Dashcam Video Released From Kansas Police-Involved Shooting During Traffic Stop

[volshayes]

Unfortunately, looks bad for her, but if he had just done what the Police said in the first place, it would have never happened.  Moral to the story: Save the argument for court, not the street.

https://www.officer.com/on-the-street/vehicles-equipment/in-car-video/news/21073399/dashcam-video-released-from-officerinvolved-shooting-during-kansas-traffic-stop?utm_source=Officer.com+Newsday+E-Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=CPS190326031&o_eid=5113J4674090I4J&rdx.ident[pull]=omeda|5113J4674090I4J&ajs_uid=5113J4674090I4J&oly_enc_id=5113J4674090I4J&ajs_trait_oebid=5902A2468689B2E

[Capbyrd]

There it is.   Perfect example.  Wear your seatbelt for safety and if you don't we are prepared to kill you to make sure you do.  Haha.   The absurdity of it.  

[volshayes]

22 minutes ago, Capbyrd said:

There it is.   Perfect example.  Wear your seatbelt for safety and if you don't we are prepared to kill you to make sure you do.  Haha.   The absurdity of it.  

She admitted she made a mistake.  She was going for her Taser.  It was a bad mistake.  However, it would have never gotten to that point had he just taken the ticket and gone to court to argue his point there.  Police cannot let someone go just because a person feels they don't deserve a ticket.  There would be no need for traffic laws if that were the case.  Two ways this could have been prevented.  (1) He could have worn his seatbelt.  If he didn't like the seatbelt law, he could have contacted his legislative representatives, argued his case, and ask that they change the laws.  (2) Take the ticket and go to court to state his case there like most rational people would have done.

[Capbyrd]

2 minutes ago, volshayes said:

She admitted she made a mistake.  She was going for her Taser.  It was a bad mistake.  However, it would have never gotten to that point had he just taken the ticket and gone to court to argue his point there.  Police cannot let someone go just because a person feels they don't deserve a ticket.  There would be no need for traffic laws if that were the case.  Two ways this could have been prevented.  (1) He could have worn his seatbelt.  If he didn't like the seatbelt law, he could have contacted his legislative representatives, argued his case, and ask that they change the laws.  (2) Take the ticket and go to court to state his case there like most rational people would have done.

And the cop could have said, "You know, it's stupid to threaten force to enforce a rule that is supposed to be about protecting someone."   And then NOT pulled him over and everyone would have gone home safe and happy that day.  

[volshayes]

33 minutes ago, Capbyrd said:

And the cop could have said, "You know, it's stupid to threaten force to enforce a rule that is supposed to be about protecting someone."   And then NOT pulled him over and everyone would have gone home safe and happy that day.  

If the laws aren't enforced, there is no need in having them.  I would imagine that the Patrolman would never have thought that he would have to use any kind of force on a seatbelt infraction.  Normal people would have taken the ticket and gone on about their business.  Unfortunately, there's always those few who think the law does not apply to them and they can do whatever they want.

[Quavodus]

2 hours ago, Capbyrd said:

There it is.   Perfect example.  Wear your seatbelt for safety and if you don't we are prepared to kill you to make sure you do.  Haha.   The absurdity of it.  

Oh yeah. If your suicidal and aint got the guts to off yourself, do some stupid traffic violation and get pulled over. Run your mouth a lot and get shot. I don't know maybe she did make a mistake. I would think the taser would feel different

Edited March 26, 2019 by Quavodus

[bersaguy]

Well, I will say this. I wear my lap belt but don't use the shoulder strap that crosses my abdomen because of all the mesh in my body my doctor has recomended I don't wear it. I would not have to have a wreck or hit anything. A sudden stop could cause damage to the mesh inside my abdomen by the should strap pressure. Now because I don't have the shoulder strap I have been puled over several times for it. I have a letter from my doctor explaining why it is recomended I don't wear it in my console. Every time I get pulled over and the officer asks for my license and proof of insurance they tell me they stopped me for not wearing my seat belt. I ask them if I can open my door and show them that I do in fact have my seat belt on. Then I offer to show them the letter from my doctor. Soon as the officer sees I do have my lap belt clicked they hand me my license and insurance card back and say thank you and have a good day and that is the end of it. No big issues, no questioning if I am trying to be smart or anything else. None of them have even taken the time to read the letter. I would not argue with any officer that chose to write me a ticket. I would have just thanked him/her, went to court with the letter from my doctor and accepted what ever the judge saw fit to do. How many times do you hear about serious accidents involving death that the person or people killed were not wearing their seat belts. The law is written to save lives and the belts are put in cars to save lives and all the officers are doing is their job when they stop someone for not wearing one. I also have a fully operational air bag in my vehicle............JMHO 

[eRay]

I wear my seatbelt every time I get in a vehicle. That being said, if you do not want to wear one , I don't have a problem with it. I worked as a police officer for a couple of years about 40 years ago. I believe if we had seat belt laws back then, I would have probably ignored most violations. I feel today the seatbelt violation is often used simply as probable cause to stop a car for which you really have no probable cause. Something about that vehicle just doesn't look right. You stop him for a seatbelt violation and then look for something else.

