That’s an awfully misleading situation. They state that her boyfriend’s gunshot caused her death, which I think most people would reasonably interpret to mean that her boyfriend shot her in the moment, but what they really mean is that if he hadn’t opened fire on police officers entering their home without prior warning, they wouldn’t have returned fire and killed her.
It also sounds like precedent to excuse cops murdering children.
"Their parents killed them by opening fire at the intruders they didn't know were cops with the gun they legally have to protect their family."
Which is not even a sure thing. Black people have been shot for even less than sleep, somehow.
Yup, like the time they broke into a house and shot the girl sleeping on the sofa with her grandma.
Thanks for the link, I was too lazy to look for it.
Note that all charges were dropped in that case. I.e. throwing a flash grenade into an apartment, then breaking in and shooting a 7 y/o sleeping in her grandma's arms is A-OK in the US.
Who is saying that and where?
Edit: Never mind, I found it. Note that this is the newspaper's phrasing. Apparently what the judge actually wrote is more technical and less misleading:
In his ruling, Judge Simpson wrote that the gunshot fired by Walker "became the proximate, or legal, cause of Taylor's death."
It’s still the same concept. The exciting incident is breaking and entering by the cops. Judge is still stating them entering illegally is not the cause which it is.
They state that her boyfriend’s gunshot caused her death, which I think most people would reasonably interpret to mean that her boyfriend shot her in the moment, but what they really mean is that if he hadn’t opened fire on police officers entering their home without prior warning, they wouldn’t have returned fire and killed her.
Holy shit that's beyond fucked. How can a judge rule that?
edit: Oh nvm, I just saw who appointed that judge, wow.
That’s an awfully misleading situation. They state that her boyfriend’s gunshot caused her death, which I think most people would reasonably interpret to mean that her boyfriend shot her in the moment, but what they really mean is that if he hadn’t opened fire on police officers entering their home without prior warning, they wouldn’t have returned fire and killed her.
It also sounds like precedent to excuse cops murdering children.
"Their parents killed them by opening fire at the intruders they didn't know were cops with the gun they legally have to protect their family."
Which is not even a sure thing. Black people have been shot for even less than sleep, somehow.
Yup, like the time they broke into a house and shot the girl sleeping on the sofa with her grandma.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Aiyana_Jones
Thanks for the link, I was too lazy to look for it. Note that all charges were dropped in that case. I.e. throwing a flash grenade into an apartment, then breaking in and shooting a 7 y/o sleeping in her grandma's arms is A-OK in the US.
Who is saying that and where?Edit: Never mind, I found it. Note that this is the newspaper's phrasing. Apparently what the judge actually wrote is more technical and less misleading:
It’s still the same concept. The exciting incident is breaking and entering by the cops. Judge is still stating them entering illegally is not the cause which it is.
Holy shit that's beyond fucked. How can a judge rule that?
edit: Oh nvm, I just saw who appointed that judge, wow.