DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Blake Shooting

Department of Justice releases name of officer involved in shooting, says Blake had knife
Deneen Smith Aug 26, 2020 Updated 3 hrs ago


The Wisconsin Department of Justice on Wednesday afternoon identified the Kenosha Police officer who shot Jacob Blake, also stating that Blake had a knife during the confrontation.

Blake, 29, was shot by the officer Sunday. A video shared widely on social media showed the officer was holding onto Blake’s shirt when he shot him as he attempted to get into a parked car. The shooting has led to widespread protest.

The DOJ said the “shooting officer” was Rusten Sheskey, who has been with the department for seven years.

According to the statement from the DOJ, police were called to a home on the 2800 block of 40th Street by a woman who said her boyfriend was present and was not supposed to be on the premises. Officers attempted to arrest Blake, and used a taser as part of that attempt before the shooting.


According to the statement, the DOJ found Sheskey fired his gun seven times, None of the other officers involved fired weapons.

“During the investigation following the initial incident, Mr. Blake admitted that he had a knife in his possession,” the DOJ release states. “DCI agents recovered a knife from the driver’s side floorboard of Mr. Blake’s vehicle. A search of the vehicle located no additional weapons.”

The officers involved, including Sheskey, are on administrative leave.

DCI investigators are “continuing to review evidence and determine the facts of this incident.” They aim to provide a report to the district attorney within 30 days. The DA will then decide whether charges are warranted.


If the prosecutor determines there is no basis for prosecution of the officer, DCI will thereafter make the report available to the public.

https://www.kenoshanews.com/news/local/d...ome-top-story-1

Defund the police.

Yeah the police never lie. And really does that justify shooting him in the back at point blank range 7 times? And where's the charges filed against Blake at the scene for assault with a deadly weapon?

This doesn't make it very clear,, Was Blake the person that the police were called about?

No. He called the cops from what I understand.

j/c:

NBA on the brink: 'LA Lakers and LA Clippers led by LeBron James vote to end season' hours after Bucks boycotted game over Wisconsin chaos - as MLB, MLS and WNBA teams call off games in solidarity

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...e.html#comments

Did anybody notice without reading the news first?

In my younger days I have had a few encounters with the police. You know what I did every time I was in trouble or being talked to by them? I complied. They told me to sit down, I sat down. They told me to lay down, I laid down. I didn't try to fight them or run away. I know they carry guns and could kill me at any moment.

This isn't rocket science.

Jacob Blake got shot repeatedly, but it didn't have to be this way. He shouldn't have fought the police. He shouldn't have pulled a knife. He shouldn't have tried to take off in his car. Point being, actions have consequences. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

So not listening to what the officer may or may not have told someone to do is now grounds for public execution? Got it.

They said he "had a knife". Witnesses say he didn't have a knife in his hands or "pull a knife" on anyone. Witnesses also state he was trying to "break up a fight" between two girls.

Now I'm not exactly clear which account is correct and maybe nobody else should jump to the conclusion that the police account of the incident is accurate either.

Nowhere in the American court system does fleeing the police carry a death sentence. Because at the time he was shot, that's what he was attempting to do.

J/C

I appreciate what the players are trying to accomplish, but cancelling the season I think would be counter productive.

As someone said above, if not for the news coverage of the boycott, most people would have no idea that it happened.

It would seem to me, that playing brings a captive audience, no matter how small the ratings may be, in which they and the league has a platform to get their position out there.

I'm sure they could also do some of it outside of basketball, but in the current climate I don't think they would get the airtime that they would during a season.

j/c

Putin uses Jacob Blake shooting to call U.S. and E.U. hypocrites

"We behaved much more restrained and neutral in relation to the events in Belarus than many other countries," the Russian president says.

Russian President Vladimir Putin criticized the U.S. and Europe on Thursday for condemning Belarusian police brutality without doing the same on police violence in their own countries.

When asked about police brutality in Belarus during an interview with state-owned television channel Russia-1, Putin referenced the Yellow Jackets movement in France and the shooting of Jacob Blake in Wisconsin.

After the interviewer called the first two days of protests in Belarus “uncomfortable,” Putin said: “Was it comfortable when in some European countries people were dying almost every day? And was it comfortable when an unarmed person is shot in the back, despite the fact that he also has three children in his car?”

