Jul 282015
 

This will be fun:

Chief Blackwell on UC officer’s body cam: I’ve seen the video, ‘it is not good’

Apparently one Sam Dubuse (reportedly father of *at* *least* 20 children) was stopped by police officer Ray Tensing. From there it gets fuzzy and contradictory. A claim is that Tensing wound up getting dragged by Dubose’s car. Whatever happened, Dubose was shot dead by Tensing; reports here and there say that Dubose got his face blown off (if this is true, it might indicate that he got shot in the back of the head). Tensing was wearing a body camera which recorded it. The video has not been made public yet, but the universal opinion of those who have seen it can be summed up with “Oh, F……”

Not sure really what the problem is. It might be that it shows the officer doing something Seriously Wrong. Or it might show substantial gore. Or it might be both. In any event, the local government is apparently trying to hold off riots.

 Posted by at 9:37 pm
  • sferrin

    Dubose was a white guy right?

    • Scottlowther

      Not so much.

      • sferrin

        It was a rhetorical question. It pretty much goes without saying that when we’re worried about riots from a shooting it’s most often a particular demographic.

  • Peter Hanely

    Do we need to ask which party rules that city?

    • Chris Jones

      Yes, I think you do (my guess would have been wrong).

      Cincinnati’s 9 member city council is split among 3 parties and 4 affiliations. There are 4 Charterites (read the Wikipedia “Charter Party” article for more info), 5 Democrats, 2 Republicans, and 1 Independent. The reason that adds up to more than 9 is that 2 of the Democrats and 1 of the Republicans are also Charterites (I’m assuming they were endorsed by multiple parties). The mayor is a Democrat. So, while it might or might not be accurate to say that it’s a Democratically ruled city, it seems more accurate to say it’s a diverse multi-party city (more diverse much of the rest of the US).

  • Rick

    the thing is, a lot of the reactions should also be protected by law, so even those are most likely those which match the case of the deceased. If the court of public opinion can’t be swayed by video that’s kept under wraps for legal reasons, the reactions can be released if they fit the narrative. But are they accurate reactions or hyperbolic ones from those who benefit from finding a fault?

  • James

    I’ve seen it. It was basically murder. There was no reason to shoot the guy and the cop never got drug off by the car.

    Even one of the investigators was shocked. Basically a cop got pissed when someone didn’t listen and snapped. As I have said before. The amount of people who should be cops because they have the right mindset is actually very small.

    • Scottlowther

      I just saw the CNN version. Terrible audio, confusing video, squeezed between the CNN logos and text scrolls at the bottom of the screen. So I was not entirely clear on what I was seeing. But what *looked* like what was going on is that the cop pulled out his gun at the same time a scuffle started with the driver. Kinda gathered that the cop was trying to pull the driver out of the car, or maybe the cop saw the driver reaching for something. But the cop wound up pointing the gun at the drivers head and in the course of the very brief scuffle the gun went off, the driver lurched on the gas and the cop got banged around and knocked down as the car shot off.

      Given one watch of a crappy video, it looks like the cop demonstrated inadequate “gun control.” It seems to me he didn’t intend to shoot the guy in the noggin, but he was perhaps negligent in the handling of his weapon.

      Another question: how did the car take off down the road even if the dead driver mashed down on the accelerator? Shouldn’t the car have been in “park?”

      • publiusr

        He was trying to take off, and got the head shot after stomping the pedal. The shot made his body seize up, posture–and his corpse floored it in a spasm–that’s my guess.

        Not all fatal gunshots will cause somebody to ragdoll. Some may tense up briefly–electrical signals all over the place.

        • Chris Jones

          One story I read (and I think, but am not certain, that it was the DA who decided to hold him for murder who said this), is that DuBose started to roll the car away and the officer grabbed him, and within a second or two fired the shot, and the car accelerated as he fell dead and the officer fell backwards.

          The commentary about how many children the dead man had are irrelevant and a red herring. The fact that he was black doesn’t give the officer any extra reason to use deadly force for stopping a car without a FRONT plate (i.e., as it was rolling away he could have gotten the rear plate number), which translates into no reason at all to use deadly force. I know he SAID he feared for his life, and two other officers agreed with him and one (at least) said he witnessed him being dragged, but a lot of law enforcement officials viewed the video and the prosecutor said no one had ever seen such a clear case of an unjustified shooting (he used the word, and got a charge of, murder). In a sane world, those other officers would face charges for obstruction of justice (and they would probably lose their jobs before trial for their statements in any case).

          • Scottlowther

            > The commentary about how many children the dead man had are irrelevant and a red herring.

