Officer's Body Cam Fails To Capture Footage Of Woman Shooting Herself In The Head While Her Hands Were Cuffed Behind Her

from the another-law-enforcement-miracle dept

There's more than one contortionist performance going on here. (h/t Greg Doucette)

A 19-year-old woman whose hands were cuffed behind her back when she committed suicide during a traffic stop in Chesapeake died of a gunshot wound through the mouth, according to the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner.

This is the official line -- one repeated several times by local journalists. The traffic stop leading to this highly unlikely conclusion occurred July 25, 2018. Here's what the Chesapeake Police Department said then:

Officers pulled over the car at 4:24 p.m. Wednesday near the intersection of Berkley Avenue and Wilson Road, police said in a news release Wednesday afternoon.

The exact timeline is not clear, [spokesman Leo] Kosinski said. As officers used a stun gun on the driver, Wilson, who was a passenger, shot herself, he said. Police attempted life-saving measures and called for medical assistance, but she died at the scene, the news release said.

The original report also noted the PD was looking at body cam footage from the scene to determine what happened.

Less than a week later, the initial impression was the official narrative.

Police had handcuffed Wilson when Medlin began resisting arrest and trying to flee, said Officer Leo Kosinski, police spokesman. Wilson was left standing next to the passenger side of the car while police rushed to help the officer who was trying to arrest Medlin, he said.

It was then that Wilson somehow got a gun and shot herself in the head, Kosinski said. It was not immediately clear how Wilson got the gun, but it was not a police weapon, he said.

“We clearly ruled that it was a suicide,” Kosinski said.

"We." I guess that means the PD since the medical examiner didn't hand down his declaration until March 14, 2019. The police department, however, made its own unscientific findings public twice in one week.

As for the body camera footage, there was nothing usable there.

One officer was wearing a body camera, but it was “knocked offline” while Medlin was fighting the officer, Kosinski said. If the camera hadn’t gone offline, it still wouldn’t have recorded the shooting, Kosinski said, because the officer was struggling with Medlin.

The police department has 356 cameras and deploys "40-60 per shift." The department has 525 officers so it seems the odds were in favor of there being multiple cameras on the scene. But the only footage recorded didn't capture the incident. Multiple police cruisers were on the scene, but the Chesapeake PD decided to eliminate dash cams when it acquired body cameras, removing one more impartial witness.

With the official word from the state, the Chesapeake PD closes the book on an extremely dubious "suicide." Whether this is just a bunch of lies or some very terrible police work, the end result is the same: someone in handcuffs ended up dead. The odds that this person decided to escalate a traffic stop to a successful suicide attempt are incredibly low. Something fucked up happened that afternoon and the police department hasn't even attempted to explain how something like this might have happened. Since the medical examiner has spoken, the Chesapeake PD has decided it's no longer obligated to provide an explanation.

The CPD launched an internal investigation into Wilson's suicide in July. Kosinski confirmed that the department has since concluded that investigation, but declined to comment on its outcome.

Worse, there's been no pushback from the local media covering this arrest and its ensuing, and completely unbelievable, suicide. This isn't journalism. It's stenography.

Filed Under: arrest, body cam, chesapeake, handcuffs, holden medlin, journalism, police, sarah wilson, suicide


Reader Comments

The First Word

Not so unbelievable.

1) There were only two officers on scene. It is unclear whether it is meant to suggest they were together or in two separate cruisers, but there were only two officers on the scene. This is why it is not so shocking that only one body camera was on-scene, when there are over 500 officers and only 350 cameras. It also explains why Ms. Wilson was reportedly left on her own when the driver attempted to flee and engaged in a struggle with one of the officers.

2) After the botched arrest, another weapon was found in the car along with the variety of drugs that were discovered both on the driver and in the vehicle. Possession of this rifle was illegal in and of itself, as the driver was a convicted felon. This provides some credence to the idea that the revolver which fatally wounded Ms. Wilson came from within the car, and was not in the possession of the police.

3) According to a close friend of the driver, all three were homeless, and living in the vehicle -- which was loaned to them, not owned by any of them. The driver, according to his own account, was on the way to a probation hearing regarding previous drug possession charges.

4) According to Sarah's mother, she had tattoos of both her siblings' names -- including one that had been born mere months before Sarah's death.

These are hardly "smoking guns," but it at least seems plausible, does it not?

A 19-year-old girl, in a relationship with a man 8 years her elder, who is a convicted felon. A girl with two siblings, one of whom was more than 18 years younger than her, and a mother who went straight to the news, yet never once went to a lawyer.

A mother whose arguments that her daughter could not have possibly been suicidal were, “She’s a moody teenager. If there is a mom out there that hasn’t heard some of that stuff from their kids, I’d love to meet them,”, that her Facebook page didn't mention anything about depression, and that "she would never do that to her sisters".

I know people who have been depressed to the point of attempting suicide. They never mentioned it on social media, either. Their families considered any attempts made to state their feelings as "just a phase" or "being moody". And they would often profess their strong love for their siblings or pets. None of that prevented them from putting a belt around their neck or slicing open their arm.

And then there's the fact that she was, allegedly, homeless and living in this convicted felon's car, surrounded by drugs and weapons, despite her mother living nearby and still raising children. This suggests to me that either there was a serious divide between her and her mother, resulting in being kicked out or running away, or she was not capable of understanding how bad her situation was (either by blind teenage love, or by drugs, or by depression and the feeling of worthlessness that comes with it).

