
Minnesota woman broadcasts police stop and shooting on Facebook Live - _pius
https://www.facebook.com/100007611243538/videos/1690073837922975/?pnref=story
======
llamataboot
Facebook can't sell itself as a new live media platform and then just remove
videos that are politically disturbing.

As an aside, this is the 559th person killed by police in the United States
this year. His name was Philando Castile‬. They were pulled over for a broken
tail light. He was shot with a 4 year old child in the backseat of the car.

(you can find the video on youtube, twitter, and elsewhere, but be forewarned,
it is disturbing)

~~~
icebraining
600th, if you count every death by a police officer:
[http://killedbypolice.net/](http://killedbypolice.net/)

~~~
mirimir
Being killed by police is still pretty rare in the US, even if you're not
white. But then there are all the adverse nonlethal interactions.

I wonder if it's common enough for concerned people to have live feeds.
Perhaps triggered by loud noises, shock waves, voice commands ("help!") etc.
For groups, watching each other, and the environment.

~~~
maho
If you compare "being killed by the police" to other causes of death, then
yes, you can call it rare.

However, 600 killings in just over half a year is deeply troubling when you
compare it to other first-world nations. For example, in Germany, the police
kills approximately 6-8 people per year [1]. If you scale this number by the
US/German population, it's equivalent to 24-32 police killing per year.
Clearly, the U.S. has a problem.

[1]:
[https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffengebrauch_der_Polizei_in_...](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffengebrauch_der_Polizei_in_Deutschland)

~~~
mirimir
Yes, the US does have a problem with police violence. And through mobile tech,
it's being better documented.

~~~
akshatpradhan
Don't you see why we need police body cams? Imagine if the police had forced
her to turn off the phone. This video wouldn't exist. We wouldn't have even
known about this.

I remember being pulled over by the cops. I was on my phone while he was doing
the license check, and the officer told me to turn off my phone. I complied,
so it's interesting to see how this woman luckily got away with recording the
video. If the police had told her to turn off the phone, there's nothing she
could have done at that moment in time. All transparency of the incident would
have been lost.

He's dead. My professor once said, "The police have gone from 'Serve and
Protect' to 'Seek and Destroy'."

~~~
whamlastxmas
>the officer told me to turn off my phone. I complied

Why did you comply? He has no reason to ask that of you.

>If the police had told her to turn off the phone, there's nothing she could
have done at that moment in time.

If a police officer tells you to turn off your phone, you don't have to listen
to it. They cannot legally compel you to do that. They can tell you step back,
and you should definitely take a couple step backwards if so. If they want you
to stop recording, they need to arrest you and have probable cause for that
arrest.

~~~
akshatpradhan
I'd rather comply then risk getting shot to death.

------
prymitive
After reading a few comments on how to behave when police stops you and how to
tell them you're carrying gun I can't shake the feeling that this country is
trapped in some sort of a deadly staring contest, if you blink you can die.
You have armed people trying to police a nation where everyone can have a gun,
and many do. With this sort of tension on a daily basis things will go wrong,
someone will make a mistake, which seems to be what is happening every week.
And then people see the news, get scared and buy more guns, because they feel
in danger, and later you read more comments on how they should calmly explain
that they had a gun when police stopped them.

~~~
hackernewsuck
Literally the only intelligent comment on here.

------
ryanmarsh
It appears someone posted it to YouTube

Pretty grim

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wuyXayGMB8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wuyXayGMB8)

------
wallace_f
America has some institutional and cultural problems that no other developed,
westernized democracy has, at least in terms of the extent of the problems.
One of these is policing.