[DaveTN]

We didn’t have Tasers when I was a cop. (Ah, the fun I could have had). 

But this is the second video I have seen where a cop grabbed their gun instead of their taser. I would think that an officer would have their taser on their weak side so it would be different movements than grabbing their gun.

The guy was looking for trouble and attacked the Officer. Too bad that young Officer made that mistake.

As far as seatbelts go… I was a cop when they passed the seatbelt law. I didn’t wear mine, never stopped a car for it and never wrote a ticket for it. My guess is he had another reason for wanting to stop that vehicle and the seatbelt was just the PC for a stop. But that’s just a WAG.

[RED333]

If "J Walking" carried a death sentence this would have not happened! We have come to be soft on crime, just look at what was done in Chicago yesterday!

[E4 No More]

1 hour ago, DaveTN said:

We didn’t have Tasers when I was a cop. (Ah, the fun I could have had). 

But this is the second video I have seen where a cop grabbed their gun instead of their taser. I would think that an officer would have their taser on their weak side so it would be different movements than grabbing their gun.

The guy was looking for trouble and attacked the Officer. Too bad that young Officer made that mistake.

As far as seatbelts go… I was a cop when they passed the seatbelt law. I didn’t wear mine, never stopped a car for it and never wrote a ticket for it. My guess is he had another reason for wanting to stop that vehicle and the seatbelt was just the PC for a stop. But that’s just a WAG.

Pretty much the same thing here. I was a police officer about the time when Missouri passed their seat belt law. I never stopped someone for it. The closest that I came was when the Chief ordered me to sit on a specific road and count how many infractions that I saw in an hour.

But you also have to account for the times, and many jurisdictions today want to gather as much money as they can under the guise of "public safety" so that it's a little more socially acceptable. Just last month Metro was complaining about losing $50,000 per month in traffic violations and blaming it on a cop work slowdown. 

[Chucktshoes]

5 minutes ago, SWJewellTN said:

But you also have to account for the times, and many jurisdictions today want to gather as much money as they can under the guise of "public safety" so that it's a little more socially acceptable. Just last month Metro was complaining about losing $50,000 per month in traffic violations and blaming it on a cop work slowdown. 

The quite common practice of using traffic enforcement as a means of backdoor taxation is one of my biggest beefs with modern policing. It has naught to do with public safety and everything to do with revenue generation. Using police in this manner effectively turns them into the highwayman of yore holding up motorists at gunpoint telling them to stand and deliver their money or their lives. It’s disgusting. 

[E4 No More]

11 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

The quite common practice of using traffic enforcement as a means of backdoor taxation is one of my biggest beefs with modern policing. It has naught to do with public safety and everything to do with revenue generation. Using police in this manner effectively turns them into the highwayman of yore holding up motorists at gunpoint telling them to stand and deliver their money or their lives. It’s disgusting. 

I wouldn't exactly go that far. I'd hate to drive on roads without enforcement of traffic laws. My problem is when they go beyond safety into revenue generation. It's no one's damned business if I wear a seat belt or not. That law was brought about by pressure from the insurance industry. When I was a cop in a small suburb of Kansas City, my Chief only asked me for one ticket per shift. That's remarkable for a small town PD. Too bad they were corrupt in other ways.  

[felinesNfreedom]

[felinesNfreedom]

1 hour ago, Chucktshoes said:

The quite common practice of using traffic enforcement as a means of backdoor taxation is one of my biggest beefs with modern policing. It has naught to do with public safety and everything to do with revenue generation. Using police in this manner effectively turns them into the highwayman of yore holding up motorists at gunpoint telling them to stand and deliver their money or their lives. It’s disgusting. 

 

For the record I think seat belt laws and helmet laws are beyond stupid. If you choose to not wear a seat belt or a helmet that's on you, you hurt no one other than your self and your family if something happens to you.  I also wear my seat belt every time I am in my truck or any other vehicle, not because it's the law but I understand a little bit of the physics of the situation.