So you're 19. You've either been rejected by your family, or you've rejected them. You're living out of a car -- not even your car, a car shared by two other people. Your boyfriend is 8 years older than you, is a convicted robber, and is a drug user. And now you've been arrested, while he's trying to punch an officer while swallowing a bag of drugs.

I don't think it's such a stretch to say: this is a really, really bad situation for you.

No matter what happens, it's probably pretty clear your boyfriend is going to get taken away from you and get locked up for a good long while. Quite possibly your "home" will be taken away, too. And you might even go to jail on top of that. You don't have much, but you're watching what little you have go right down the drain.

If you're suffering from any depression, or various other mental disorders that might trigger a spur-of-the-moment action, death now may seem a much more merciful option than having to suffer on through all these new tortures unfolding ahead of you.

Of course, that still begs the question of, how do you shoot a revolver through your mouth when you're handcuffed?

Well... all those handcuffs are doing is keeping you from moving your hands around to your front. You can still grab things with them. You can still move them up higher on your back and to the side, as far as your arms are able to stretch. You can still twist your head, neck, and back around. You're not being restrained in any other way. It's not all that impossible.

Now, this would be a lot clearer if the police department would stop making things look bad for itself by refusing to offer the body cam footage. By keeping it under wraps, they are doing nothing to support the case that it was suicide, and doing a lot to make it seem like they have something to hide. But even if they are innocent in her death, they do have a "good" reason not to release it. (That's "good" as in "good for the police department ", not "good" as in "good for literally anyone else".)

The traffic stop was quite likely not legal to begin with. At best it was pretextual. The couple had been under active police surveillance by the narcotics officer involved in the arrest for an undisclosed amount of time before the traffic stop, meaning there could quite likely be difficulties for the PD if the exact reason for the stop is disclosed, such as, perhaps, by a body camera recording.

In short: without a lawsuit to uncover the footage, we're not likely to have this footage revealed, and none of the affected parties seem to have shown any interest in filing such a lawsuit, only in making a media circus.

—Qwertygiy

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:06pm

    Bad Luck

    I hate when that happens.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Baron von Robber, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:17pm

    She then fell onto the exploding bomb and stabbed herself 25 times while having a heart attack when falling down the elevator shaft, dying from old age.

    Everyday arrest stuff.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:31pm

      Re:

      You forgot about how she managed to shove herself in that suitcase afterwards.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        David, 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:29pm

        Re: Re:

        Small wonder the Saudis cannot comprehend the hooplah about the Khashoggi murder. Well, it somehow became yesterday's story anyway and everybody has moved on.

        At least the Saudis waved money to make it happen which is more than can be said for the repeat police story.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anon, 20 Mar 2019 @ 10:04am

      Re:

      As National Lampoon's "Tue Facts" said decades ago about Salvador Allende's suicide - "Caramba! Our beloved president has shot himself in the back from twenty paces pausing only once to reload!"

      There's a whole bunch of detail missing from this account - not just how did she shoot herself in the mouth with her hands handcuffed behind her back? Did she manage to slip her hands to the front? That's an important detail you would think the cops would have mentioned. What does the driver (presumably alive but stunned) say happened? Or is the threat of a larger sentence keeping him silent? The angle of the bullet (to the right or left) might indicate which hand was used. The right-handed-left-handed thing is overworked since "To Kill A Mockingbird" but worth looking at. Complaint records against the two officers? A shot in the mouth is not an accident, someone deliberately put the gun there to either commit suicide or to tell her to STFU (and then a Pulp Fiction "oops" moment? That might explain why the other arrestee thought running away was a good idea.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:32pm

    She was a professional competitive shooter and could perfectly calculate the angles of ricochets to murder herself in the face while shooting backwards. The world has lost a genius shooter.

    Obviously the official story is accurate. There's no reason to doubt what they say.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 20 Mar 2019 @ 7:24pm

      Re:

      Reminds me of the line from Tomorrow Never Dies:

      James Bond:
      It won't look like a suicide if you shoot me from over there.

      Dr. Kaufman:
      I am a professor of forensic medicine. Believe me, Mr. Bond, I could shoot you from Stuttgart und still create ze proper effect.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:34pm

    The state should get involved, and if that doesn't work the FBI should get involved. I don't expect them to, but it would be nice if they charged someone for murder, and violating civil rights.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Gary (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:35pm

    Cams

    Just shutting off a police cam should be grounds for destruction of evidence, and charges filed even if someone didn't die.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:42pm

      and also

      whose genius accounting idea was it to remove the DASH CAMS?!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      identicon
      Billy, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:55pm

      Re: Cams

      Just shutting off a police cam should be grounds for destruction of evidence, and charges filed even if someone didn't die

      And you just tossed out the whole of Western Law because utterly biased against police.

      Let's apply your standard to piracy, then. Jailed upon only accusation.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Stephen T. Stone (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:17pm

        Re: Re: Cams

        A police officer shutting off their body camera isn’t an “accusation”, it’s an overt act.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Pixelation, 19 Mar 2019 @ 9:08pm

          Re: Re: Re: Cams

          Dear officers, If you have nothing to hide you won't shut off your cameras.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 20 Mar 2019 @ 7:35am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Cams

            Do you really believe they shut the camera off? I think it was running at the time and the footage was deleted as it did sho what really happened and didn't look good for the Line Blue Line Gang.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Gary (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:21pm

        Re: Re: Cams

        Let's apply your standard to piracy, then. Jailed upon only accusation.

        Oh, lets.

        Shutting off a police cam is a willful act of obstruction. You are destroying critical evidence. My only accusation is "willfully shutting off the camera." It either filmed or it didn't. You don't think destroying evidence is bad?

