop shooting within 350 milliseconds. Maybe your brain is unusally slow.

You are back to misquoting research again and of course its pointless because this is a path trod by many other cases and none gave the outcome you need to make this angle work.

Plumhoff v. Rickard, 572 U.S. 765 - 2014 - Reasonableness of the force judged at the time it is used. Multiple shots were justified to bring the vehicle to a halt.
Tennes-see v. Garner, 471 U. S. 1 (1985) "where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force."
Kisela v. Hughes, 584 U.S. (2018) Is also worth a read, Hughes was shot 4 times while posing no apparent threat - result - Qualified Immunity.

then on top of that you have the Graham factors.

You have to address these

 

[MNW67]

You are back to misquoting research again.

 

[Odds]

It's fkng absurd to claim he was within his rights to fire two more shots once he'd moved away from the car.

Once more, to remind y'all - this was an unarmed civilian, not a bomb laden terrorist.