Cop Who Killed Ashli Babbitt Never Interviewed By Investigators, Now Back In Charge Of House Securit

Of course you do. Rightists always believe race is an issue.

 

False as I have already shown, it was slowed-rolled on Capital Hill and the DC city hall.

Read the cite, Byrd did not even issue a verbal warning nor had he seen her hands to determine if she was even armed or possibly armed. And no law enforcement organization lets their officers use lethal force and then not give a statement of events or lets them refuse to give one and then go OH WELL charges dropped.

 

Verbal warnings are not required, and there were those around her already verbally warning her. She ignored them. As for your claims about there being no statement at all, I'd have to look into whether or not that's what actually happened. The RW tends to lie about this **** every day. And, yes, the Executive branch slow-rolled. The Governor of Maryland and others were actively pushing for NG involvement. The Executive branch was slow to respond.

 

I think the police officer who shot her probably over-reacted, maybe out of fear? Of course, it would have been better if nobody would have been killed that day. It would have been also better if more than 100 police officers wouldn't have been assaulted that day, some beaten with the American flag. None of this, however, was the police officer's fault. It could have been totally prevented if the Trump mob had decided to stay peaceful, and to not storm the Capitol.

 

Lethal force is authorized for not only imminent death but also threat of grievous bodily harm.
Joining a mob and breaking in to a secured area makes you a threat of grievous bodily harm.
The hallway officers were stuck by the mob, not the best idea to wade in and try to get to the front of it where you'll be in the line of fire from officers manning the doors. They're there to keep them from going down that stairwell the officers are standing in, so they have to go back the way they came not deeper in to the congressional warrens where they might lay in wait for persons or otherwise commit crimes.

Why did all officers not fire indiscriminately? No further force was necessary or reasonable as the crowd stopped trying to get in when Babbitt catches that high speed lead supplement. Why didn't they fire before, because the threat wasn't imminent until she breached the door between the mob and the majority of the federal government sitting in that room doing the business of State. You're asking why the first person to cross the deadline got shot dead, but people who didn't cross the deadline didn't get shot, and saying that entirely consistent response is inconsistent. Its silly.

Why no statement from him? Because he cannot be compelled to testify against himself ffs. He doesn't HAVE to give a statement about a shooting, none of us do, and by the time he gave that interview they had decided he was clear from obvious evidence to hand.

 

Except that's not why they decided not to charge him, its a nice straw man though.

 

Firing a shot in to the air is criminally irresponsible and will get you a prison sentence in any of the 50 states or US territories.
Do not. Shoot. Into the Air. Bullets easily travel through dry wall and most flooring materials used in that building. You don't know who is standing above you. You're putting those persons at risk with your reckless discharge as you don't know what you're aiming at by definition.
Please. Educate yourself.

 

We don't know why because the investigation has been covered up and closed without him being put under oath or giving his offical report as a police officer involved in a homicide.

Why don't you want to know the facts?

 

IMMINTENT grevious bodily harm for which there was no such threat when he fired.

The officers are her side of the door were not stuck by the mob they moved away from the door as the SWAT team was entering up the stairs. NONE of them fire a shot including at Babbitt. The only officer who fired a weapon that day was one who did not have a clear view of his target and was not facing a imminent threat that require lethal force.

He is LAW ENFORCEMENT. He is claiming it was a justified shooting. If so they he is required to give his full report and statement. If he refuses then he should FIRED for not cooperating with the investigation, does that somehow elude you?

 

Because we do know the facts, the shooting is on tape and there was a crowd of witnesses ffs.

 

They were no verbal warnings go watch the videos. And yes warnings are given like "stop our I will shoot". He had not even assessed whether she might be armed.

If you think he gave a a statement then refute the reporting otherwise, what was it. Why don't we have it. This was a HOMICIDE and those records should be public.

And I have already demonstrated that the NG was NOT delayed I even cited the OIG report that stated the White House did not delay any request and the Gov. of Maryland has nothing to do with it. And push for them was to the CP the Capital leadership and the DC Mayor and DC police.

 

If the stupid decision is a threat to our Congress, it's reasonable to believe it will be met with deadly force.

He WAS interviewed by his superiors. Apparently the deemed it sufficient.

 

Read previous post. Already addressed.

Again, I'm not going to take the word of right wing fringe rags. I'll look into it myself. I don't parrot what I'm commanded to parrot.

The facts say otherwise.

 

Yes, that would be a manslaughter. I think it would be better if there were NO violent protest ANYWHERE, that doesn't authorize police officers to use lethal force against those protesters who are IMMINENTELY threatening someone with death or serious bodily injury.

 

HOGWASH, you could apply to that to ANY of the recent riots at the capital then. If what you say it true then why weren't the CP lined up in the tunnel firing away at the protesters threatening to get in?

He wasn't interviewed by anyone, he refused to speak with them read the OP article.

 

None needed to shoot and they were in the best position to judge, they didn't even attempt to stop.

What was the need for Byrd to shoot when there was NO imminent threat to anyone and he had not even determined if the person was armed.

 

The CP were being conservative. They set up barricades. They waited to fire until a member of the violent mob breached the final barrier, feet away from the evacuating lawmakers, encouraging the violent mob to follow. You are literally trying to claim that restraint is evidence of guilt.

 

She had plenty of warning, you can hear many shouts of "gun, gun, he's got a gun prior to her jumping up to breach the barricade. The mob was between her and the officer's on the outside of the Speaker's lobby. Would you have had them shoot through the mob to stop her?

 

He had more reason to shoot than Arbery's murderer ever did, yet you defended that murder.

 

No it is a trespass as the persons are being charged. Babbitt was not brandishing a weapon or threatening anyone with harm, dear.

And again, this police officer involved in a police shooting, a homicide, gets to skate without even giving a statement, without and demand he file a report, without a grand jury investigating this death by gunfire.

Why the cover up?

 

Yeah, she definitely just wanted in for a hug.

 

IF Lt. Byrd hadn't stopped Ms. Babbitt, unquestionably, the mob would have followed her and made good on their threats of murder and mayhem.

 

She wanted in to further protest, that is now grounds for lethal force?

 

Once she breached the perimeter, she became such an imminent threat. That's exactly how it works. Don't like it? Don't join a mob and break into a nat sec area. Pretty basic stuff really.

They moved out of what would clearly be the line of fire rather than get crushed to death by a mob and shot in the back by their fellows? No ****?
They didn't open fire on a mob that was within arms reach of them and would've torn them to bloody shreds and instead retreated out of the line of fire of those guarding the perimeter? No ****?

He is A US CITIZEN AND CANT BE REQUIRED TO TESTIFY AGAINST HIMSELF. See I can do caps attack too.
He is not required to do any such thing legally speaking, if you'd like to fire him create a petition man. Hard to fire someone for exercising their 5th amendment right too.

 

Breaking and entering in to a nat sec area with a mob? Yes, it is.