        Kinda silly to compare that to accusing someone of maybe copying a file because the IP might have matched. Because someone in Hollywood is upset.

        "All of western law." You crack me up. Take that LOL vote Billy! (Sorry, I meant Western Law. Missed those super serious caps.)

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Qwertygiy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:29pm

        Re: Re: Cams

        I was not aware that "shutting off a police camera" and "being accused of shutting off a police camera" were the same thing.

        Kinda was under the impression that "filing charges" and "being jailed" were two different things, too. Whoops.

        If that's how Western Law works, maybe we do need to toss it out. I've heard a lot about this Sangria Law from the Middle-Earth, maybe we should give that a try, even though we're not an Islandic nation.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        JMT (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:49pm

        Re: Re: Cams

        I'm not sure how being charged with an offence, in this case destruction of evidence, is "toss[ing] out the whole of Western Law". Being charged with a crime is in fact Step 1 in most systems of "Western Law", whatever the hell that actually means.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:19pm

        Re: Why not both?

        Hey blue do they call you that because you suckcop until you turn blue? Or because you only suck off cops?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 3:12pm

        Re: Re: Cams

        Lol I thought western law already did that but just looked prettier for everyone?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 4:06am

        Re: Re: Cams

        "And you just tossed out the whole of Western Law because utterly biased against police."

        You need a refresher course on the "violence monopoly" and the necessary criteria around the enforcers allowed to make use of it?

        A police officer who shuts off the tool meant to hold him accountable for his actions while he executes his duties is by definition already caught in flagranti with willfully destroying evidence.

        "Let's apply your standard to piracy, then. Jailed upon only accusation".

        Except "pirates" aren't exactly law enforcement officers trusted to carry and use lethal weaponry against the citizenry in time of need.

        You have any other completely irrelevant examples you'd like to air? While you refer to criticism over a handcuffed suspect somehow managing to shoot herself - in the head - while in police custody as "utterly biased"?

        What would it take for you to acknowledge that the police dun goofed? A written testimony and an actual snuff movie?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:00pm

      Re: Cams

      How does one destroy evidence that never existed in the first place? The body cams should not be off in these types of incidents.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      identicon
      Spotter, 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:43pm

      Oh, look, it's Techdirt most frequent astro-turfing "account".

      With a bland supportive one-liner

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 20 Mar 2019 @ 9:08am

      Re: Cams

      There is no evidence if the camera is not working and capturing the video. You cannot destroy something that is not present. It becomes a he said, she said situation... oh she can't say anything. /s/

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:42pm

    Deaths in police custody need to be investigated by someone else

    If anyone is killed by a gang, would we ever consider letting that gang investigate itself? Of course not, neither should we let police investigate themselves. This was clearly a death at police hands. If she had shot an officer, they would have trumpeted this to the rooftops. Their lame excuse doesn't hold water and everyone involved needs to lose their jobs for covering it up.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:48pm

      Re: Deaths in police custody need to be investigated by someone

      everyone involved needs to lose their jobs for covering it up

      At a minimum, everyone involved needs to do time behind bars including loss of their jobs and pensions. The police actually involved in this incident should be on death row if their state allows it, the rest of their lives being 1000 prisoners' bitches if they don't.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Qwertygiy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:37pm

        Re: Re: Deaths in police custody need to be investigated by some

        Wait, wait... I must have been misunderstanding something here. I thought the gang analogy here was that the police were the gang, not that the police were the victims of the gang.

        I mean, if the punishment for lying to the state is either execution or being gang-raped, can you imagine how horrific the punishment must be for actually shooting someone?

        No wonder they all decided to lie instead.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:30pm

          Re: Re: Re: Deaths in police custody need to be investigated by

          Yeah, it's a good thing they didn't actually murder someone handcuffed in custody. That would just be wrong.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Qwertygiy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 3:28pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Deaths in police custody need to be investigated

            Good lord, I can hardly imagine what the penalty for that would be if merely lying requires execution!

            Being force-fed the remains of their mother, perhaps, before being roasted on a bed of hot nails?

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Billy, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:52pm

    You don't know the truth are just smearing cops because hate Law

    Knew this would soon be on Techdirt. Allows a smear without any facts required.

    Now, what's so difficult to believe that a 2nd person goes insane after first starts struggling? Young people these days think they don't have to obey any laws at all. And it's physically possible. You don't even guess at a reason for police to shoot her.

    This isn't journalism. It's stenography.

    Then do some "journalism", punk, instead of re-writing non-journalism to vilely smear without any actual evidence.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Matthew Cline (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:07pm

      Re: You don't know the truth are just smearing cops because hate

      And it's physically possible.

      It might be physically possible to shoot yourself in the back of the head while your hands are cuffed behind you, but how could you possibly shoot yourself in the mouth in such a situation?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:19pm

      You don't even guess at a reason for police to shoot her.

      They needed a reason?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Gary (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:25pm

      Re: You don't know the truth are just smearing cops because hate

      Now, what's so difficult to believe that a 2nd person goes insane after first starts struggling? Young people these days think they don't have to obey any laws at all. And it's physically possible. You don't even guess at a reason for police to shoot her.

      It's absurd to imagine. Possible? Maybe.