What happens in these cases is taxpayers will need to pay for a settlement.
The officers, and their departments, are often not held seriously accountable.
In the recent shooting of Alton Sterling that just happened, the officer's
body cameras "fell off." Oh, oops. Why is that acceptable? Compare this to
other professions: A surgeon makes a mistake during a procedure, the response
is not "oops." It is: you will lose your life savings, even potentially their
medical license. Police should be the most transparent of organizations, and
the most scrutinized, not immune to it. What happened to protect and serve?

~~~
DanBC
> A surgeon makes a mistake during a procedure, the response is not "oops." It
> is: you will lose your life savings, even potentially their medical license.

Medical errors are a significant cause of death. If the responsible clinician
involved lost their life savings every time someone died after a mistake the
US wouldn't have any doctors.

It also sounds like a lousy way to prevent medical error or to learn from
mistakes.

Did you mean "mistake", or did you mean something like reckless negligence?

~~~
wallace_f
>Did you mean "mistake", or did you mean something like reckless negligence?

The comparison was to the body camera falling off, which seems closer to
reckless negligence, but we don't often hear that language used when
discussing policing. Maybe it should be, but let us please not go microscopic
in a debate about the meaning of words here -- the comparison is valid, I
believe, and I don't think you've shown why it is not?

All my argument is saying is that the bar is set extremely high for doctors,
extremely low for policeman, and that police officers have an equally
important job to do in society, and should be subject to similar standards.

------
matt_wulfeck
> "ma'am you're just being detained right now until we can get this all sorted
> out."

Apparently owning a gun and letting the police know of that fact is enough to
get you killed. Good luck sorting things out.

~~~
teuobk
Not making any judgments or assumptions about what happened in this case, but
there are better and worse ways of informing a police officer that you're
carrying.

To start, not all states obligate concealed carry permit holders to inform
police that they are carrying. However, if you're pulled over, and you do want
to inform the officer, keep your hands on the wheel and calmly tell the
officer that you have a permit to carry concealed. Tell them that you are
currently doing so -- again, without having moved your hands. Ask them how
they would like you to proceed.

You will probably be asked where the firearm is located. They might ask you to
step out of the car so they can temporarily relieve you of your weapon. They
might just say something like "don't reach for yours, and I won't reach for
mine." Bottom line: let the officer guide you, and keep your movements slow
and deliberate.

DON'T say the words "gun" or "weapon" or anything like that. Those are
keywords that can trigger an instinctive reaction in the officer, and they
might not be able to hear anything else you say thanks to a rush of
adrenaline.

Interestingly, Minnesota is not a state where CCW holders are obligated to
disclose their permit or weapon to peace officers.

~~~
grandalf
The officer didn't even try to help the man as he was bleeding all over the
car and clearly unconscious.

It's just unconscionable that a trained safety officer would allow someone to
bleed like that, and even worse that the officer pulled the trigger.

~~~
tomschlick
The officer isn't an EMT and if he was really shot 4 times in the abdomen then
nothing the officer has would stop the bleeding. Not only that but if the guy
really did react in a threatening manner the officer is providing cover to
make sure the gun doesn't come back out.

I'm not advocating one side or the other on this, just letting you know how
the protocols work.

~~~
bobberkarl
LEt's not play doctor after death. He shot 4 times someone who revealed he was
open carrying, and had his daughter in the car.

Then he didn't provide basic assistance to someone shot even though he his
trained for it.

~~~
tomschlick
How do you know he is trained for administering GSW treatment? We don't know
the full story here and I was just trying to point out why the protocol is
basically to secure the scene and wait for backup when you're alone.

~~~
0707_hn
I am only adding these posts for posterity's sake - in MN, there is an
obligation to aid individuals who have been harmed and MN officers are trained
to do this. Indeed, reports exist of MN officers responding to gun shot wounds
(GSWs).

See my earlier posts:

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=12047969](https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=12047969)

[2]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12048024](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12048024)

~~~
tomschlick
And again I will suggest that and officer will not do that alone, before
backup arrives after a shooting like this. I saw somewhere else that once
backup arrived they started CPR which would be in line with what I am trying
to point out.

------
a13n
Yesterday a man was killed by an officer in Louisiana. Headline: "Man shot by
BRPD multiple times to chest and back; two officers placed on leave".

How the heck is "leave" a punishment worthy of homicide? And why are these
videos always recorded by witnesses rather than body cameras on the police?

If we want to stop this from happening then change the officer's punishment to
be a prison sentence, strap a camera on every police officer, make the footage
available to the public, and fire people when the camera "falls off" or is
"obstructed".

