Justine Damond: Australian PM calls shooting 'inexplicable'

[FloatingFatMan]

Quote

Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull has said he will seek answers from US authorities over the "inexplicable" death of a woman shot by a policeman.

 

Justine Damond, originally from Sydney, was killed in Minneapolis after calling police to report a possible crime.

 

The incident is under investigation by US authorities, who say they cannot compel the officer to give a statement.

 

Mr Turnbull said his government is determined to learn what "went tragically wrong".

 

"How can a woman out in the street in her pyjamas seeking assistance be shot like that?" he said on the local Nine network on Wednesday.

 

"It is a shocking killing, and yes, we are demanding answers on behalf of her family."

 

US media reported that Ms Damond, 40, was dressed in her pyjamas and had approached the driver's side door of a police car when she was shot on Saturday.

 

Officer Mohamed Noor, who was sitting in the passenger seat, fired his weapon across his partner and through the driver's door, striking Ms Damond in the abdomen.

 

Every police officer and squad car in Minneapolis is equipped with cameras, but the incident was not recorded.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-40651470

 

 

I do hope this cop will be charged with murder over this...

[DocM]

Sounds pretty distressing, especially shooting over his (likely now deaf) partners shoulder to shoot through the drivers side window.

 

Ofc. Noor is a Somali immigrant, who has 2 open citizen complaints. 

[TPreston]

14 minutes ago, DocM said:

Ofc. Noor is a Somali immigrant, who has 2 open citizen complaints. 

Wow we finally found out how to get DocM to criticize a cop

[DocM]

34 minutes ago, TPreston said:

Wow we finally found out how to get DocM to criticize a cop

 

I still think we need to hear more; was she being belligetant, reach into the car to grab his partners weapon (or appear to do so from his position) etc., but absent those the shot selection alone put his partner at high risk. 

 

Also; was the weapon department issued or meet that safety standard? Was there a weapon safety standard? If applicable, was he carrying/displaying his weapon in Condition 0*? 

 

These can set up the conditions where a warning via a drawn firearm turns into an accidental discharge.

 

*magazine inserted (if a semi-auto), round chambered, safety off/(alt: hammer back)

[FloatingFatMan]

4 hours ago, DocM said:

I still think we need to hear more; was she being belligetant, reach into the car to grab his partners weapon (or appear to do so from his position) etc., but absent those the shot selection alone put his partner at high risk. 

 

The victim was the one who called the cops to report a suspected sexual assault behind her home. She was gunned down when she approached the cops to talk to them about her report.  Why on Earth would she be belligerent when SHE is the one who called them?

 

Why is the cop refusing to make a statement?

Why were their body cameras off?

Why was the car camera off?

Has the other cop made a statement?

[DocM]

2 hours ago, FloatingFatMan said:

The victim was the one who called the cops to report a suspected sexual assault behind her home. She was gunned down when she approached the cops to talk to them about her report.  Why on Earth would she be belligerent when SHE is the one who called them?

 

Why is the cop refusing to make a statement?

Because we have a constitutional right not to, and we are informed of this when arrested. It's called the Miranda warning. A wise person clams up until their attorney arrives, and they are provided one free if they don't have one. That attorney should be there for any interviews.

 

Quote

Why were their body cameras off?

Good question, and it sounds like a violation of protocol not to turn them on as or before arriving on the scene.

 

Quote

Why was the car camera off?

Has the other cop made a statement?

It doesn't say it was off just that it didn't record the incident. The typical dash mounted, front facing camera will record about 60-70° either side of straight ahead, not the >100° to either side needed to see what's happening at the side windows.

[FloatingFatMan]

1 minute ago, DocM said:

Because we have a constitutional right not to, and we are informed of this when arrested. It's called the Miranda warning. 

Yes, and how many innocent people don't make one?

 

1 minute ago, DocM said:

 

Good question, and it sounds like a violation of protocol not to turn them on as or before arriving on the scene.

 

It doesn't say it was off just that it didn't record the incident. The typical dash mounted, front facing camera will record about 60-70° either side of straight ahead, not the >100° to either side needed to see what's happening at the side windows.