      Of course even if it's true (and the video vanished), it was still an act of negligence for the cop to leave his gun where she could grab it. So at the very least that's Negligent Homicide.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:32pm

        Re: Re: You don't know the truth are just smearing cops because

        They claim it wasn't done with a police weapon so at best it's dereliction of duty in failing to relieve the girl of her weapon when taking her into custody.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Gary (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 4:52pm

          Re: Re: Re: You don't know the truth are just smearing cops beca

          If the suspect snuck a gun into the car with her, and the cops missed it, and they just happened to turn off the cameras then it is quite possible she might have used it to harm herself.
          But that narrative pushes credibility to the breaking point.
          A dashcam would have make all the difference.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Qwertygiy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 5:03pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: You don't know the truth are just smearing cops

            Not necessarily. The driver was resisting arrest almost immediately, requiring the attention of both officers on scene. They found another gun -- a rifle, and boxes of ammunition for it -- in the car after they had subdued him.

            And I would think it's less difficult to sneak a gun into a car if you're homeless and living out of the car.

            Bigger post below, but it's not so far-fetched as it seems on first glance.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 20 Mar 2019 @ 3:27am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: You don't know the truth are just smearing c

              If the police lie about how someone died, then why would they tell the truth about what the found in the car?

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 21 Mar 2019 @ 5:32am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: You don't know the truth are just smearing c

              "Bigger post below, but it's not so far-fetched as it seems on first glance."

              Actually it is.

              She was handcuffed. That means she was outside the car and under police control.

              And yet she somehow manages to produce a gun, while handcuffed and presumably frisked, and discharges it in her mouth with her hands tied to her back.

              If this is plausible in your eyes then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                nasch (profile), 21 Mar 2019 @ 1:50pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: You don't know the truth are just smeari

                She was handcuffed. That means she was outside the car and under police control.

                My understanding is both officers were dealing with the driver at the time, so probably on the other side of the car where they couldn't see her.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  Uriel-238 (profile), 21 Mar 2019 @ 3:46pm

                  "Both officers were dealing with the driver at the time"

                  If that's the case then there would be video footage of them managing the driver, yes?

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • icon
                    nasch (profile), 21 Mar 2019 @ 5:48pm

                    Re: "Both officers were dealing with the driver at the time"

                    If that's the case then there would be video footage of them managing the driver, yes?

                    "One officer was wearing a body camera, but it was “knocked offline” while Medlin was fighting the officer, Kosinski said. If the camera hadn’t gone offline, it still wouldn’t have recorded the shooting, Kosinski said, because the officer was struggling with Medlin."

                    There is no video of the death.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JMT (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:39pm

      Re: You don't know the truth are just smearing cops because hate

      "Now, what's so difficult to believe that a 2nd person goes insane after first starts struggling?"

      Most people would find that very difficult to believe without something solid to explain it. People don't just "go insane" and commit suicide as an immediate reaction to a stressful situation.

      "Young people these days think they don't have to obey any laws at all."

      Ignoring the grotesquely ridiculous and inaccurate generalization, what does that even have to do with this situation?

      "And it's physically possible."

      For most people it would be extremely difficult or practically impossible. Do you know something about this woman's physicality that we don't that would explain why she was able to?

      "You don't even guess at a reason for police to shoot her."

      So which is it you want Tim to do? Take a wild guess at an alternative explanation or "do some journalism"?

      So just so we're clear, you're perfectly ok with someone dying in police custody in extremely unusual and unlikely circumstances, will accept any story form the police without and independent investigation, and anyone suggesting the official account might not be entirely truthful is a "punk". Sounds like the criticism is hitting a little close to home.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:02pm

      Cop hate

      It's not hatred of law, nor of law enforcement. It's presuming that since police officers are so commonly caught of misconduct and have been so willfully looking to obstruct checks on their power and obfuscate information used to watch their conduct that there are no arguments to be made that they're conducting themselves properly.

      Feel free to try to make one.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:14pm

      Re: You don't know the truth because you lie so often

      “Then do some "journalism", punk, instead of re-writing non-journalism to vilely smear without any actual evidence.”

      Better watch out blue you know how much Jhon boy doesn’t like competition as king of projection.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Coyne Tibbets (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 5:48pm

      Re: You don't know the truth are just smearing cops because hate

      If a victim in police custody were shackled naked and spread eagle facing a concrete wall, and were shot in the back of the head from a distance of 10 feet, do you suppose then you might concede a slim chance of the death as suspicious?

      Nah. These scummy gangstas are just so into creative suicide.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 6:32pm

      Re:

      I'm pretty sure that people, young or insane or otherwise, still have to obey the fucking laws of physics.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 4:21am

      Re: You don't know the truth are just smearing cops because hate

      "Now, what's so difficult to believe that a 2nd person goes insane after first starts struggling? Young people these days think they don't have to obey any laws at all. And it's physically possible."

      A person who has her hands cuffed on her back, as per normal police procedure, somehow manages to pull a gun out, and shoot herself through the mouth?

      A professional contortionist could manage this, yes ,but while that 30-second acrobatic act is going on, do you think the officers standing around her are just watching and applauding?

      Assuming that the woman was NOT a professional contortionist it is fairly obvious that she was shot by another party.
      The police are verifiably lying through their teeth regarding what happened on the scene. Either her handcuffs were off, enabling her to shoot herself...or a second party shot her. The police have no motive to lie if said second party was the driver.

      So what we're looking at is a scenario where the only event even remotely likely, this side of aliens with mind control rays doing it, is that of a police officer putting a handgun into the mouth of a 19 year old suspect and pulling the trigger.

      Securing a murder conviction may be difficult, but it's already established fact that a suspect died of wounds impossible for her to self-inflict. Those officers should be on unarmed traffic ticket duty for the rest of their lives given what CAN be proven - total incompetence at fulfilling the most basic function of their job description.