~~~
remarkEon
They are placed on leave because, even for Cops, we afford them the
presumption of innocence. They are on leave while the investigation proceeds.
I'm noting this exogenous to the video evidence that's in the public record
now, and that I still believe that leave is appropriate while an investigation
proceeds. Otherwise what we have is mob rule. I'm by no means defending the
conduct of the officers that we've seen in these videos, but rule of law
matters here. Even for Cops.

~~~
mirimir
They're placed on leave because they might be guilty, I think. Because we want
to keep trigger-happy cops off the street. If they're clearly guilty, they're
fired, even before trial.

~~~
remarkEon
No, it is standard practice to place an officer on leave for _any_ officer
involved shooting. It has nothing to do with them being "trigger-happy".

~~~
mirimir
OK, so _why_ do they do that? Just PR? Out of concern for the officer?

------
grandalf
Why can't we just take guns away from police officers. It would improve the
safety of minorities, and also likely help reduce the attitude problems many
officers have.

------
saynsedit
Why has HN taken this off the front page without explanation?

~~~
aethr
Probably deemed to be off topic according to the HN guidelines:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

Although personally, it struck me as very strange that someone who's just
witnessed her partner being shot (and who is currently in some need of medical
treatment) that her reaction is to reach for her phone and the live streaming
feature of an app. I certainly think that falls under "evidence of an
interesting new phenomenon".

Edit: I don't mean "strange" in any kind of moral judgement. My heart goes out
to this woman and her child who had to witness this and who've lost someone
close to them. I mean strange in the sense that this isn't how I would expect
someone to react.

Police brutality has been a serious problem in the US for decades, and it
seems that putting a streaming video camera in everyone's pocket might help
shift the narrative back in the people's favor.

~~~
mirimir
Her actions demonstrated _amazing_ presence of mind. She's probably not
trained as an EMT. But she did think to document the situation. It's just very
lucky that they didn't shoot her too.

------
tomschlick
As someone who carries on a regular basis, the #1 rule when dealing with the
police is compliance.

Yes sir, no sir, the weapon is on my hip, my hands are on the steering wheel
and you don't move unless told to do so. A cop is always on edge during a
traffic stop but even more so after you tell them you have a weapon. Quick
movements after you tell them you are armed is not going to end well.

Obviously we don't know the whole story here as the video starts after the
shooting, but hopefully there is body cam footage to clear everything up.

~~~
llamataboot
Oh, I think since cell phone cameras became ubiquitous we know enough stories
to know the whole story, even if we haven't seen the exact details of this
particular case yet.

~~~
tomschlick
> we know enough stories to know the whole story, even if we haven't seen the
> exact details of this particular case yet

So you're assuming something happened without any evidence? That is a horrible
way to go about things.

We saw the same thing in the Micheal Brown case, people threw crazy stories
out there about him being executed with his hands up and people rioted,
looted, and burned the town down. Then a few months later we saw the actual
evidence that proved he attacked that officer, ran away, and came back.

~~~
llamataboot
I'm not assuming anything. I know that despite whatever happened in this
particular case (though it would seem rare to tell a cop you have a gun and
then try to shoot him with it, and then be a cop freaking out, cursing and
shaking over what you have just done, and by all accounts this guy was a super
stand up guy, great school employee, no rap sheet, etc, etc, etc), that
despite whatever happened in this particular case we have a problem with
institutionalized violence against bodies of color in the United States,
especially Black males. We have a structural problem with highly militarized
police that believe they are fighting a war against the people they are paid
to protect. We have a problem with holding those police accountable for their
actions. The whole story is a long story, starting with slavery, continuing
through redlining and segregation, etc but this whole story is a story about
cops that kill more people in a day in this country than other industrialized
countries have in a year. It's a story about unarmed Black men being killed at
disproportionate rates even while white mass shooters are brought in alive and
heavily armed. It's a whole story about a lot of things actually - a prison
industrial complex grown bloated, a war on drugs that doesn't work, police
training that is incomplete or wrong, complacent citizens, etc.

