Former Bengals running back shot to death by police

[The Patriot]

I'm tired of having these arguments.

I remember when that Oakland cop accidentally mistook his gun for his taser and shot a guy in handcuffs on the ground, and people were blaming the guy (who died!) for squirming around too much or something, I don't know. Nobody mind that we have cops who don't know the difference between their gun and their taser! I guess people put so much faith in the security that the police provide that they forget the fact that police are people under their uniforms and people can royally screw up. If you don't see anything wrong with this story then you have no common sense.

It scares me even more to know that some states are making it a FELONY to videotape police officers in public places.

[fansince'76]

Certainly seems to be a case of an overzealous cop to me.

[CantStop85]

How do you know the 56 year old man didn't have a gun in his pocket? The officer sure as hell didn't know and can't risk something like that I don't care how old you are.

Why would he have any reason to think that he did have a gun in his pocket?

You're correct in stating that the officer "sure as hell didn't know," but I'm not really sure what you're suggesting here by saying that "he can't risk something like that." When in doubt, just assume they have a gun? So, I guess the next time a cop pulls you over and you decide to reach into the glove compartment to pull out your insurance, the cop should just go ahead and assume that you're packing heat and give you a couple shots to the chest because, you know, he "can't risk something like that."

There was no intention of shooting to kill the man he took a few shots out of self defense because he was struck.

This is just silly. Whenever you use a gun, you have to be conscious of the fact that there's a good chance you're going to kill the person you use it on. Just re-read the phrase "a few shots out of self defense" and realize how silly it sounds.

I wager that there would have been many more viable routes of self-defense than gun-play in this situation. If the cop was the only one on the scene, then it might have been a little more understandable, but there were MULTIPLE cops on the scene. Don't you think 2 or 3 of them would have been able to restrain him instead of resorting to murdering him in front of his son?

[Craic]

Wow, a cop got hit with bag of groceries?! Sounds like a clean kill to me!

I understand police officers have to defend themselves, but if you can't deal with a struggling unarmed suspect without pulling out your gun and shooting him, don't f**king become a cop.

Unarmed? Unarmed means no weapons. He chose to use the bag as a weapon. Thus, he was no longer unarmed. Wait, wait, I know, a bag of groceries, get serious! Actually, I am very serious. Let's take a look at just how easily that bag of groceries could have killed the cop. Physics tells the story.

1. Swing speed. Somewhat hard to measure, but let's see what we can do. Golf club swing speed, about 90 miles an hour on impact (face of club). Baseball bat swing speed, about 80 MPH for a highschool player. I would say that a highschool ball player would be equal to a 50 year old ex-Pro NFL player.

2. The difference between the bag and the bat. The bag had two 24 ounce cans of beer, for a total of 48 ounces. Cutting down the swing speed by half, gives you 40 MPH. Let's take another 50% off that for good measure, since it is a bag. That gives a swing speed of 20 MPH, which is easily attainable when someone is angry or scared.

3. Now, plugging all those numbers in:

Beer weighs approx. 1.09 ounces for every liquid ounce, plus the can which is about 2/3rds of an ounce. Thus, two 24 ounce cans of beer will weigh approx. 3.35 pounds. Now, if that was all that is in the bag, then we can calculate the impact (Don't forget, the more that's in the bag, the bigger the potential impact, depending on what hits first).

So, 3.35 pounds swinging at 20 MPH hits the cop in the back of the head. Let's say the can dents in a quarter inch (Quite a bit for a can, but we're being conservative), and the cop's head moves 2 inches from the impact. That's a total stopping distance of just over 2 inches.

Thus, the impact is 263.68 pounds of force over an inch to inch and a half piece of the skull.

That has tremendous potential danger, including TBI or worse. Don't forget, I lowered the numbers tremendously. If the guy was really ticked, in decent shape, and took a good swing, he could get that bag up to 40 MPH, which equals over 1000 pounds of impact force. That coming VERY close to skull breaking force.