      A simple traffic stop without due cause ended with a murder, while the civilian, not suspected or charged with anything, was in police custody.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 12:54pm

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      stderric (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:57pm

      Re:

      It's not like hardened, field-ready, active-service police gear can be expected to match the reliability of consumer grade gopros.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Qwertygiy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 5:08pm

        Re: Re:

        Or alternatively: why would equipment supplied by the lowest bidder be expected to compare to the equipment consumers would actually find fit to purchase?

        Can't have the cops wasting all that valuable taxpayer money on more expensive cameras just because those fancy cameras do something frivolous like "actually work"!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:21pm

    Worse, there's been no pushback from the local media covering this arrest and its ensuing, and completely unbelievable, suicide. This isn't journalism. It's stenography.

    Sarah Wilson was also white.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:27pm

    The magic bullet that killed JFK traveled through time.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Agammamon, 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:27pm

    Was she the owner of a rotten borough?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    stronginva (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:32pm

    Chesapeake Va shooting

    Was there only one camera? Even so, why didn't it record the sound of the gunshot. You'd hear it even if the camera was askew. It should be on there because it allegedly happened when the cop was struggling with the other person, You should hear it in the background. The local media should be asking for that video.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Qwertygiy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:38pm

      Re: Chesapeake Va shooting

      There is no footage (according to the police department) because it was "knocked offline". As in, "it was turned off" and not recording audio or video.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    #LEOSAccountability, 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:45pm

    Police / Law Enforcement need new body armor to protect Citizens

    The new body armor would sport automatic straightjacket/defensive shell deployment, that can be activated when "fear" is sensed within the officer.

    Said straight jacket would wrap the law enforcement official up safely in bullet/shrapnel/water proof packaging with sufficient air, water and food for up to 3 days.

    This will prevent law-enforcement from killing innocent citizens when scared because the citizens are lying face down on the ground, hands on their heads, hog-tied and stun-gunned. Why are they scared? Because they know they've fucked up royally and are gonna be screwed.

    Right now they get so scared they decide to 'alter' the story-line by killing the innocent bystanders/citizens.

    This NEEDS to stop...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Daydream, 19 Mar 2019 @ 1:59pm

    These officers need to have more cams. Make sure they're working, make sure they cover as wide an area as possible, with as high quality video and sound as possible.

    It's not just about protecting themselves from accusations of wrongdoing, it's about catching the perpetrators of violence against police.
    What happens if someone reads stories like this and decides that the police are guilty guilty serial killers, and decides to take justice into their own hands?
    Police need those cameras, because if and when someone takes action against them, they need a way to find the shooter, need a way to achieve justice.

    ...No, I'm not advocating that a shooter take advantage of these officers' propensity to leave their cameras off to assassinate some serial killers and get away with it. Why do you ask?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      nasch (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 8:22am

      Re:

      Police need those cameras, because if and when someone takes action against them, they need a way to find the shooter, need a way to achieve justice.

      Not really. Someone pulls out a gun, they will just start shooting.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:14pm

    This is why I don't trust police anymore. Even when they make such a blatantly false claim, no one in law enforcement calls them on it. This makes everything they say of dubious truth value.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    william chandler, 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:20pm

    camera off? should be a felony

    Under construction/development. Feel free to run with it, share, develop:
    It is Time for a National Memorial to Citizen Victims .
    Mandatory Law needed: The Abused Citizen Victim Apology Law:
    Any time the police botch a raid on the wrong house, murder a Civilian for no cause, recklessly injure, kill, a Citizen, and other false arrests where their TAXPAYER FUNDED body-cameras "just happen" to not work, and every other screw-up situation ....... EVERY cop anywhere in the area shall assemble, "Take a Knee" and cover their hearts with their covers in apology. with their cars flashing lights .................... The same actions will take place for Citizen funerals.
    A prominent memorial to be erected in every large city dedicated to the innocent victims of abusive and corrupt police. Annually, a day of reflection and regret. on date (May 26th?) to be determined, there will be a Citizen Victim Day whereupon EVERY cop will assemble at said monument to meditate and reflect on Murdered Citizens and again kneel, doff covers, and pray to God for forgiveness.
    There will be mandatory monthly ethics classes on such subjects as "Negative Effect on Society of Perjury by police" and "Sociatal impact of Murder by police".
    These acts shall be in addition to punitive damages and restitution paid.
    Have you noticed there are no massive funerals with TAXPAYER FUNDED police cars/equipment and TAXPAYER PAID police saluting for the VICTIMS of police MURDERS?
    Where is the recognition and apologies to the VICTIMS of their BLUNDERING???
    Always remember ---- these are the "HIGHLY TRAINED PROFESSIONALS" that the government says will protect you if you just be nice and give the government your guns. Police murder more Citizens every year than do terrorists.
    The cowardice of hiding MURDER behind lies of "resisting arrest" and "I was in fear for my life" should immediately disqualify for life anyone from ever engaging in "law enforcement" . If you are that cowardly you should be a greeter at Walmart.
    Yeah sure, the POLICE - --- Currently, in the U.S., law enforcement kills around 1,200 citizens per year. Ironically, that number is actually four times higher than those who die from rifles. As has been recorded, cops have killed 450 percent more people than have died in the past forty years of mass shootings.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Uriel-238 (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 2:54pm

    Kama-Sutra Yoga Suicide

    It's my new grunge band.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    rangda (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 3:13pm

    It's getting to the point where you have to assume that any interaction with law enforcement is going to result in your death, and that you should take appropriate action based on that assumption.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 3:23pm

      Re: Oh, look! It's one of the resident alt-right trolls

      If they don't want to use dash-cams there's nothing preventing us from using them. The type that record inside the car, too. And make sure they upload to the cloud instead of using a local memory card.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Gary (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 4:48pm

        Re: Re: Oh, look! It's one of the resident alt-right trolls

        I have no doubt the police would have discovered and confiscated a body cam before tossing a suspect in the back seat.

