US cop 'who shot dead Australian woman in her pyjamas'

[Johnboy60]

The police officer who shot dead an Australian woman after she called 911 to report an alleyway assault near her Minneapolis home has been identified as a junior police with two-years experience.

Pictured: US cop 'who shot dead Australian woman in her pyjamas'

 

[381465]

Sad.
Lots of missing info here.
What would make a cop fire across his partner at an unarmed woman?
If there was an assault outside of her home as reported, why was she outside and unarmed?
I wonder what the jurisdiction's rules are regarding body camera use?

 

[JCFantasy23]

Sad.
Lots of missing info here.
What would make a cop fire across his partner at an unarmed woman?
If there was an assault outside of her home as reported, why was she outside and unarmed?
I wonder what the jurisdiction's rules are regarding body camera use?

From what I can gather with different articles, there was a suspected assault in her alley. I'm guessing she probably saw the cop car pulling up and went up to it?

Can't imagine why the officer would fire

An article stated they are required to use body cams but hadn't turned them on. They claim the video in the car was off too. They aren't releasing 911 call either.

 

[jsimms615]

The police officer who shot dead an Australian woman after she called 911 to report an alleyway assault near her Minneapolis home has been identified as a junior police with two-years experience.

Pictured: US cop 'who shot dead Australian woman in her pyjamas'

This is a very sad situation. She was suppose to be married in August. Such a terrible tragedy. I hope they charge this cop with murder because he had no probable cause

 

[wing2000]

Sad.
Lots of missing info here.
What would make a cop fire across his partner at an unarmed woman?
If there was an assault outside of her home as reported, why was she outside and unarmed?
I wonder what the jurisdiction's rules are regarding body camera use?

I agree....more information is needed.

 

[Sketcher]

So the shooter is black, and the victim is white now. I really, really hope he wasn't trying to make some sort of statement.

 

[381465]

This is a very sad situation. She was suppose to be married in August. Such a terrible tragedy. I hope they charge this cop with murder because he had no probable cause

I'll reserve judgement of cop's guilt until there's more information.

 

[bhsmte]

Need facts and lots of them.

 

[Nithavela]

Need facts and lots of them.

You're not going to get any because the officers disabled all cameras and will back each other up.

 

[W Johnson]

Let’s see, there are two living witnesses to the shooting. The witnesses are both police officers and should be pretty good at making statements as that is a routine part of their job. Now that the shooting is being called a homicide by the medical examiner, I can understand why one of the witnesses is not making a statement as he is now the prime suspect in a murder investigation. So what about the guy that had a bullet fly inches from his head? It shouldn’t be too hard. Are they afraid that they will influence a future jury? Well, they already have been influenced by the neighbors, fiancé, son, friends from Australia. We know that the cop shot her, there were no other weapons found at the scene and they are tests to determine which of the police officers was fired. There were only two people that could have shot her and the shooter has been identified. Tell us why he shot. What are they afraid of? More negative feeling about police murdering unarmed innocent people?

 

[381465]

Per police department policy, body cameras are supposed to be turned on prior to use of force "as soon as it is safe to do so" or during "any contact involving criminal activity."

It would be hard for me to believe an officer contributed to the writing of this policy. Never met a cop who was psychic.

 

[381465]

Let’s see, there are two living witnesses to the shooting. The witnesses are both police officers and should be pretty good at making statements as that is a routine part of their job. Now that the shooting is being called a homicide by the medical examiner, I can understand why one of the witnesses is not making a statement as he is now the prime suspect in a murder investigation. So what about the guy that had a bullet fly inches from his head? It shouldn’t be too hard. Are they afraid that they will influence a future jury? Well, they already have been influenced by the neighbors, fiancé, son, friends from Australia. We know that the cop shot her, there were no other weapons found at the scene and they are tests to determine which of the police officers was fired. There were only two people that could have shot her and the shooter has been identified. Tell us why he shot. What are they afraid of? More negative feeling about police murdering unarmed innocent people?

Homicide is not a legal charge or definition to a medial examiner. An autopsy categorizes manner of death. Homicide, accident, suicide, etc.
The officer intentionally committed an act leading to death. The same cause of death would be identified if a crazed killer broke into your house, killed your family and you dispatched him while he was attacking you.
The cop may have been a cold blooded killer, but the coroner's cause of death and cops not making statements does not equal that.

 

[trunks2k]

Now that the shooting is being called a homicide by the medical examiner, I can understand why one of the witnesses is not making a statement as he is now the prime suspect in a murder investigation.

Of course it's a homicide. She was shot. That's not in doubt. In ME parlance, Homicide != murder. Homicide just means they didn't die of natural causes and was caused by another person.

edit: I see this was mentioned above

 

[bhsmte]

You're not going to get any because the officers disabled all cameras and will back each other up.

Disabled or did not enable the body cams? Those are two completely different acts.

 

[trunks2k]

Disabled or did not enable the body cams? Those are two completely different acts.

The impression I get is that they just hadn't enabled them yet. My understanding is a lot of officers won't turn on the cameras until they are getting out of the car. The woman seems to have approached the car when it arrived on scene, so they could reasonably just not have gotten to turning them on before things went south. Though apparently the dash cam was off too, I would expect that to be active on the way to the scene. IMO if blue lights on? Dash cam on.

As I mentioned in a different thread, I'm betting on an accidental discharge. She may have approached the car in a panicked state which startled the officers, one of whom may have interpreted it as an attack and drew the weapon. Then realized she wasn't a threat, and tried to put the weapon away, discharging accidentally in the process. That seems to fit in with the scant info we now have.

 

[Nithavela]

Disabled or did not enable the body cams? Those are two completely different acts.

Mind explaining the difference to me?

And the dash cam was turned off as well. I can't think of any reason to turn off the dash cam, can you?

 

[W Johnson]

The impression I get is that they just hadn't enabled them yet. My understanding is a lot of officers won't turn on the cameras until they are getting out of the car. The woman seems to have approached the car when it arrived on scene, so they could reasonably just not have gotten to turning them on before things went south. Though apparently the dash cam was off too, I would expect that to be active on the way to the scene. IMO if blue lights on? Dash cam on.

As I mentioned in a different thread, I'm betting on an accidental discharge. She may have approached the car in a panicked state which startled the officers, one of whom may have interpreted it as an attack and drew the weapon. Then realized she wasn't a threat, and tried to put the weapon away, discharging accidentally in the process. That seems to fit in with the scant info we now have.

Accidentally discharging multiple times… police issued MAC 10?

 

[trunks2k]

Mind explaining the difference to me?

One is failing to go off->on the other is on->off. The former suggests they just hadn't gotten to turning them on yet, as in many departments they are only turned on when interacting with people or investigating a complaint. The latter suggests they deliberately turned it off to prevent recording incriminating/illegal actions.

 

[Nithavela]

One is failing to go off->on the other is on->off. The former suggests they just hadn't gotten to turning them on yet, as in many departments they are only turned on when interacting with people or investigating a complaint. The latter suggests they deliberately turned it off to prevent recording incriminating/illegal actions.

I think that both actions should carry the same penality.

 

[bhsmte]

Mind explaining the difference to me?

And the dash cam was turned off as well. I can't think of any reason to turn off the dash cam, can you?

Very simple; if the body cams are not on all the time, they would need to be manually enabled by the officer. If they are on all the time they would need to be manually disabled by the officer.