Court Docs Show Pics From Mar-A-Lago Raid Were Part Of Media Stunt
The FBI purchased glossy cover sheets to use in photos of authorities' unprecedented raid of former President Donald Trump.
Former Tucson, Arizona police officer and host of "The Tatum Report" Brandon Tatum joins our show to discuss the recent shooting of Patrick Lyoya in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He explains what series of actions led to the fatal shooting and why people that like to play "Monday-morning quarterback" are often mistaken about these types of situations. What happens when a police officer is at the very end of his fitness level?
In this clip, "Fearless" host Jason Whitlock asks Tatum whether or not the city would have settled in a scenario where the suspect fires a gun at the officer, and the officer shot and killed him? Tatum says the city is unlikely to settle in a situation like that because the city is actually unlikely to pursue the case.
Tatum explains that in a situation like this with compelling video (to the average person) and in which the police department is sued, instead of fighting the family, the city normally just sits in the court for a crazy amount of taxpayer dollars and walks away from the situation.
Michael Brown's family, for example, got paid out, and that was a justified use of force. Jacob Blake's family got paid out, and it was a justified use of force — he was committing a crime in the course of him getting shot and paralyzed. Tamir Rice's family got paid out, so it's not necessarily a matter of whether the use of force was legitimate.
If they call it a wrongful death suit, it means that maybe there could have been a possibility that the person wouldn't have died if somehow the stars realigned and the officer did something different. The court usually pays these people out. In this case, of course, you can Monday-morning quarterback or Monday-morning judge all you want, but the circumstances in this situation necessitated the use of deadly force.
Whitlock redirects, asking Brandon to explain to people why all of the Monday-morning quarterbacks are asking why the officer didn't shoot him in the leg, the butt, or the arm? Why did the officer hit him in the neck and head area?
"Why did the police officer use lethal force when he could have shot him in the arm? It's just like saying, why did Tom Brady throw the bomb down the field, and nobody was in sight? It's because you don't see that the wide receiver was supposed to run a go route, and he ended up stopping it early. Tom Brady threw it when he was going, and then he stopped, and so it looks like nobody was down the field. It's the same thing with the police," Tatum said.
If you don't understand the use of force policy and how police are trained, then what you see will not match what you think. When an officer has gotten to a point where he/she has to use deadly force against a suspect, the officer can shoot them wherever he/she believes will stop them and eliminate them as a threat. Once a person has your taser, which is a deadly weapon, they can render you incapable of fighting if you get stung with it, and they could potentially kill you. So, that escalates the threat level and officers can use deadly force when they're in a situation like that.
"I've been in plenty of problems like this police officer was ... when you're spent, and you're at the end of your fitness level, and this guy now has your taser you don't have a choice to pause and strategize whether or not to shoot him in a leg. Because if he takes that leg shot, he turns around to tase you, you're going to be dead," Tatum explains, adding that the use of deadly force results from the totality of circumstances.
Watch the clip to hear more from the conversation. Can't watch? Download the podcast here.
To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock and Uncle Jimmy, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Law enforcement experts asked to weigh in on the deadly police shooting of a 16-year-old girl who was attacking another person with a knife say that the police officer's use of force was legally justified and that it appears he had no other options to de-escalate the situation.
The fatal shooting occurred Tuesday in Columbus, Ohio. Police were called to respond to a physical threat of violence at a house in the southeast area of the city. Bodycam footage released by the Columbus Division of Police after the incident shows the teen girl, Ma'Khia Bryant, attempting to stab two people with a knife. The video is from the perspective of Officer Nicholas Reardon, who arrived on the scene and shortly thereafter fired his weapon and shot Bryant before she could stab someone.
Bryant was taken to the hospital and later died of her injuries. Her death led many prominent leftists and celebrities to denounce "police terror" and the "injustice" of another death of a black person at the hands of the police.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Wednesday that the death was "tragic," saying, "she was a child."