        Unlike that gun that just happened to be in the car.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 3:33pm

      Death as result of police encounter

      Police-involved deaths are still averaging about a thousand per year, so not terrible considering police encounters per year. But conspicuous among all of them is the obscurity of the facts.

      We're expected to trust law enforcement to be truthful (when false testimony is epidemic) and that they acted appropriately and in good faith even when publicly known evidence tells a different story. And when evidence exists that suggests there was misconduct, we the public are asked to trust them, often while they withhold evidence in the hands of law enforcement, whether it would vindicate them or not.

      So the public is learning not to trust law enforcement to be truthful or act in good faith.

      You're probably not going to die from a police encounter, but if they do kill you, there will be no justice and no compensation for your family, and the guy who got you will probably continue to have a job policing and eventually shooting other people.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 4:58pm

      'If you keep throwing that rock straight up...'

      I'd like to say that was unreasonable, but honestly as I've noted over the years if police keep pushing people and making them legitimately afraid for their lives, with the knowledge that the legal system and other cops could not care less if a cop kills someone(and will in fact defend them when they do so)... well, basic human nature kicks in at that point, and while it's unfortunate it's no longer any sort of surprise what can happens next.

      This is not to say that I support that sort of action(any more than I support cops killing non-cops), merely that you can only cow someone with fear for so long before they respond in kind, and at that point it's kinda hard to play the victim card and be believed by anyone who's been paying attention.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jak Crow (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 3:26pm

    Oh those bad apples...

    Where are all the good apples in the PD again?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 4:20pm

      Re: Oh those bad apples...

      Busy working alongside leprechauns and bigfoot, who are just as real as they are.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 4:41pm

      Re: Oh those bad apples...

      They probably quit years ago.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 4:32am

        Re: Re: Oh those bad apples...

        "They probably quit years ago."

        Bingo.

        When you have an organization which prides itself on rabidly defending its members against any accusation, merited or not, those "good cops" will eventually end up with either helping to cover up the crimes of a colleague or suffer heavy ostracism, knowing that they'll never get the backup they may have to call for.

        At that point the good cop either quits, gets killed in the line of duty, or ends up having to watch his back more against his fellow officers rather than the criminals.

        The criminal cops, on the other hand, are in the unique position of being able to doctor and interpret the scene of any crime they themselves may commit in the safe knowledge that the witnesses are all going to be on their side.

        It's unavoidable that the bad cops will eventually outnumber the good ones. By a lot.

        The only cure is to have a persistent political will to continually investigate all suspicious activity taking place under what should be police supervision. And camera oversight is, for this purpose, a necessity. For both the police and the public.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 4:36pm

    Just... leave

    Yeah, when you reach the point where you're willing to accept a murder by police as a 'suicide', I'd say it's time to turn in your news credentials and maybe go into PR, congressional fluffer, or hell, see if you can work for the police directly, since you're already doing so unofficially.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Qwertygiy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 4:58pm

    Not so unbelievable.

    1) There were only two officers on scene. It is unclear whether it is meant to suggest they were together or in two separate cruisers, but there were only two officers on the scene. This is why it is not so shocking that only one body camera was on-scene, when there are over 500 officers and only 350 cameras. It also explains why Ms. Wilson was reportedly left on her own when the driver attempted to flee and engaged in a struggle with one of the officers.

    2) After the botched arrest, another weapon was found in the car along with the variety of drugs that were discovered both on the driver and in the vehicle. Possession of this rifle was illegal in and of itself, as the driver was a convicted felon. This provides some credence to the idea that the revolver which fatally wounded Ms. Wilson came from within the car, and was not in the possession of the police.

    3) According to a close friend of the driver, all three were homeless, and living in the vehicle -- which was loaned to them, not owned by any of them. The driver, according to his own account, was on the way to a probation hearing regarding previous drug possession charges.

    4) According to Sarah's mother, she had tattoos of both her siblings' names -- including one that had been born mere months before Sarah's death.

    These are hardly "smoking guns," but it at least seems plausible, does it not?

    A 19-year-old girl, in a relationship with a man 8 years her elder, who is a convicted felon. A girl with two siblings, one of whom was more than 18 years younger than her, and a mother who went straight to the news, yet never once went to a lawyer.

    A mother whose arguments that her daughter could not have possibly been suicidal were, “She’s a moody teenager. If there is a mom out there that hasn’t heard some of that stuff from their kids, I’d love to meet them,”, that her Facebook page didn't mention anything about depression, and that "she would never do that to her sisters".

    I know people who have been depressed to the point of attempting suicide. They never mentioned it on social media, either. Their families considered any attempts made to state their feelings as "just a phase" or "being moody". And they would often profess their strong love for their siblings or pets. None of that prevented them from putting a belt around their neck or slicing open their arm.

    And then there's the fact that she was, allegedly, homeless and living in this convicted felon's car, surrounded by drugs and weapons, despite her mother living nearby and still raising children. This suggests to me that either there was a serious divide between her and her mother, resulting in being kicked out or running away, or she was not capable of understanding how bad her situation was (either by blind teenage love, or by drugs, or by depression and the feeling of worthlessness that comes with it).

    So you're 19. You've either been rejected by your family, or you've rejected them. You're living out of a car -- not even your car, a car shared by two other people. Your boyfriend is 8 years older than you, is a convicted robber, and is a drug user. And now you've been arrested, while he's trying to punch an officer while swallowing a bag of drugs.