The example of Blake, an unarmed black man who was left paralyzed after being shot seven times in the back by a police officer, was used by Putin to suggest that the EU and the U.S. are not genuinely concerned about the police violence in Belarus.

“Does anyone who now blames Belarus and the Belarusian leadership — President Lukashenko — for something, do they condemn these actions? Why such selectivity?” Putin asked.

“This suggests that the point is not about what is happening in Belarus,” Putin added. “They want to influence these processes and achieve some decisions that correspond, as these people [U.S. and EU leaders] think, to their political interests.”

The U.S and the EU have both called the Belarusian presidential election, which Alexander Lukashenko claims to have won, neither free nor fair. They have also strongly condemned Belarusian authorities for using violence against peaceful protestors.

In the same interview, Putin said, “In my opinion, we behaved much more restrained and neutral in relation to the events in Belarus than many other countries, both Europeans and Americans.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/27...pocrites-403617

The fact that Putin said this increases the odds Trump will finally listen.

Oh Lord I wish people would wait till all the facts come out before they start crying like 3 month old babies who are starving.

What a very sad, tragic, and truthful statement you made.

I know, right? It's almost like they should rename this part of the forum the "Romper Room"

True.....look what romper room taught us back in 1963.

Language in the subtitle of the picture....post needs removed. Apparently "dang" is what got my YouTube video removed, so....

What ticks me off so much right now is most certainly the cops.

Did y’all see how they just drive on by a kid walking down the street with a rifle around him?

And yet so many conservatives tried to justify the cops rolling up on a 12 year old kid with a toy gun and MURDERING him.

This is why I call them racist. 12 year old black kid with a toy gun got rolled up on and shot down like a dog, while a 17 year old white domestic terrorist walking with his hands up toward the cops just got passed on by, and didn’t get picked up til the next morning.

Wonder if they stopped by to give the kid Burger King like they did Dylan roof.....

Bro swear to god imma start using that every time some white dude it woman gets murdered.

Eh, well you know, whites kill whites 86% of the time. So they probably deserved it. Move it along.

j/c:

Trivializing murder to further one's politics. Just when I thought y'all couldn't sink any lower.

It's not quite as bad as people using their politics to further murder.

In Chicago!
Chicago!
Chicago!

Relevant:

Are they trying to say that the Chicago police department can't do their job after being given a 1.76 billion dollar budget?

Or are they trying to say that giving them a 1.76 billion dollar budget means nobody cares about it?

j/c

For those who seem to claim that police are justified for shooting people in the back because they are fleeing the police.....

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)

Facts
A state police officer shot and killed Garner as he was fleeing the scene of the crime. Despite knowing that Garner was unarmed, the police officer believed that he was justified in shooting him to prevent his escape. Garner's father brought a constitutional challenge to the Tennessee statute that authorized the use of deadly force in this situation. The state prevailed in the trial court, but the state appellate court ruled that the statute was unconstitutional.
Opinions

Majority

Byron Raymond White (Author)
William Joseph Brennan, Jr.
Thurgood Marshall
Harry Andrew Blackmun
Lewis Franklin Powell, Jr.
John Paul Stevens

When a non-violent felon is ordered to stop and submit to police, ignoring that order does not give rise to a reasonable good-faith belief that the use of deadly force is necessary, unless it has been threatened.

Dissent

Sandra Day O'Connor (Author)
Warren Earl Burger
William Hubbs Rehnquist

Case Commentary
This decision responded to the evolution of the common law, which formerly imposed a death sentence for most felonies. Shooting a non-violent fleeing felon historically would have been permitted because it would have been the same result as if he had been caught and convicted. This is no longer the situation, and the Supreme Court adjusted the rule regarding the use of deadly force to account for it.


U.S. Supreme Court
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)

Tennessee v. Garner

No. 83-1035

Argued October 30, 1984

Decided March 27, 1985*

471 U.S. 1

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

Syllabus

A Tennessee statute provides that, if, after a police officer has given notice of an intent to arrest a criminal suspect, the suspect flees or forcibly resists, "the officer may use all the necessary means to effect the arrest." Acting under the authority of this statute, a Memphis police officer shot and killed appellee-respondent Garner's son as, after being told to halt, the son fled over a fence at night in the backyard of a house he was suspected of burglarizing. The officer used deadly force despite being "reasonably sure" the suspect was unarmed and thinking that he was 17 or 18 years old, and of slight build. The father subsequently brought an action in Federal District Court, seeking damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for asserted violations of his son's constitutional rights. The District Court held that the statute and the officer's actions were constitutional. The Court of Appeals reversed.