At the very least, there should be audio, right?

[DocM]

3 minutes ago, FloatingFatMan said:

Yes, and how many innocent people don't make one?

All the smart ones, especially cops in a PR heavy incident. 

 

Quote

At the very least, there should be audio, right?

Audio is open to interpretation, and when the poo flies is too often just yelling and cursing. Not terribly useful.

[Vandalsquad]

I've defended a lot of police shootings in the U.S in the past, due to areas they're operating in... people they're dealing with.. and 99% of the time it's justified when we see footage of the offender going to draw etc, but hey lets riot anyway.

This but, I have no way of defending at all from every piece of evidence we've been given I have no idea how he hasn't been arrested yet. I hope this is getting as much news time as it is Australia and doesn't vanish from the U.S news system just because its a white woman if it's even getting air time to begin with.

[DocM]

I agree, but as noted above there are questions. Let's see the witness accounts, any local  home/store/city security or traffic camera footage etc.

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

Rule #1, when in the U.S., do NOT try to run and scream as you're approaching a police car.

[FloatingFatMan]

10 hours ago, Mirumir said:

Rule #1, when in the U.S., do NOT try to run and scream as you're approaching a police car.

You're assuming that's what happened. All we know is she approached the driver's side of the police car when she was gunned down.

[Emn1ty]

Been hearing about this incident on the news the last couple days, this is such a bizarre thing. I really hope we figure out just what was going on mostly because I just don't understand why this happened.

[macrosslover]

This story has a lot of questions.  Devil's advocate for the cop,  if she called to report a sexual assault in progress and the cops showed up it would have been highly unlikely for her to walk outside and go talk to the cops on her own, while the "suspect" was still out there.  The cops would have just gone to her or talked with her via the telephone, so why was she outside?  I think it's probable that someone, either the dispatcher or one of the cops via the dispatcher asked her to step outside, which would be why she only had on pajamas as that's the easiest article of clothing most people put on before stepping out.

 

I'm troubled by the fact they said she called twice, with the second call being 8 minutes after the first.  I have no idea of the call volume the PD was experiencing at the time, but it seems troubling that they possibly only sent one unit to an active sexual assault and it took them 8 minutes after the initial call to get there.  Did they not take it seriously or not take her seriously?

 

The fact that the "threat" was closest to the driver, but yet he never shot and assuming as a fact he never pulled his gun, what partner would shoot across his own, without first warning him or telling him to drive off.  I've said to a friend before, you'll never beat a scary person out of the holster.  The few details we have about this story so far appears to indicate that the officer was scary and it cost a woman her life.

 

As to him having 2 open complaints, without knowing the specific details of those complaints, they mean nothing in the grand scheme of things.  They could be serious complaints or they could be something as minor as a citizen complaining because they saw him litter once.  I wouldn't focus to much on them until they actually indicate what the complaints are.

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

22 hours ago, DocM said:

Let's see the witness accounts

So let's hope they don't end up hiding behind their "constitutional right".

[macrosslover]

1 minute ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

So let's hope they don't end up hiding behind their "constitutional right".

It only applies if you are accused of a crime, not for a witness.  There are instances when a witness can be compelled to speak.  Only a suspect or accused can't be compelled to speak.

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

4 minutes ago, macrosslover said:

It only applies if you are accused of a crime, not for a witness.  There are instances when a witness can be compelled to speak.  Only a suspect or accused can't be compelled to speak.

I feel that as a police officer you should be held to a higher standard - so there's that.  But also, if someone shoots the person who asks for help - and no reason is given why, and their personal recording equipment is off - and no reason is given why, and their vehicle recording system is off - and no reason if given why... It may be a "constitutional right" to choose to not comment, but it also speaks volumes.

 

Any other job "Why didn't you follow procedure and why were your recording devices disabled" would be an acceptable mandatory question.

[macrosslover]

59 minutes ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

I feel that as a police officer you should be held to a higher standard - so there's that.  But also, if someone shoots the person who asks for help - and no reason is given why, and their personal recording equipment is off - and no reason is given why, and their vehicle recording system is off - and no reason if given why... It may be a "constitutional right" to choose to not comment, but it also speaks volumes.

