It's pretty clear from the videos that there was no danger to the officer that fired.
They approached from the front, and stepped into the path of a turning "fleeing" vehicleto get a better shot at the driver and then jumping to the side.
> I will admit I would like to see how her car got into the middle of the road
I'm also curious about this, but in Australia this would have zero bearing on the "right" of a LEO to use lethal force.
> What I do know is that she had a choice to get out of the car, but chose to press gas.
She reversed, turned wheels to arc into the exiting lane and was shot by an officer who was already drawn prepared to fire.
That officer had the option to step either way, that officer chose to step into the turning arc to get a better shot and then side step clear .. they were not in any danger other than the danger they put themself in.
It's not acceptable here to kill people for fleeing.
I realise it's more common in the US which has a reputation for LEO's shooing unarmed people in the back.
<< They approached from the front, and stepped into the path of a turning "fleeing" vehicleto get a better shot at the driver and then jumping to the side.
Friend. Just from pure logic if the path was blocked by ICE agent then her pressing a gas means attempt to run that ICE agent over. And if you look at the vid in slow motion, he does jump to the side to avoid a swipe.
<< That officer had the option to step either way
And I guess this is where the lawyers will have a field day. Best I can say is that he is lucky to have protection that comes from being LEO, where the standard is just different.
<< I realise it's more common in the US which has a reputation for LEO's shooing unarmed people in the back.
To be fair, here it was literally face to face.
<< She reversed, turned wheels to arc into the exiting lane and was shot by an officer who was already drawn prepared to fire.
As I am rewatching the video in slow motion, it does seem like he was preparing for the eventuality, but the entire interaction and change in stance takes mere seconds.
<< this would have zero bearing on the "right" of a LEO to use lethal force.
To me it is not the question of whether they are right, but whether she had a good reason to be there. If she was following them around and ended up in that situation as a result, I might be more inclined to give ICE a pass. If she is an actual random individual that simply did not know what to do and panicked, then it is an actual problem.
That said, it does not appear atm that that was the case. FWIW, I am not happy about it as I believe it further undermines existing system, but what I think does not really matter.
> To me it is not the question of whether they are right, but whether she had a good reason to be there.
To me that's irrelevant - FWiW I come from a largish extended family with more than a century of history in various military and civil conflicts.
Well trained personnel should handle the situation of a vehicle blocking traffic in a civilian non theatre of war context in a manner that doesn't lead to escalation.
> If she was following them around and ended up in that situation as a result, I might be more inclined to give ICE a pass. If she is an actual random individual that simply did not know what to do and panicked, then it is an actual problem.
Either way, regardless of her background, three agents gave conflicting instructions, acted in a bullying manner, escalated a situation and shot a citizen.
If she was there in protest, in a country that boasts free speech and the right to protest, that doesn't justify or give a pass to the clown show on camera.
<< Either way, regardless of her background, three agents gave conflicting instructions, acted in a bullying manner, escalated a situation and shot a citizen.
This should be the rallying cry. But it isn't. As I noted in previous posts, I am not super happy about it, but at this point, the case is alreadya political football.
They approached from the front, and stepped into the path of a turning "fleeing" vehicleto get a better shot at the driver and then jumping to the side.
> I will admit I would like to see how her car got into the middle of the road
I'm also curious about this, but in Australia this would have zero bearing on the "right" of a LEO to use lethal force.
> What I do know is that she had a choice to get out of the car, but chose to press gas.
She reversed, turned wheels to arc into the exiting lane and was shot by an officer who was already drawn prepared to fire.
That officer had the option to step either way, that officer chose to step into the turning arc to get a better shot and then side step clear .. they were not in any danger other than the danger they put themself in.
It's not acceptable here to kill people for fleeing.
I realise it's more common in the US which has a reputation for LEO's shooing unarmed people in the back.