'Every 24 hours is pain' : Jacob Blake speaks publicly for first time since police shooting
Source: KHOU
Jacob Blake has spoken publicly for the first time since a Kenosha, Wisconsin, police officer shot him seven times in the back, saying he's in constant pain from the shooting, which doctors fear will leave him paralyzed from the waist down.
In a video posted Saturday night on Twitter by his family's lawyer, Ben Crump, Blake said from his hospital bed that, "Twenty-four hours, every 24 hours it's pain, nothing but pain. It hurts to breathe, it hurts to sleep, it hurts to move from side-to-side, it hurts to eat."
Blake, a 29-year-old father of six, also said he has staples in his back and stomach.
"Your life, and not only just your life, your legs, something you need to move around and forward in life, can be taken from you like this," Blake said, snapping his fingers.
Read more: https://www.khou.com/article/news/nation-world/jacob-blake-twitter-video-from-hospital/507-48403543-7b84-47ed-84ea-e5abdda0876b
Kenosha, WI, police shooting victim Jacob Blake: "Stick together, make some money, make everything easier for our people out there, man, because there's so much time that's been wasted."
Cha
(297,029 posts)back 7 times. The cop, Rusten Sheskey, was trying to kill him
sandensea
(21,615 posts)Worse still, he'll most likely be acquitted.
catrose
(5,065 posts)sandensea
(21,615 posts)He no doubt realized that otherwise, he'd be portrayed as a "thug who deserves be shot like a dog."
Something Repugs are doing anyway.
catrose
(5,065 posts)Someone else said it was his court appearance--but would a white man be expected to show up for court from his hospital bed and feel like he should be in a dress shirt & tie?
I think I read that charges against him were dropped--but what in God's name could he possibly be charged with.
He's in a hospital gown in the actual video. This photo is from his court appearance (where a shirt and tie is absolutely appropriate).
catrose
(5,065 posts)cstanleytech
(26,273 posts)times in the back was clearly excessive force far and above what was needed and that there should be criminal charges brought against the officer.
FBaggins
(26,727 posts)Assuming the original arrest attempt was legit (it appears so)... If he struggled with them and had a knife... and if he was tasered multiple times without stopping... and then leaned into his car... shooting him could be appropriate.
That's a bunch of "if"s... and there are still another six shots of additional force.
forgotmylogin
(7,522 posts)If a police officer feels in danger, but is also at range to shoot, why not disable movement instead of breathing? Until they see an actual firearm which can kill them at range?
Probably because racism.
I also remember those quaint old movies that used to refer to "warning shots" that would often make a perpetrator think twice. Fired into the air or the ground nearby. I guess they don't do that anymore.
(Yes, I totally understand the "if you're at the point of pulling the trigger, you're at the point where you are intending to kill" but I thought cops got better training.)
Decoy of Fenris
(1,954 posts)If a target is far enough away for you to consider shooting a limb, there's not an imminent enough threat to warrant a shooting.
A limb shot can be just as fatal, in some cases moreso, than a torso/gutshot, depending on circumstance.
If you've hit the point where a firearm is involved, it's supposed to be that you're firing to end the imminent threat; You fire center-mass because a center shot is most likely to bring about the conclusion of the conflict.
If you discharge your firearm, you're expected to both know what's behind your target and avoid hitting said target should the bullet overpenetrate.
Please play attention to that last one, because it's -really- important. A limb shot is putting a bullet into an area far, -far- too small to effectively kill momentum. Even with some of the smallest calibers around, unless you're firing into the thigh, there's a very good chance that bullet keeps going and becomes an active danger to whoever/whatever is behind the target. Same reasons they don't fire 'into the air or ground': a gun is not a toy, and discharging it recklessly can end up in collateral casualties or fatalities.
I can't speak on the active racism of any particular police force but in this case, probably an overwhelmingly good chance that racism played a role in the decision to shoot.
forgotmylogin
(7,522 posts)I've probably seen too many movies where people shoot at the feet as as a warning. If you're going to put a bullet in a target, you aim for the center of the target and hope for the best. It's the decision-making process that's flawed, not the technique.
Decoy of Fenris
(1,954 posts)The technique, when instilled correctly, is incredibly safe and prevents incidental casualties. The problem is, no matter how safe the technique, it's still being used by a fallible, easily-panicked, fight-or-flight-response, possibly racist human being.
As with so many things, the problem lies in the person pulling the trigger, and that's where reform and reeducation need to begin.
iluvtennis
(19,843 posts)Response to sandensea (Original post)
Post removed
Response to sandensea (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Hekate
(90,616 posts)Maybe the docs only retrieved 7, but I counted 8 shots.
Such cowardice on the part of the cop.