The Latest: Chief: At least 1 body camera video of shooting

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

The Latest: Chief: At least 1 body camera video of shooting
Sep 23, 11:45 AM EDT

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) -- The Latest on unrest in Charlotte following the shooting of a black man by police (all times local):



11:35 a.m.

Charlotte's police chief says there is at least one video from a body camera and one other video from a dashboard camera that captured the deadly shooting of a black man by an officer.

But Chief Kerr Putney continued Friday to refuse to release the video, which could resolve wildly different accounts of the shooting of 43-year-old Keith Lamont Scott.

Police have said Scott refused repeated commands to drop a gun; residents say he was unarmed. An attorney for his family, who viewed the video Thursday, says it's not clear from the video if he's holding anything, including a gun.

Putney said during a news conference Friday that he cannot release more information about the shooting because his department is not leading the investigation, which is being conducted by the State Bureau of Investigation.




Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CHARLOTTE_POLICE_FATAL_SHOOTING_THE_LATEST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-09-23-11-45-34

---

[niyad]

1. seems pretty obvious--if the video exonerated his people, he would release. since he

isn't releasing, the videos do not exonerate.

[tonyt53]

2. I think the city attorney is advising the chief. After the SBI is done, odds are it will be released

But, from my viewpoint anyway, if the family attorney isn't willing to come right out and say that he was not holding anything, that there might be a problem with the narrative of some of the family members and their claims about a book. There were other witnesses. The family attorney doesn't get access to their words until the investigation is complete and the findings are released. Tulsa was clear murder. This one is still up in the air. But odds are that the video will be released after the investigation is complete and the final report is released.

[BronxBoy]

9. Or maybe...

Just maybe, the family attorney is keeping his mouth shut and advising his clients to do the same until an investigation is completed. "Book Deal"? Really?🙄

[hatrack]

11. Or they're just waiting until October 1st, when it becomes legal to suppress the video

.

[BumRushDaShow]

3. His wife had a recording on her phone and MSNBC has been playing it

[JCMach1]

4. Lack of transparency is part of the problem here

just throws fuel on an angry situation...

[malthaussen]

5. But here's the thing...

... if it is so unclear if he was or wasn't, then there is no way to argue he posed a "clear and present danger." Is it reasonable that a citizen should be killed because he poses a potential danger?

-- Mal

[Delmette]

6. I agree with your comment. nt

[freebrew]

7. Except he was black...

law enforcement seems to have judgemental attitude toward POC.

Many things involved in making the police what they've become.
Low IQ standards(limits), ex-military preferred, Arian groups infiltrating because they 'seem' the type, etc.

It seems that the best prospects for good cops wouldn't want the job.
So, what do you do? (a strange serious question from freebrew)

[malthaussen]

8. Prosecute and convict.

Other than that, I got nuthin'. Reassembling our whole society from top to bottom would be a start, but that's pretty complex.

The laws do exist. We need to start prosecuting the criminals. But juries will bend over backwards to excuse police behavior, and judges have a vested interest in supporting them. A lot of heads need to roll.

-- Mal

[freebrew]

10. I agree...

it seems that when I was young...the people
were led to believe(and it could have been true) that police officers
were supposed to be prosecuted harsher than the general public.

Now, it seems they get a pass for near everything.

[branford]

12. That's not really how it works.

In order for a shooting to be justified, the police officer has to reasonably believe at the time of the shooting in the risk to himself and others. A gun need not exist at all, only a reasonable belief in danger, and any ambiguities will be resolved in favor of the officers, particularly when the deceased is later found to have an violent felony record.

If experts, after considered review of multiple videos, witness statements and other evidence, are in disagreement or uncertain about the existence of a gun, the officers at the time under far less ideal conditions would be assumed to also at least be unsure, and thus their fear would be considered reasonable (assuming other factors also indicated danger).

If it is determined conclusively that the deceased had a firearm (e.g., residue on hand or clothes, fingerprints on bullets in magazine, etc.), the presumption in favor of the accused officers will become even stronger as Scott could not legally possess a firearm due to his felony conviction.

While this story is undoubtedly tragic, prior to a more thorough and completed investigation, it's probably not the best example of an unjustified police shooting.