But again, I'm not passing judgement on whether this particular killing was
"justified" or not. I'm just saying we already know the whole story, and the
whole story is bigger than this particular tragic ending.

~~~
tomschlick
I'd agree with you that some police are too heavy handed for the everyday
situation. However, there are a lot of violence / gang problems within the
black communities in the US. That leads to cities and police forces cracking
down on those violent areas which leads to even more heavy handedness and even
more distrust by those communities. Its a perpetual cycle.

It seems that we need a revolution on both sides for anything meaningful to
happen. Sadly we probably won't see that happen anytime soon.

Hopefully we can at least pass some meaningful reform related to drug
imprisonment which would keep a lot of people out of jail for petty things,
which just ends up feeding the cycle to begin with.

~~~
0707_hn
I can't fully address your comment as I don't have access to the relevant data
(regarding black community violence and its correlation with "heavy handed"
police).

What I will suggest is that overall violence does not seem to be correlated
with the rate of police killings - see the third image in ref. 1.

[1]
[http://mappingpoliceviolence.org/2015](http://mappingpoliceviolence.org/2015)

EDIT:

I can't reply to you due to the HN rate limit. Please see my response below:

I appreciate your response but I take issue with the data source behind that
post (ref 1). I don't intend to take it apart fully, but it _appeared_ to
included factors (e.g., average commute time) that:

1\. Systematically disfavor urban areas

2\. Have little bearing to the question at hand, whether violence is
correlated with police killings

Additionally, my claim above (2) is that violence and police killings, across
the municipalities with the highest rates of police killings, _are not
correlated_ (ref. 3).

[1]
[http://places.findthehome.com/#guide](http://places.findthehome.com/#guide)

[2]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12048043](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12048043)

[3]
[http://static1.squarespace.com/static/54ecf211e4b0ed744420c5...](http://static1.squarespace.com/static/54ecf211e4b0ed744420c5b6/t/5677f85d1115e0704eb36ed3/1450702944850/)

~~~
tomschlick
Just via some quick googling, here are the most dangerous (violent) cities in
the US. A lot of them match up to the top of the list you provided.

[http://kdvr.com/2015/05/08/by-the-numbers-here-are-the-
most-...](http://kdvr.com/2015/05/08/by-the-numbers-here-are-the-most-
dangerous-cities-in-america/)

------
justifier
this is heartbreaking

i am so saddened by the loss of life and i am so amazed by lavish and her girl

they are both affectingly strong

my best attempt at keeping my composure as well as them:

are officers trained to withhold giving medical aide?

i've seen this a lot in police videos, especially where a death is involved

why is this officer continuing to point a gun at a dying person?

was the officer preparing to shoot either the person bravely live broadcasting
the situation in defiance of the gun, or the child in the backseat, if one
tried to apply pressure to the wound or offer water to the victim?

~~~
mirimir
She might have grabbed the gun, and shot back. That seems very unlikely, I
know. But that seems to be how police are trained.

------
mrlambchop
once the lady was cuffed on the ground, I had to turn off - her anguish / pain
got real fast. and to see her daughter in the background... :(

~~~
DanBC
[https://youtu.be/Z1mlD3t2DV0?t=8m55s](https://youtu.be/Z1mlD3t2DV0?t=8m55s)

"it's okay, I'm right here with you" most heart breaking words from a 4 year
old.

------
Animats
Currently the top story on the New York Daily News and the Washington Post.

------
nicolashahn
Link is dead.