So calling this guy unarmed is very incorrect. He used an everyday object as a weapon and doing so, should have been considered an armed suspect attacking a police officer.

What do YOU think should happen to an armed suspect that attacks a police officer? If the policeman was incapacitated at all, and the guy got a second swing at him, that's a potential total of 500 pounds to a TON of force on the policeman's head over two hits. Is that enough to warrant deadly force?

[venom]

Unarmed? Unarmed means no weapons. He chose to use the bag as a weapon. Thus, he was no longer unarmed. Wait, wait, I know, a bag of groceries, get serious! Actually, I am very serious. Let's take a look at just how easily that bag of groceries could have killed the cop. Physics tells the story.

1. Swing speed. Somewhat hard to measure, but let's see what we can do. Golf club swing speed, about 90 miles an hour on impact (face of club). Baseball bat swing speed, about 80 MPH for a highschool player. I would say that a highschool ball player would be equal to a 50 year old ex-Pro NFL player.

2. The difference between the bag and the bat. The bag had two 24 ounce cans of beer, for a total of 48 ounces. Cutting down the swing speed by half, gives you 40 MPH. Let's take another 50% off that for good measure, since it is a bag. That gives a swing speed of 20 MPH, which is easily attainable when someone is angry or scared.

3. Now, plugging all those numbers in:

Beer weighs approx. 1.09 ounces for every liquid ounce, plus the can which is about 2/3rds of an ounce. Thus, two 24 ounce cans of beer will weigh approx. 3.35 pounds. Now, if that was all that is in the bag, then we can calculate the impact (Don't forget, the more that's in the bag, the bigger the potential impact, depending on what hits first).

So, 3.35 pounds swinging at 20 MPH hits the cop in the back of the head. Let's say the can dents in a quarter inch (Quite a bit for a can, but we're being conservative), and the cop's head moves 2 inches from the impact. That's a total stopping distance of just over 2 inches.

Thus, the impact is 263.68 pounds of force over an inch to inch and a half piece of the skull.

That has tremendous potential danger, including TBI or worse. Don't forget, I lowered the numbers tremendously. If the guy was really ticked, in decent shape, and took a good swing, he could get that bag up to 40 MPH, which equals over 1000 pounds of impact force. That coming VERY close to skull breaking force.

So calling this guy unarmed is very incorrect. He used an everyday object as a weapon and doing so, should have been considered an armed suspect attacking a police officer.

What do YOU think should happen to an armed suspect that attacks a police officer? If the policeman was incapacitated at all, and the guy got a second swing at him, that's a potential total of 500 pounds to a TON of force on the policeman's head over two hits. Is that enough to warrant deadly force?

Wow , that sounded like an episode of Sports Science , lol . People dont know how it feels like to walk in a cop's shoes . Rather be tried by 12 then be carried by 6 .

[The Patriot]

Unarmed? Unarmed means no weapons. He chose to use the bag as a weapon. Thus, he was no longer unarmed. Wait, wait, I know, a bag of groceries, get serious! Actually, I am very serious. Let's take a look at just how easily that bag of groceries could have killed the cop. Physics tells the story.

1. Swing speed. Somewhat hard to measure, but let's see what we can do. Golf club swing speed, about 90 miles an hour on impact (face of club). Baseball bat swing speed, about 80 MPH for a highschool player. I would say that a highschool ball player would be equal to a 50 year old ex-Pro NFL player.

2. The difference between the bag and the bat. The bag had two 24 ounce cans of beer, for a total of 48 ounces. Cutting down the swing speed by half, gives you 40 MPH. Let's take another 50% off that for good measure, since it is a bag. That gives a swing speed of 20 MPH, which is easily attainable when someone is angry or scared.

3. Now, plugging all those numbers in:

Beer weighs approx. 1.09 ounces for every liquid ounce, plus the can which is about 2/3rds of an ounce. Thus, two 24 ounce cans of beer will weigh approx. 3.35 pounds. Now, if that was all that is in the bag, then we can calculate the impact (Don't forget, the more that's in the bag, the bigger the potential impact, depending on what hits first).