    I don't think it's such a stretch to say: this is a really, really bad situation for you.

    No matter what happens, it's probably pretty clear your boyfriend is going to get taken away from you and get locked up for a good long while. Quite possibly your "home" will be taken away, too. And you might even go to jail on top of that. You don't have much, but you're watching what little you have go right down the drain.

    If you're suffering from any depression, or various other mental disorders that might trigger a spur-of-the-moment action, death now may seem a much more merciful option than having to suffer on through all these new tortures unfolding ahead of you.

    Of course, that still begs the question of, how do you shoot a revolver through your mouth when you're handcuffed?

    Well... all those handcuffs are doing is keeping you from moving your hands around to your front. You can still grab things with them. You can still move them up higher on your back and to the side, as far as your arms are able to stretch. You can still twist your head, neck, and back around. You're not being restrained in any other way. It's not all that impossible.

    Now, this would be a lot clearer if the police department would stop making things look bad for itself by refusing to offer the body cam footage. By keeping it under wraps, they are doing nothing to support the case that it was suicide, and doing a lot to make it seem like they have something to hide. But even if they are innocent in her death, they do have a "good" reason not to release it. (That's "good" as in "good for the police department ", not "good" as in "good for literally anyone else".)

    The traffic stop was quite likely not legal to begin with. At best it was pretextual. The couple had been under active police surveillance by the narcotics officer involved in the arrest for an undisclosed amount of time before the traffic stop, meaning there could quite likely be difficulties for the PD if the exact reason for the stop is disclosed, such as, perhaps, by a body camera recording.

    In short: without a lawsuit to uncover the footage, we're not likely to have this footage revealed, and none of the affected parties seem to have shown any interest in filing such a lawsuit, only in making a media circus.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 5:02pm

      It's not all that impossible.

      Please draw a diagram of the position that her body and the gun would have to be in for her to have shot herself through the mouth while her hands were restrained behind her back.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Qwertygiy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 5:29pm

        RE

        You can do it yourself. Got a 16-oz soda/water bottle handy? Probably a comparable length to the revolver. A flashlight would be even better for several reasons.

        Hold it behind your back with both hands at the base. Bend your elbows to raise the object while maneuvering your arms to one side. Lift remote/bottle/gun/revolver underneath one armpit. Lower head towards armpit and open mouth wide.

        If you're using a flashlight with a button on the base, go ahead and press it.

        Congratulations, you just shot yourself in the back of the mouth with a beam of light.

        What, did you think bullets won't kill you unless your lips are on the barrel? That gap of 6-12 inches doesn't matter one bit to a piece of metal going over a thousand feet per second. All it cares about is being aimed the right direction.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          JohnnyRotten (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 7:03pm

          Re: RE

          Tried it. Had 3 other people in the house try it, including a very flexible young-in. None of us could even get close, even with cheating - ie, moving your wrists much further apart than you possibly could with cuffs on (which is what you can do with your bottle/flashlight example).

          If you can do it, post a picture.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Qwertygiy (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 7:21pm

            Re: Re: RE

            Again: you don't have to get the tip of the barrel anywhere close to your lips. You just have to have the tip of the barrel pointed at an angle which intercepts that of your open mouth. Move hands to side, angle object with fingers.

            Cuffs generally leave several inches of space, and your fingers and elbows and shoulders aren't restrained at all. It's very much possible.

            I'm afraid I don't have a quick and reasonable way to take a photo of myself while doing so, as both my hands would, of course, be occupied, and my only available camera is a very basic smartphone. If I find the time to figure out a rig, or (less likely) find someone else who would be willing to take photos of such shenanigans without embarrassing myself too greatly, I'll gladly do so.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        nasch (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 8:39am

        Re:

        Quite possible she just stepped over the handcuffs to get her hands in front of her.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Thad (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 9:59am

          Re: Re:

          Try it.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            nasch (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 10:37am

            Re: Re: Re:

            Try it.

            I didn't say I could do it, I said she might have. Or are you suggesting that this feat is impossible?

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Thad (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 11:16am

              Re: Re: Re: Re:

              I knew a guy with a trick shoulder who could step between his linked arms, move them around behind his back, over his head, and back around to step between them again, and keep doing it.

              No, it's not impossible. But between "the victim moved her hands around from behind her back, grabbed a gun, and shot herself in the mouth, and the police just coincidentally happened to have technical difficulties with their bodycams at exactly the same time this was happening" and "the police killed a woman in handcuffs and then covered it up," I know which scenario sounds more plausible to me.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                nasch (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 2:09pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                There is just one thing I think gives their story a bit of credibility. If the police shot her, a gunshot wound in the mouth doesn't seem that likely. Why not the chest, or the forehead? It is possible the cop actually put the gun in her mouth and pulled the trigger, but I'm really hoping that's not what happened. Could the cop have been thinking ahead about making it look like a suicide? Maybe. On balance, I just don't think there's enough information to draw a firm conclusion. Which by itself is enough to demonstrate that their body cam program is not working.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  Uriel-238 (profile), 21 Mar 2019 @ 11:16am

                  Failed body cam

                  Body cam fails are prevalent in police-involved suspicious circumstances. At this point they should lose benefit of doubt whenever a body cam fails and a suspicious circumstance occurs.

                  This is a highly suspicious incident with a body cam fail. And a death is involved.

                  The law enforcement officers involved deserve no benefit of doubt.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 21 Mar 2019 @ 5:42am

              Re: Re: Re: Re:

              "I didn't say I could do it, I said she might have. Or are you suggesting that this feat is impossible?"