            Noting that someone has 20 or more children is newsworthy in and of itself regardless of whatever else is going on.

            > The fact that he was black doesn’t give the officer any extra reason to
            use deadly force for stopping a car without a FRONT plate

            Which isn’t what happened. Apparently the cop used flashing lights and a siren to stop the car without a front plate.

            > In a sane world, those other officers would face charges for
            obstruction of justice (and they would probably lose their jobs before
            trial for their statements in any case).

            In a sane world, no cop would ever say anything to anybody until they themselves have had a chance to review the same video footage. I’ve seen a *lot* of talking heads on the TV the last day or so talking about how they had to watch the video multiple times before they could even figure out when the shot happened. Because things happened *very* fast, in a confined space. Something like that happens, a witness at some distance can be expected to not have a good recollection of the incident.

            What looks to me what happened is the driver was acting suspiciously – cop tells you to unbuckle, what you *don’t* do is shut the door, turn on the ignition and reach for something – and the cop unholstered his gun and pointed it at the driver, who then promptly freaked. Something physical happened and the trigger got pulled. My *guess* is that the cop didn’t intentionally shoot him, but lost control of his weapon. When the car took off, the cop had his arm(s) in the window and either got them or bits of his uniform/Bat Utility Belt hung up on the door and got yanked off his feet. Impossible to tell if he actually got dragged, but if the car actually chucked him off his feet, to a distant witness it could certainly look like the cop getting dragged, for a few feet at least.

            The authorities in this instance are, I believe, jumping to the worst-case interpretation of the situation in order to look like they’re doing something, in order to help keep the streets from bursting into flames.

          • Chris Jones

            “> The fact that he was black doesn’t give the officer any extra reason to
            use deadly force for stopping a car without a FRONT plate

            Which isn’t what happened. Apparently the cop used flashing lights and a siren to stop the car without a front plate.”

            Pardon my unclear phrasing. My point was that since he stopped a car for not having a front plate, there shouldn’t be a need to resort to deadly force (I see no evidence to justify his claim that he felt his life was in danger, and from the statements I’ve heard neither did .anyone in the prosecutor’s office who viewed the video).

            I’m not arguing that the civilian/victim in this case behaved perfectly. Not behaving perfectly is not grounds for summary justice, and there’s an expectation/requirement that police officers behave professionally. Pulling a gun and firing at someone to prevent their escape from a scene in which there are other officers on the scene (and perhaps able to give chase, let alone identify the vehicle and call it in) smacks of hot headedness

          • Scottlowther

            > My point was that since he stopped a car for not having a front plate, there shouldn’t be a need to resort to deadly force

            The cop didn’t use deadly force because the car didn’t have a front plate. He pulled out his gun and fired it almost instantly because the driver was doing things that the cop felt threatened by. Whether or not a reasonable cop would feel threatened by the drivers actions is another matter, one I’m not in a position to pontificate on. There was a sudden extreme ramp-up in activity right before the shot.

            > Pulling a gun and firing at someone to prevent their escape

            I remain unconvinced that the cop intentionally pulled the trigger for *any* reason. What it *kinda* looks like is he point his gun at the driver, the car lurched ahead and since the gun was in the window of the car, the gun/cops hands got jolted and the trigger got yanked. Now, should the cop have pulled the gun out that fast? Seems kinda like not.

            The whole issue could have been resolved more rationally. Such as: if the driver acts threateningly, which kinda seemed the case, you back up and let him go. And then send in a drone to take him out.

          • publiusr

            We do have trigger happy fools out there–he had no business off campus, even though the local police force allow jurisdiction outside the campus. He should have used his radio.
            I’m just glad I’m not on the jury. You can read anything you like into the video.

  • Paul451

    For those who haven’t seen it unedited.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeU2l_Oa3GY

    The black screen at the end seems to be when the officer turned off his vest-cam.

    Dubose seems to have decided “screw this” and tried to drive off (coz that always works), and Tensing pointed his weapon at Dubose’s head. It’s jumpy, but I can’t see that Dubose reached for the weapon in any way. Reportedly, Tensing told investigators that he was attacked and only fired to defend himself; they seem somewhat pissed off that he lied. (Which, frankly, is unusual these days; lying by officers seems widely accepted by both police officials and the courts.)

  • Bruce

    Probably should have just reached for the pepper spray or a taser gun just to temporarily

    disable him instead of his gun. I feel that if the guy hadn’t tried to run in the first place this all
    wouldn’t have happened.

  • Bruce

    Another thing….why was the officer pulling over a man who was not on the campus property…
    an off-campus traffic stop?