Edited March 27, 2019 by felinesNfreedom

[DaveTN]

2 hours ago, Chucktshoes said:

The quite common practice of using traffic enforcement as a means of backdoor taxation is one of my biggest beefs with modern policing. It has naught to do with public safety and everything to do with revenue generation. Using police in this manner effectively turns them into the highwayman of yore holding up motorists at gunpoint telling them to stand and deliver their money or their lives. It’s disgusting. 

Of course its revenue generation. The city is going to get its money either through that or my property taxes. I have absolutely no problem with azzhats that can’t drive or those that drive with total disregard for the law (like me when I got my last speeding ticket) paying instead of property owners.

If you live in an area where you are more likely to be injured or killed by a “real” criminal instead of a traffic offender; you should think about moving, you live in a very dangerous place.

My beef is with cameras, unmanned radar and ghost cars. If there is a big enough problem in an area; put a real cop there in a real marked Police car so people see what is going on. If they don’t see the cop; they aren’t paying attention. I would bet real cops and Police cars cost less than what some cities (like Murfreesboro) is paying these private companies for cameras and such.

A cop stopping a careless driver, DUI or your local crack dealer could save your life or that of a family member. Or catch the burglar that is casing your neighborhood.

[E4 No More]

2 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

Of course its revenue generation. The city is going to get its money either through that or my property taxes. I have absolutely no problem with azzhats that can’t drive or those that drive with total disregard for the law (like me when I got my last speeding ticket) paying instead of property owners.

If you live in an area where you are more likely to be injured or killed by a “real” criminal instead of a traffic offender; you should think about moving, you live in a very dangerous place.

My beef is with cameras, unmanned radar and ghost cars. If there is a big enough problem in an area; put a real cop there in a real marked Police car so people see what is going on. If they don’t see the cop; they aren’t paying attention. I would bet real cops and Police cars cost less than what some cities (like Murfreesboro) is paying these private companies for cameras and such.

A cop stopping a careless driver, DUI or your local crack dealer could save your life or that of a family member. Or catch the burglar that is casing your neighborhood.

What about those that are falsely accused going in front of judges that are not interested in innocence? You must be just as aware as I am of that happening quite frequently. 

[DaveTN]

25 minutes ago, SWJewellTN said:

What about those that are falsely accused going in front of judges that are not interested in innocence? You must be just as aware as I am of that happening quite frequently. 

I would guess there are Officers that do that. I know there were people that took my tickets to court that said that was the case.

Like you, we had a quota. It was called an “acceptable standard”; same thing different name.  Ours was 10 tickets a month for a District car (1 every other shift) and 100 a month for a traffic car (5 a shift). Pretty simple to do without making stuff up. Plus I didn’t like going to court even though it was overtime; so I wrote good tickets.

 I worked a traffic car for 2 years and trained traffic Officers for year. I hated it an was really glad to get out into a District car. I saw the worst stuff I have ever seen in my life working traffic.

 

EDIT: And I’ll add this.. Our States attorneys that handled traffic settled a lot of tickets without court. Dismissed, pay the fine with no points, probation, etc. Our traffic court Judges were pretty straight, they listened and if they thought a person had a good case, and that person didn’t think they did anything wrong; they dismissed it.

Edited March 27, 2019 by DaveTN

[E4 No More]

58 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

I would guess there are Officers that do that. I know there were people that took my tickets to court that said that was the case.

Like you, we had a quota. It was called an “acceptable standard”; same thing different name.  Ours was 10 tickets a month for a District car (1 every other shift) and 100 a month for a traffic car (5 a shift). Pretty simple to do without making stuff up. Plus I didn’t like going to court even though it was overtime; so I wrote good tickets.

 I worked a traffic car for 2 years and trained traffic Officers for year. I hated it an was really glad to get out into a District car. I saw the worst stuff I have ever seen in my life working traffic.

 

EDIT: And I’ll add this.. Our States attorneys that handled traffic settled a lot of tickets without court. Dismissed, pay the fine with no points, probation, etc. Our traffic court Judges were pretty straight, they listened and if they thought a person had a good case, and that person didn’t think they did anything wrong; they dismissed it.

In my time I've had several officers admit to me that they lied to get convictions. Their reasoning is that the criminal lies so why can't they? One of those admissions came from my own pastor who was a cop before becoming a pastor.