So, 3.35 pounds swinging at 20 MPH hits the cop in the back of the head. Let's say the can dents in a quarter inch (Quite a bit for a can, but we're being conservative), and the cop's head moves 2 inches from the impact. That's a total stopping distance of just over 2 inches.

Thus, the impact is 263.68 pounds of force over an inch to inch and a half piece of the skull.

That has tremendous potential danger, including TBI or worse. Don't forget, I lowered the numbers tremendously. If the guy was really ticked, in decent shape, and took a good swing, he could get that bag up to 40 MPH, which equals over 1000 pounds of impact force. That coming VERY close to skull breaking force.

So calling this guy unarmed is very incorrect. He used an everyday object as a weapon and doing so, should have been considered an armed suspect attacking a police officer.

What do YOU think should happen to an armed suspect that attacks a police officer? If the policeman was incapacitated at all, and the guy got a second swing at him, that's a potential total of 500 pounds to a TON of force on the policeman's head over two hits. Is that enough to warrant deadly force?

We're not on the same page. You're assuming Turner charged at the cops whipping that thing around like a ball and chain. Maybe he did (It would certainly play to the cop's favor), but that doesn't sound like the more realistic situation to me. No, this sounded more like a guy resisting being taken to the ground by police. I've seen this situation happen with drunks and idiots like a dozen times. And if he was jerking around with a bag of beer cans, it could have easily swung back and struck an officer pulling him to the ground in the back of the head.

However, I could be wrong. Hopefully this will get cleared up with the testimony of witnesses and the other cops. But your story gives a huge amount of benefit of the doubt to the officer in question.

[smokin3000gt]

Preach, I think you are missing the point.
Shooting to kill is a last resort with an officer. A taser would have stopped the "grocery bag" attack the same as his gun but without killing anyone. If there were multiple cops on scene then the chances of this officer being 'beat to death' with a beer can is slim to none.

Everyone is assuming the bag was used as a weapon just because the cop who shot him said he was attacked with it. Do you think he is going to say "I over reacted and killed a man when I was accidentally hit with a bag." ?

I can't believe how many people are writing this guy off like a bag of garbage being put curbside without being there, knowing the FACTS (of the situation, not what he says are facts in his report), or hearing the other side of the story (which obviously isn't possible). Try to have a little remorse for person, son, father that was more likely killed for resisting arrest then brutally beating a cop.

I'll save my judgement until I see the store's surveillance video.

[Boh]

inb4hatecrime

[Craic]

We're not on the same page. You're assuming Turner charged at the cops whipping that thing around like a ball and chain. Maybe he did (It would certainly play to the cop's favor), but that doesn't sound like the more realistic situation to me. No, this sounded more like a guy resisting being taken to the ground by police. I've seen this situation happen with drunks and idiots like a dozen times. And if he was jerking around with a bag of beer cans, it could have easily swung back and struck an officer pulling him to the ground in the back of the head.

However, I could be wrong. Hopefully this will get cleared up with the testimony of witnesses and the other cops. But your story gives a huge amount of benefit of the doubt to the officer in question.

Actually, I'm not assuming he charged him, but rather that he simply turned and swung the bag, that is why I looked at baseball swings and golf swings, since they are both done from a stand still.

As for what it sounds like to you, you could be absolutely correct. But the fact that he was cooperative, then not, makes me think that it was more than just a bag swinging up from a take down. Do I know? Nope. Not at all. But I was actually commenting on your comment of "just a bag of groceries" showing that no, it really isn't "just a bag of groceries." It IS a potential weapon.

But again, your scenario could end up being absolutely right.

Preach, I think you are missing the point.
Shooting to kill is a last resort with an officer. A taser would have stopped the "grocery bag" attack the same as his gun but without killing anyone. If there were multiple cops on scene then the chances of this officer being 'beat to death' with a beer can is slim to none.

Beat to death? No, as I said before, it has the potential to kill in a single swing to the back of the head.

