This, kid was a friend of my son. Good kid not a thug.

Also reports are that he was the passenger in the vehicle, that doesn't help the situation at all.

Plain and simple I do not understand what the cop was thinking firing into that vehicle. I get that it is not easy being a cop never has been but right now incredibly hard. Does not matter you have to be smarter than just to open fire on a vehicle especially since you really don't know if they are even involved in a crime at all.

I can relate to that BigPig. I worked at the state hospital in Rusk for the last two years. Just recently got canned for shoving a patient with both hands. No one saw it, camera either wasn't working or didn't show enough... patient went screaming that I pushed him, I admitted it. Didn't matter that the patient stuck me with his shoulder and elbow as he cut in line and muscled his way past me, didn't matter that patient was 15 years younger and 40 lbs heavier, didn't matter that I was mad at myself immediately afterward but couldn't explain why I reacted that way. I had never physically reacted that way at the hospital even though in the previous six weeks I had been hit in the head or face on four separate occasions and kicked in the stomach once by different patients. Just part of the job. It didn't matter to the investigators that we were severely short handed, that the replacement staff were often in fear from not knowing the patients, or that many of the staff were always slow or last to respond knowing that it safer to just watch.

Glad I'm out of there and can't imagine how tough it would be, to be a cop.

If you commit a crime and it results in someone's death you can be charged with the murder right (like a get away driver can be charged even though they didn't kill the clerk)? So could the person who fired the initial gun shots be charged in this case? Zeek what say you?

I think you can be charged. Doesn't mean you will be convicted but the whole indicting a ham sandwich thing comes to mind.

Seems like I read about a case where an officer shot at an unarmed suspect and missed and killed a bystander. They were charging the suspect with murder of the bystander.

I think the rule you're looking for is called "Felony Murder". If you commit a felony, and ANYONE dies in the process, then you can be charged with the death, even though you did not actually kill the person.

The application of this rule that I love seeing is when criminals attempt a home invasion, bank robbery, etc and have a getaway driver. A would-be victim fights back and kills the intruders. The getaway driver gets charged with felony murder even though his accomplices are the dead bodies, and they were killed by the citizen/victim.

Not really sure what to think of the present case from the OP without more facts.

It's human nature to make mistakes. Funny how nobody says as much about doctors killing people everyday. They make a mistake and you die, oh well it's due to "complications from surgery". Irony

The Chief has stated the vehicle was moving forward, not backing up toward the officers. Bad shoot and this cop could be charged with murder, but I'd imagine it's going to be to a lesser degree.

One thing I just read that really pizzes me off is a statement from the boy's family. The part about we're getting tired of this same old story. Police shooting young black men. Do we know for a fact the officer knew the young man was black? This happened at night, correct? If the cop screwed up, throw the book at him. But please don't use this incident to fan the flames of racial hatred.

Don't some cities have a 2-3 day time period after a shooting for an officer to give a full statement because it gives the brain time to fully comprehend the situation he was in and all that went on? I thought I seen that before on another shooting in another city that the officer changed a little of his story.

Thanks for the explanation. I guess my thinking is if the cop says he was reacting to the gun fire perhaps his defense would argue that the person that started the shooting is at fault. No one seems to be too worried about the fact that someone shot off some rounds while the cops were there.

Yes. My department, for a short period, went to a 7 day period, but because of citizen criticism we are now back to 1-3 days. A study by Force Science Institute found that after a high stress situation, it took up to 7 days for the actor to recall the event correctly. There's is a lot more mental/physical/psychological that goes on too, that most will never experience.

To immediately bash this officer, merely 24hrs after the incident, isn't good for the officers psyche.

thats what creates the pay day. No one wants to have a honest conversation on the truth and the facts. Race pimping sells. Once they start pushing this balch spring will fold faster than superman at the laundry mat. Again sad deal all around, but saying it was because the color of ones skin is very unlikely. When I googled this even the first link went straight to color of skin. House party , gun shots, speeding cars Im sure people running and screaming but it was the color of his skin. Crazy

Not saying it's the case in this instance,but a motor vehicle can be a deadly weapon by use and intent....so shooting into the windshield of a truck that's trying to run you down because they just killed someone and are trying to escape would be completely perfect... double pinky swear promise, t shirt awarded.

I haven't even started digging into this one yet. No point digging till more info is out.

Based on this thread, though. I am still confused about which direction the vehicle was pointed and whether it was moving toward or away from the officer.

The police chief is saying the officer's story doesn't match the body cam and that's not cool. The kid was apparently not a thug and was just a passenger in the car. The family lawyer is playing the race card and everything has the potential to blow up. That about cover it?