I was a Missouri State certified RADAR instructor and DUI instructor back in the day. Being a RADAR instructor I was well versed in proper procedure and case laws governing the use of RADAR. I've sat in a few courtrooms since I moved to Tennessee in 1998, and during those sessions I listened to numerous traffic cases as well as being attentive to the demeanor of those involved. Those courts were in Nashville, Smyrna, Bedford County, Williamson County and Murray County. There are certain things that must be done and testified to in order for the operator to truthfully testify that the RADAR reading was accurate. I was shocked at the frequency that those things were ignored. The most egregious were where there was obviously the lack of training on how to properly operate a RADAR gun.  Not one of the judges that I witnessed showed any evidence that they were aware of this situation, or should I say cared? One of the cases in Smyrna the officer testified that he received no formal training on the RADAR gun that he used. In that particular case I was the defendant. The officer couldn't even tell the court how to test the calibration of the RADAR gun. For those reading this who were not cops, you test the calibration of a RADAR gun with two tuning forks that vibrate at calibrated speeds, and  pushing an internal calibration button. The "Judge" didn't care. In an environment where the judge is also the prosecutor they should be erring on the side of the defense. When they obviously do not then it's not justice but rather revenue collection.

[volshayes]

7 minutes ago, SWJewellTN said:

In my time I've had several officers admit to me that they lied to get convictions. Their reasoning is that the criminal lies so why can't they? One of those admissions came from my own pastor who was a cop before becoming a pastor.

I was a Missouri State certified RADAR instructor and DUI instructor back in the day. Being a RADAR instructor I was well versed in proper procedure and case laws governing the use of RADAR. I've sat in a few courtrooms since I moved to Tennessee in 1998, and during those sessions I listened to numerous traffic cases as well as being attentive to the demeanor of those involved. Those courts were in Nashville, Smyrna, Bedford County, Williamson County and Murray County. There are certain things that must be done and testified to in order for the operator to truthfully testify that the RADAR reading was accurate. I was shocked at the frequency that those things were ignored. The most egregious were where there was obviously the lack of training on how to properly operate a RADAR gun.  Not one of the judges that I witnessed showed any evidence that they were aware of this situation, or should I say cared? One of the cases in Smyrna the officer testified that he received no formal training on the RADAR gun that he used. In that particular case I was the defendant. The officer couldn't even tell the court how to test the calibration of the RADAR gun. For those reading this who were not cops, you test the calibration of a RADAR gun with two tuning forks that vibrate at calibrated speeds, and  pushing an internal calibration button. The "Judge" didn't care. In an environment where the judge is also the prosecutor they should be erring on the side of the defense. When they obviously do not then it's not justice but rather revenue collection. 

You said you came to Tennessee in 1998.  There is a long history waaaaaaay before 1998 of Smyrna being one of Tennessee's biggest speed traps.  It was on the main highway to Nashville before the Interstate was built and greatly supplemented the local economy.  When the Interstate came through, it killed off some of that revenue.  I don't know how it is today.  I haven't been down there in years.  From what you said above, it sounds like it hasn't improved a lot.

[E4 No More]

2 minutes ago, volshayes said:

You said you came to Tennessee in 1998.  There is a long history waaaaaaay before 1998 of Smyrna being one of Tennessee's biggest speed traps.  It was on the main highway to Nashville before the Interstate was built and greatly supplemented the local economy.  When the Interstate came through, it killed off some of that revenue.  I don't know how it is today.  I haven't been down there in years.  From what you said above, it sounds like it hasn't improved a lot.

Well, I would like to believe that I had something to do with change there. Smyrna used to love sitting between a chain-link fence and the railroad tracks while aiming their RADAR guns down Lowry Street towards the bridge that passes Sam Ridley over Lowry.  From where they sit there are steel chain-link fence, metal railroad tracks, power lines, steel spanner beams, and steel reinforced concrete. All of those items vibrate just like the tuning forks used to test the RADAR gun except NOT at pre-calibrated speeds and giving false readings. The Chief of Police was in the courtroom and was obviously alarmed at all of the points that I was bringing up to the judge. From that point on I've NEVER seen Smyrna police running RADAR at that location again. So maybe I took one for the team to make things better for others going through that particular speed trap?

BTW: The judge's response to all of these points was "I don't care, you're guilty!"

[Will Carry]

He didn't get shot for a seatbelt violation. He attacked a police officer.  A person can strike a deadly blow with two fingers. Hand to hand fighting is not like you see on TV.   I hope the man survived, Did he? 

[DaveTN]

47 minutes ago, SWJewellTN said:

In my time I've had several officers admit to me that they lied to get convictions. Their reasoning is that the criminal lies so why can't they? One of those admissions came from my own pastor who was a cop before becoming a pastor.