But I think you missed the impetus of my post, where I was correcting the idea that it was "Just a bag of groceries" and an unarmed man (see my comments above).

Everyone is assuming the bag was used as a weapon just because the cop who shot him said he was attacked with it. Do you think he is going to say "I over reacted and killed a man when I was accidentally hit with a bag." ?

Again, see my comments above. I do not doubt that is a possibility. Especially when the cop that shot him was young.

I can't believe how many people are writing this guy off like a bag of garbage being put curbside without being there, knowing the FACTS (of the situation, not what he says are facts in his report), or hearing the other side of the story (which obviously isn't possible).

I'm not writing this guy off. Once again, just correcting a thought that he was unarmed when in fact, he very well may have turned an object into a weapon.

Try to have a little remorse for person, son, father that was more likely killed for resisting arrest then brutally beating a cop.

Quite the assumption I don't. But I think your assumption was made do to misunderstanding the context of my post. As I said when Osama was killed, it is ALWAYS a shame when a human life is taken, no matter what. (and no, this is not a comparison to Osama bin laden, but rather, a light to heavy midrash).
However, I also believe that he put himself in that situation. If you resist arrest, you create a situation where police officers get riled up, and will have to make snap judgments about threats.
That's a bad situation to create.

As far as what really ahappen, you're right, we don't know.

I'll save my judgement until I see the store's surveillance video.

[steelpride12]

Why would he have any reason to think that he did have a gun in his pocket?

You're correct in stating that the officer "sure as hell didn't know," but I'm not really sure what you're suggesting here by saying that "he can't risk something like that." When in doubt, just assume they have a gun? So, I guess the next time a cop pulls you over and you decide to reach into the glove compartment to pull out your insurance, the cop should just go ahead and assume that you're packing heat and give you a couple shots to the chest because, you know, he "can't risk something like that."


This is just silly. Whenever you use a gun, you have to be conscious of the fact that there's a good chance you're going to kill the person you use it on. Just re-read the phrase "a few shots out of self defense" and realize how silly it sounds.

I wager that there would have been many more viable routes of self-defense than gun-play in this situation. If the cop was the only one on the scene, then it might have been a little more understandable, but there were MULTIPLE cops on the scene. Don't you think 2 or 3 of them would have been able to restrain him instead of resorting to murdering him in front of his son?

The glove compartment statement is foolish, but when you just got hit in the head and the suspect is being physically violent you have to act and act fast.

It doesn't matter how many cops are there. Irrelevant.

The final say to me is: if you don't want shot than don't hit a police officer.

[CantStop85]

The final say to me is: if you don't want shot than don't hit a police officer.

This would seem to be a pretty common-sense guideline, but you're missing the big picture.

If cops are permitted to defend themselves by any means, you're setting a dangerous precedent. Before long you'll have cops getting away with shooting people for making gestures that are interpreted as threatening. Suddenly, cops can kill any unarmed civilians they want (provided there are minimal witnesses) by simply saying that the person punched or attacked him. Would all cops do this? No, but some would.

Finally, the question of how many cops were there is not at all irrelevant. Hypothetically, if there were, say, 10 cops versus one 50-year-old swinging around a bag of beer cans, do you really think that shooting the guy would be the most reasonable course of action? Even if one of the cops is attacked, there are still 9 more to restrain the guy, and I seriously doubt that the guy with the beer cans is going to be able to put that one cop's life in serious danger before the 9 other cops restrain him.

Is it possible that the cop was justified in shooting the man? It's possible, but still highly unlikely.

[Nadroj 20]

The glove compartment statement is foolish, but when you just got hit in the head and the suspect is being physically violent you have to act and act fast.

It doesn't matter how many cops are there. Irrelevant.

The final say to me is: if you don't want shot than don't hit a police officer.

How can the number of cops be irrelevant? The greater the number the lower the risk of that guy seriously hurting someone. If he is attacking one cop all it takes is for at least one other cop to take him down.

This doesn't even have anything to do with whether or not the cop should have shot the guy. The number of cops in almost every situation is most certainly relevant.