"We're thinking of her friends and family in the communities that are hurting and grieving her loss. We know that police violence disproportionately impacts black and Latino people in communities and that black women and girls, like black men and boys, experience higher rates of police violence. We also know that there are particular vulnerabilities that children in foster care, like Ma'Khia, face," Psaki said.
Experts point out, however, that the shooting appears justified and note that Officer Reardon likely saved the lives of one or more people.
After reviewing the video footage, Bowling Green State University professor Philip Stinson, who specializes in criminal justice and researches fatal shootings, told the Columbus Dispatch that Officer Reardon appears to have been "legally justified in using deadly force."
"It's a terribly tragic situation, and my heart goes out to the girl and her family and friends," he said Wednesday. "But from looking at the video, it appears to me that a reasonable police officer would have had a reasonable apprehension of an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death being imposed against an officer or someone else. That's the legal standard."
Another expert with 33 years of experience training police officers and serving as an expert witness at trials in use-of-force cases agreed after seeing the video.
"An officer is justified in using deadly force if his life or the life of someone else is at risk," retired Columbus Division of Police SWAT Officer James Scanlon said. "Few would argue that there weren't at least two lives there that were at serious risk."
He explained that Officer Reardon took action "to save the life of someone he doesn't even know. ... It's a shame that no one has recognized that that officer, in all likelihood, saved one or more lives."
Stinson added that the shooting is "a good reminder that officers sometimes have to make split-second, life-or-death decisions in violent street encounters. ... These situations can escalate in a matter of milliseconds, as we saw here."
Both experts agreed that Reardon did not appear to have any means of de-escalating the situation, whether by using a Taser or by shooting the knife-wielding assailant in the leg.
"I don't know what the officer could have done differently," Stinson said. "Based on what I saw, there was no opportunity for the officer to de-escalate."
He explained that use of a non-lethal weapon like a Taser isn't appropriate for "a lethal-force situation." He also told the Dispatch that police officers are trained to shoot at "center mass" of the person they're trying to stop, so as to protect themselves or others.
Officers are taught "to shoot until the threat is neutralized," he said.
Scanlon further described the incident as "a textbook scenario" of when officers are trained to use deadly force in a shoot/don't shoot scenario.
"That's exactly the kind of film you'd see in training rooms where you have to react to a deadly situation," he said.
Scanlon added that officers "are trained and they're re-trained in use-of-force situations. One problem we see is officers who react in ways that are inconsistent with their training. I did not see that in this video."
"In this situation, inaction by the officer, I believe, would likely have resulted in serious bodily injury or death to one or more persons," Scanlon said.
A Missouri bill introduced by a Republican state senator says motorists won't be liable for injuries to protesters who block traffic providing certain conditions are met and that deadly force is OK against protesters who enter private property.
"To think that your right to protest enables you the right to stop traffic and literally stop people's ability to move about freely in this nation is a gross misunderstanding of our constitutional rights," state Sen. Rick Brattin said during a Missouri Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Monday, KMBC-TV reported.
Here's the wording straight from Senate Bill 66:
The bill also contains provisions that clamp down on protesters who riot, harass, commit crimes against emergency service providers, and commit vandalism.
Of course, not everyone likes the bill — such as Rev. Darryl Gray of the Missionary Baptist State Convention of Missouri, the station said.
"For God sake, authorizing the use of deadly force by non-law enforcement people is creating a recipe for disaster by giving permission to commit bodily harm or even taking a life," Gray said, according to KMBC. "We believe that human life is more sacred than property."
Sharon Jones of the Missouri State Conference of the NAACP testified against the bill, the station said: "We really are crossing that line to a point of suppressing free speech, as opposed to just controlling the time and manner of it."
And the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri is urging a no vote against the bill, Newsweek reported: "No driver should be able to hit a protester and get away with it. Period."
St. Louis Protesters Shut Down Interstate During Breonna Taylor Rallyyoutu.be
(H/T: The Police Tribune)
Biden Is Arming the IRS to Go After YOU