              It's possible, but unlikely. The standard handcuff doesn't have the leeway in the chain to allow most people to do this without stretching their arms to the borderline of dislocating their shoulders.

              So unless you can show that this 19 year old is a trained chinese gymnast - or even if that was the case - we're here left with the image of a girl in handcuffs getting down on the ground and trying to perform gymnastics obviously meant to reduce the handcuff restraints - something I'm pretty sure the officer on site should have noticed.

              Our theory, given your hypothesis, now includes a suspect spending half a minute gyrating like a lunatic while the other officer watches. After which she goes back to the car, rummages it through for a handgun, pulls it out, and fires it in her mouth.

              No matter in which way this went down the officers involved should be facing criminal negligence charges because this level of utter ineptitude isn't even achievable by the Keystone Cops.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                nasch (profile), 21 Mar 2019 @ 1:54pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                So unless you can show that this 19 year old is a trained chinese gymnast

                Nobody can show anything since there is no video.

                Our theory, given your hypothesis, now includes a suspect spending half a minute gyrating like a lunatic while the other officer watches.

                Your estimate of the timing is speculative. And as I mentioned it is quite plausible she was out of sight of the officers.

                No matter in which way this went down the officers involved should be facing criminal negligence charges because this level of utter ineptitude isn't even achievable by the Keystone Cops.

                No argument there.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Bamboo Harvester (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 5:34pm

      Re: Not so unbelievable.

      First off, where's the non-cop witness that saw her hands cuffed behind her back?

      I'm old and can still "sit through" a set of cuffs to get them in front of me. If both officers were tied up tasing the driver on the other side of the car, she could have done so.

      Cops cuff dead bodies. Yup. Kind of silly with a head wound through the mouth, it's pretty obvious they're not going to sit back up and start shooting, but cuffing them anyway isn't uncommon.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Qwertygiy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 5:44pm

        Re: Re: Not so unbelievable.

        The important question then, is: why would the cops lie about her being found shot with her arms still behind her back?

        It would look so much less suspicious for them if they said they found her uncuffed, or with her arms in front of her, and could say she escaped the handcuffs and then shot herself.

        Rather than saying that she shot herself while her hands were tied behind her back, which almost every media outlet to report on it has pounced on as unlikely or suspicious.

        If they were so stupid as to just shoot her and then cuff her, and claim that she shot herself while her hands were cuffed behind their back, I have a hard time believing that there wouldn't have been various other gaping holes in their story uncovered in the 9 months since the event.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          That One Guy (profile), 19 Mar 2019 @ 6:06pm

          Re: Re: Re: Not so unbelievable.

          The important question then, is: why would the cops lie about her being found shot with her arms still behind her back?

          Offhand? Because when you know you can say anything and not be challenged on it why go through the trouble of coming up with something believable?

          If they were so stupid as to just shoot her and then cuff her, and claim that she shot herself while her hands were cuffed behind their back, I have a hard time believing that there wouldn't have been various other gaping holes in their story uncovered in the 9 months since the event.

          Uncovered by who, pray tell? The cops on the scene? Their supervisors? The coroner? By all means, name a party that would have been involved and would have been willing and able to issue a statement contradicting the 'suicide' narrative that the police had already decided on.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2019 @ 6:45pm

      Re: Not so unbelievable.

      None of this changes that it's hard to shoot yourself in the mouth while handcuffed. Committing suicide rather than get arrested, sure I could see that happening.

      But she shot herself in the mouth while handcuffed. I find that absurd.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 20 Mar 2019 @ 4:40am

      Re: Not so unbelievable.

      "Well... all those handcuffs are doing is keeping you from moving your hands around to your front. You can still grab things with them. You can still move them up higher on your back and to the side, as far as your arms are able to stretch. You can still twist your head, neck, and back around. You're not being restrained in any other way. It's not all that impossible."

      I can inform you that shooting yourself through the mouth while handcuffed is not anatomically possible. Somehow you need to get your hands to the front. There are a few tricks to do this but...unless you are a professional contortionist that just isn't likely - or even possible, within a short time frame. Handcuffs are designed expressly for this purpose, after all.

      So this "suicide" assumes a professional contortionist able to accurately aim a gun at her own head and discharge it right down her gullet.

      Can it be done at all? That's actually not very likely.

      "Beyond reasonable doubt" is established here already. Not enough to secure a conviction to be sure, but certainly enough to establish that the officers in question are completely unfit for duty.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Personanongrata, 19 Mar 2019 @ 5:57pm

    You Dictate, We Transcibe

    This isn't journalism. It's stenography.

    Their motto can be:

    You dictate, we transcribe.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Mar 2019 @ 6:37am

    Bullet exited decedent's head, struck cops in foot

    The worst part about the Dodgy Bros level of obfuscation and coverup surrounding whatever events actually happened here is not only does it make the police narrative less credible, it makes the situation nearly impossible to analyze later even if the police narrative turns out to be true. Seriously -- this should be considered a major WTF on multiple levels, no matter what the actual story turns out to be, because either we have some seriously rotten apples carrying out extrajudicial executions, or some serious miscues on the cops' part happened to make this contortionist-act suicide story possible.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Mar 2019 @ 6:48am

    Having worked as a jailer for a few years, I've seen women whose hands were cuffed behind their back still be able to scratch their nose or smoke a cigarette. Women tend to be much more flexible then men, so it is possible she was able to shot her self as described. It doesn't mean it's likely, but it is possible.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Copying Is Not Theft
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.