 

Any other job "Why didn't you follow procedure and why were your recording devices disabled" would be an acceptable mandatory question.

If everybody else can exercise their right to remain silent without an attorney, but police can't, then that's not fair or equal at all.  As to the recording equipment not being on, that's not surprising or done with ill-intent I would say.  The dash cam wouldn't even be activated if they never turned on their lights and sirens, it doesn't run all the time. 

 

Same thing with the body cameras, there is no system out there that runs 24/7.  It would drain the battery and take up too much storage.  There are some that activate when an officer turns on their car's emergency lights, but the overwhelming majority require the officer to manually activate.  Most officers don't turn them on until they are "on" the call, which is usually indicated by them getting out of the car.  As they had not exited their vehicle yet, even if they were talking to her, they probably felt they were still not "on the call". 

 

As I highlighted earlier, since their response time was at least 8 minutes or more to the call, they unlikely ran lights and sirens to the call.  After he shot her and his partner probably was like WTF just happened, I can assure you the last thing on their minds was turn on the camera.  All indications are they immediately began to give her first aid.

 

[FloatingFatMan]

42 minutes ago, macrosslover said:

As I highlighted earlier, since their response time was at least 8 minutes or more to the call, they unlikely ran lights and sirens to the call.  After he shot her and his partner probably was like WTF just happened, I can assure you the last thing on their minds was turn on the camera.  All indications are they immediately began to give her first aid.

I'm surprised the cop driving wasn't injured by the gun being fired what must have been only inches from his face...

 

Seriously, who the hell DOES that? It's a massive no no!

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

1 hour ago, macrosslover said:

If everybody else can exercise their right to remain silent without an attorney, but police can't, then that's not fair or equal at all.

###### fair or equal.  There's so much wrong with this story that he should be compelled to speak just on that alone.  Someone is dead and it looks a LOT like it's his doing - if he chooses to not clear it up, then he's damning himself.

[FloatingFatMan]

8 minutes ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

###### fair or equal.  There's so much wrong with this story that he should be compelled to speak just on that alone.  Someone is dead and it looks a LOT like it's his doing - if he chooses to not clear it up, then he's damning himself.

If he won't talk, then he should face a first degree murder charge.  Hell, he should be facing a murder charge anyway, but without offering any testimony then it should be the maximum charge possible.

 

[oldtimefighter]

On 7/19/2017 at 10:50 AM, Vandalsquad said:

I hope this is getting as much news time as it is Australia and doesn't vanish from the U.S news system just because its a white woman if it's even getting air time to begin with.

Huh? It's getting a lot of air time and will continue to do so because it is a white woman. It won't get the air time it's getting in Australia because police shooting and gun shootings in general happen all the time here. Hopefully, at some point, the public will finally buy enough guns here so this is not a problem anymore.

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

14 hours ago, oldtimefighter said:

Huh? It's getting a lot of air time and will continue to do so because it is a white woman. It won't get the air time it's getting in Australia because police shooting and gun shootings in general happen all the time here. Hopefully, at some point, the public will finally buy enough guns here so this is not a problem anymore.

What utter nonsense!

Edited July 21, 2017 by Nefarious Trigger

[oldtimefighter]

2 hours ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

What utter nonsense!

Damn, I can't even fool people all the way in the UK. After fact checking my last comment...

 

The story hasn't been getting any air time at all. No one cares about a white woman gunned down in the street. Who knew?

It has been even getting less air time in Australia. We all know they shun citizens who move to the US.

What gun violence in the US?

Americans will never feel they have bought enough guns. Ridiculousness! Sorry gun lobby! My bad...

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

3 minutes ago, oldtimefighter said:

Damn, I can't even fool people all the way in the UK. After fact checking my last comment...

 

The story hasn't been getting any air time at all. No one cares about a white woman gunned down in the street. Who knew?

It has been even getting less air time in Australia. We all know they shun citizens who move to the US.

What gun violence in the US?

Americans will never feel they have bought enough guns. Ridiculousness! Sorry gun lobby! My bad...

The nonsense was directed towards your comment that more guns will solve the problems.