~~~
wckronholm
fb probably shut it down. It had footage of a shooting. Very sad and grim
stuff.

~~~
sml156
My guess would be she sold the rights to the highest bidder.

FB probably had no choice but to remove it.

~~~
llamataboot
This just happened an hour ago and she is reportedly still in custody.

~~~
ryanmarsh
Why'd they need to arrest her?

~~~
rdtsc
Police do this to build a story retroactively -- we shot a person, so ... to
make it excusable we arrest their "accomplices" because officer so and so will
make up some report about how they threatened his life with a gun. If they
don't arrest her, then it looks like murder. Also if she was arrested, her
side of the story immediately is less believable -- "clearly officer had a
good reason to arrest her, we can't trust her words".

This happened in another case, where a person was shot in a store (Wal-Mart
perhaps). Police then proceeded to heavily interrogate the partner and try to
get them to admit the victim was "unstable", "drunk", "violent" and so on.
Because it builds an excusable story so the officer is cleared of charges
quicker (they don't have to actually resign and move one town over to another
dept., but just get a 10 days paid vacation).

~~~
thaumasiotes
Reminds me of
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6UhXivPyw4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6UhXivPyw4)

"Earlier today I spoke to their deputy leader Rory O'Connor, who under
broadcasting regulations must inhale helium to subtract credibility from his
statements."

(The actual broadcasting regulation was that Sinn Fein politicians couldn't
have their voices heard on TV at all -- interviews, statements etc. had to be
dubbed over.)

~~~
spraak
Why couldn't they have their voices heard on TV?

~~~
thaumasiotes
Britain wanted to delegitimize Sinn Fein.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988%E2%80%9394_British_broadc...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988%E2%80%9394_British_broadcasting_voice_restrictions)

------
hermannj314
The disturbing thing for me is the cop seemed more concerned with keeping his
gun out and barking orders than in administering any sort of aid. It seems the
God complex is strong in this one that he can't even render aid to a dying
human being but instead belittles him "I told you not to move" as if that
excuses all of this. That lack of compassion is so disturbing.

I'm not a cop, I don't know why it is more important to point a gun at a dying
man than render aid, but that's just one of the many thoughts this video
evoked for me. So sad. I'm sure there's much more to this story to come.

Edit: if you are going to down vote please explain why. The cop is literally
watching the man die right in front of him.

~~~
tomschlick
Posting this again as I replied to another user above:

The officer isn't an EMT and if he was really shot 4 times in the abdomen then
nothing the officer has would stop the bleeding. Not only that but if the guy
really did react in a threatening manner the officer is providing cover to
make sure the gun doesn't come back out.

I'm not advocating one side or the other on this, just letting you know how
the protocols work.

~~~
spraak
I care not why the officer himself didn't administer aid, but why the no aid
was called in time.

~~~
tomschlick
Aid would have been called by the dispatcher when the officer radios in that
there was a shooting.

~~~
spraak
Would have, but it wasn't.

~~~
tomschlick
Source?

------
beedogs
Only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad cop with a gun.

~~~
DarkTree
Really? Because this guy in the car had a gun, may have been a good guy, and
was shot by a police officer.

~~~
spdustin
From what little information we have so far, he _was_ a good guy, with a minor
criminal history who sought to improve his life, ultimately resulting in
working the same job for over a decade. That last point is more than can be
said about a lot of us here on HN, let's be frank about that. Other than my
own business, I haven't held a job longer than a few years. It shows a
commitment to his community and the kids he literally and figuratively served
while on the job.

He tried to do what he knew was the right thing to do. Sadly, it wasn't
_exactly_ the right thing in the eyes of the officer involved. Therein will
lie the crux of this matter: what led this officer to believe that shooting
the man was the correct response? Where did the system fail? Was it at the
precinct leadership level? The academy level? Societal or socioeconomic?
Because there was a pair of failures here: something or someone failed to
prepare the officer for how to handle this situation, and more heart-breaking,
something or someone failed to keep the man alive.