I was a Missouri State certified RADAR instructor and DUI instructor back in the day. Being a RADAR instructor I was well versed in proper procedure and case laws governing the use of RADAR. I've sat in a few courtrooms since I moved to Tennessee in 1998, and during those sessions I listened to numerous traffic cases as well as being attentive to the demeanor of those involved. Those courts were in Nashville, Smyrna, Bedford County, Williamson County and Murray County. There are certain things that must be done and testified to in order for the operator to truthfully testify that the RADAR reading was accurate. I was shocked at the frequency that those things were ignored. The most egregious were where there was obviously the lack of training on how to properly operate a RADAR gun.  Not one of the judges that I witnessed showed any evidence that they were aware of this situation, or should I say cared? One of the cases in Smyrna the officer testified that he received no formal training on the RADAR gun that he used. In that particular case I was the defendant. The officer couldn't even tell the court how to test the calibration of the RADAR gun. For those reading this who were not cops, you test the calibration of a RADAR gun with two tuning forks that vibrate at calibrated speeds, and  pushing an internal calibration button. The "Judge" didn't care. In an environment where the judge is also the prosecutor they should be erring on the side of the defense. When they obviously do not then it's not justice but rather revenue collection.

Our traffic Judges had a little speech they gave at the beginning of each session. Part of that speech included that Radar had been proven in their courtroom and they would not put it on trial again. However, they said they would allow the defendant or their attorney to ask whatever questions they wanted to about the calibration, certification, of the unit or the training of the Officer.

They also said that Radar was an aid for what an Officer observed. They wouldn’t convict if the Officer didn’t testify he had a clear view of the target vehicle and observed its speed. You get pretty good at estimating speed. We use to have bets and we were usually pretty close to what the radar showed.

I feel I was lucky to be in a highly trained well respected Police Department with a respected court system. However….I have said this before and I will say it again. If you have to go to court you will get exactly the amount of justice you can afford. Someone mentioned what happened in Chicago yesterday; that is what happened. I said in the thread when that happened that the Cook County States Attorney was not going to want to prosecute that case. Then she said recused herself. I can assure you that the decision being handed down without consulting with the Police or the Mayors Officer in this high profile case would not have happened without her consent. Recused my butt.

Edited March 27, 2019 by DaveTN

[E4 No More]

8 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

Our traffic Judges had a little speech they gave at the beginning of each session. Part of that speech included that Radar had been proven in their courtroom and they would not put it on trial again. However, they said they would allow the defendant or their attorney to ask whatever questions they wanted to about the calibration, certification, of the unit or the training of the Officer.

They also said that Radar was an aid for what an Officer observed. They wouldn’t convict if the Officer didn’t testify he had a clear view of the target vehicle and observed its speed. You get pretty good at estimating speed. We use to have bets and we were usually pretty close to what the radar showed.

I feel I was lucky to be in a highly trained well respected Police Department with a respected court system. However….I have said this before and I will say it again. If you have to go to court you will get exactly the amount of justice you can afford. Someone mentioned what happened in Chicago yesterday; that is what happened. I said in the thread when that happened that the Cook County States Attorney was not going to want to prosecute that case. Then she said recused herself. I can assure you that the decision being handed down without consulting with the Police or the Mayors Officer in this high profile case would not have happened without her consent. Recused my butt.

Full disclosure: I do have a lead foot, but most of my observations were watching other cases in court.

Yes, case law states that the officer first has to testify that he/she judged that the vehicle was speeding: however, they can only testify to that and the RADAR gun has to be proven to register the true speed of the vehicle +/- 1 MPH. That's where testing its calibration before and after the charge comes in. The gun must be proven to be operating properly before AND after the incident to demonstrate that it was operating properly during the incident. Where that might be different is where the jurisdiction's laws do not require a specific reading, (California is an example of that and don't know about Tennessee since I wasn't a cop here).  But you also have to show that the officer was operating the gun correctly, and that there was no false reading. Operating the gun correctly involves several things with the major one's being that you performed the calibration tests properly, that the suspect vehicle was the closest to you with no larger vehicles behind it, you tracked the vehicle through the cone, and that you had the audio for the counter on. That last one is the most ignored by LEO's and is the ONLY way you can determine a true reading from a false reading. The problem is that the audio sounds like a cross between a plane landing on your head and the scratching of a chalkboard with fingernails so most LEOs turn it off.

To Bedford County's credit, before court I pointed out to the prosecutor that the Trooper did not track me through the cone because I saw the hood of his car dive sharply to slow down to turn around. I told him that I was a RADAR instructor to qualify my statement. The prosecutor went to the Trooper and my ticket was dropped.  

[Trekbike]

17 hours ago, Will Carry said:

  I hope the man survived, Did he? 

Yes.   

Lewis, who survived the shooting, was charged in Douglas County with battery on a law enforcement officer, interference with a law enforcement officer, no proof of insurance and driving without a seat belt.