Held: The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against, as in this case, an apparently unarmed, nondangerous fleeing suspect; such force may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. Pp. 7-22.

[2]

(a) Apprehension by the use of deadly force is a seizure subject to the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement. To determine whether such a seizure is reasonable, the extent of the intrusion on the suspect's rights under that Amendment must be balanced against the governmental interests in effective law enforcement. This balancing process demonstrates that, notwithstanding probable cause to seize a suspect, an officer may not always do so by killing him. The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. Pp. 7-12.

(b) The Fourth Amendment, for purposes of this case, should not be construed in light of the common law rule allowing the use of whatever force is necessary to effect the arrest of a fleeing felon. Changes in the legal and technological context mean that that rule is distorted almost beyond recognition when literally applied. Whereas felonies were formerly capital crimes, few are now, or can be, and many crimes classified as misdemeanors, or nonexistent, at common law are now felonies. Also, the common law rule developed at a time when weapons were rudimentary. And, in light of the varied rules adopted in the States indicating a long-term movement away from the common law rule, particularly in the police departments themselves, that rule is a dubious indicium of the constitutionality of the Tennessee statute. There is no indication that holding a police practice such as that authorized by the statute unreasonable will severely hamper effective law enforcement. Pp. 12-20.

(c) While burglary is a serious crime, the officer in this case could not reasonably have believed that the suspect -- young, slight, and unarmed -- posed any threat. Nor does the fact that an unarmed suspect has broken into a dwelling at night automatically mean he is dangerous. Pp. 20-22.

710 F.2d 240, affirmed and remanded.

WHITE, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BRENNAN, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, POWELL, and STEVENS, JJ., joined. O'CONNOR, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BURGER, C.J., and REHNQUIST, J., joined, post p. 22.

[3]

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/471/1/

1. Open carry is legal where that kid was carrying the rifle.

2. The kid you reference was pointing get a gun at people. That's why the cops were called. The cops were not told by the dispatcher that the gun might be fake. The rookie cop shot the kid. That was a badly trained cop.

3. Roof complained to the police about being hungry and not having anything to eat since that morning. A good defense lawyer could have used that circumstance to show the police refused him food until they got the confession and had that case thrown out. Confessions given under duress are not allowed in a court of law. The cops secured their case by feeding him.

Oh dear Lord.

yeah that’s it.

Erik,

the kid was not legally allowed to carry in the state he was from. he then brought a rifle that he was not legally allowed to have across the state lines. he then murdered somebody, and then was running away from people trying to catch him for murdering someone, and then murdered another person.

the kid had a toy gun that was NOT firing any bullets, because, ya know, IT WAS A TOY.

dylan roof should've been shot on the spot.

because leave it to you to defend the murder of a 12 year old, and defend a 17 year old white domestic terrorist.

not surprising whatsoever.

Quick question on this...if he took the gun across state lines and used it, could this make his crimes federal crime?

Ok - that's ridiculous. As I recall, he was just stopped by police while he was driving, and then was arrested without incident.

Cops aren't supposed to be jury and executioner, no matter how bad your crimes are -- or what the color of your skin is.

But they do make exceptions. You have noticed that, right?

How are the cops to know that someone carrying that rifle was not from the area?

I know that kid had a toy gun, and was not firing anything. I said as much. I did not defend that shooting at all. A badly trained rookie overeacted. I don't know what legal ramifications that cop faced.

Why should roof had been shot on the spot? He was captured in North Carolina. He was calm and cooperative with the cops.

Yes.

I think George Floyd would agree with you- if he could.

Domestic terrorism is a federal crime. But I’m sure trump and his supporters will spin this as standing his ground. The dude was a trouble maker looking for violence...he’s a right wing nut and a violent instigator. Part of the trump law and order clan. trump’s law..trump’s order...trump’s America. Right wing nuts shooting people on broadway while the police drive right past the white guy with the assault rifle with his hands up. Screw these cops, trump, and his clueless supporters.

Maybe everyone yelling to the cops, "He just shot a guy!" should have been a clue to stop him and investigate?