Philando Castile shooting - full dashcam video released

[Hikergirl]

I wasn't trying to say police are the problem or anything like that. I do agree with what you are saying. My comments were more about society in general. My personal opinion is our goal should be what you describe. I do believe that we are not at that point and it's hard to talk about why because we (society) have come far and certain words and all they bring with them are loaded and come with images that go against how we think and how we see ourselves.
In this case, there's a reason why Mr. Castile having a gun freaked out the officer so much. It could have been the same if Mr. Castile had been a white guy. Being honest about it though, and obviously this is just my opinion so it doesn't really mean anything more than that, Mr. Castile being a black man did play a role in how the officer reacted. He even said in his interview after that he didn't know if the gun was "for protection from drug dealers or to rob people". Honestly, I do believe race played a part in that comment.

I read a couple articles and this is what I've seen. Do you have a link where he says the bolded in his interview.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...id-about-the-shooting/?utm_term=.295d9c64f38f

The officer told investigators later that the marijuana smell remained in his mind, saying that because of the odor, he didn’t know whether Castile had the gun “for protection” from a drug dealer or people trying to rob him.

 

[sunshinehighway]

I read a couple articles and this is what I've seen. Do you have a link where he says the bolded in his interview.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...id-about-the-shooting/?utm_term=.295d9c64f38f

The officer told investigators later that the marijuana smell remained in his mind, saying that because of the odor, he didn’t know whether Castile had the gun “for protection” from a drug dealer or people trying to rob him.

From a drug dealer or people trying to rob him. You are correct. I quoted it wrong and will edit to correct.
I think my point still stands though. I don't think that would have been the two first thoughts had the man been white.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

That's not the point. This is about the verdict. 3 men and a boat says that if the jury decided not guilty in the Castille's case that's good enough for him.

So my question is again, if he thinks the not guilty verdict for the Castille's case is good enough for him, is the not guilty verdict also good enough for him?

I don't know, I think it's a very simple and straightforward question. I don't get the confusion.

It's a simple question, but a bad comparison.

In one case, there is no question a crime has taken place. The question is, "who did it?".

In the other, there is no question who did it. The question is, "was it a crime?".

The two cases could not be more different. The notion that someone who is okay with what the jury decides in case A must automatically be okay with ANY jury decision is a real stretch.

Did you react exactly the same way to OJ's murder trial as you did to his civil trial? I didn't.

 

[mummabear]

Because you said that the evidence was looked out by the jurors and he was found not guilty. So it seems like a not guilty verdict is enough for you

I find it funny how you are avoiding answering the question about OJ. Everyone has an opinion about that case. It doesn't matter that you were a teen then. You are a grown man now. You said you have not followed the Castille case closely, yet the fact that the jury found him not guilty is enough for you. Same with the OJ case. He was found not guilty.

So I ask again...Do you feel the same way about the OJ verdict?

A little off topic here but I have this argument with my mom over a case here where the accused was found not guilty and she thinks he is, her argument is that he was found not guilty as opposed to innocent and says they are not the same thing.
She is right, they are not but a jury cannot rule innocent.

 

[sunshinehighway]

It's a simple question, but a bad comparison.

In one case, there is no question a crime has taken place. The question is, "who did it?".

In the other, there is no question who did it. The question is, "was it a crime?".

The two cases could not be more different. The notion that someone who is okay with what the jury decides in case A must automatically be okay with ANY jury decision is a real stretch.

Did you react exactly the same way to OJ's murder trial as you did to his civil trial? I didn't.

It's not a stretch. If someone wants to use a verdict to defend someone's actions then it's a natural question to say " hey well what about x verdict". The point being made is juries don't always get it right and being acquitted doesn't really mean the person is absolved of all wrong in public opinion.
It's so weird that you're such a gun rights advocate but you aren't speaking out about what happened to Mr. Castile.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Thank you for explaining their history and stance Gumbo. I had no clue that all police officers receive training from the NRA.

Are you confident that they would still have no response if it was a white man that was shot by police in this situation? Truly curious. I'm not at all confident. Meaning it is very difficult for me to understand that an organization that promotes the rights of gun owners to carry arms would not have a thought on this situation or outcome - despite their ties to police officers. You've fully explained to me how they work, how they've chosen to address these issues historically and the conflict of interest. I am just completely perplexed thinking about their aggressive stance on so many issues, but no words on this situation.

I would hope that many NRA members question their lack of response.

_____________________________

I've also heard that Mr. Castile didn't legally need to state that he had a permit and a weapon. It is just what is strongly suggested to immediately do in this kind of situation. it would be nonsensical not to let an officer know but I am left wondering what if he didn't.

I would imagine the laws vary state by state on this issue - legally needing to acknowledge the concealed weapon, yes?

Honestly, I doubt his death would have been national news if he had been white. So yes, I think the NRA response (or lack thereof) would have been the same. We know police killed roughly twice as many white men as black men last year. Can you name even one of them? I can't.

As for a lack of a response, while one may seem warranted, I'm not sure exactly what they're supposed to say here.

 

[Hikergirl]

From a drug dealer or people trying to rob him. You are correct. I quoted it wrong and will edit to correct.
I think my point still stands though. I don't think that would have been the two first thoughts had the man been white.

I wasn't trying to say you were wrong I was just trying to figure out if what I had read was wrong.

 

[sunshinehighway]

I wasn't trying to say you were wrong I was just trying to figure out if what I had read was wrong.

Oh it's fine. I was wrong and am glad you pointed it out so I could correct it.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

It's not a stretch. If someone wants to use a verdict to defend someone's actions then it's a natural question to say " hey well what about x verdict". The point being made is juries don't always get it right and being acquitted doesn't really mean the person is absolved of all wrong in public opinion.
It's so weird that you're such a gun rights advocate but you aren't speaking out about what happened to Mr. Castile.

I don't read it as using the decision to defend the actions. At all, and yes I think it's a stretch. As for me speaking out,

Unfortunately, the dashcam doesn't really show why the officer pulled his gun (rationally or otherwise). Sad situation all around. I don't believe "murder" is the correct term, but given what we have, *I* think the cop overreacted. Manslaughter is more like it, but really not something that can be proven from the video.

Page one. Honestly, what else is there to say?

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

It's not a stretch. If someone wants to use a verdict to defend someone's actions then it's a natural question to say " hey well what about x verdict". The point being made is juries don't always get it right and being acquitted doesn't really mean the person is absolved of all wrong in public opinion.
It's so weird that you're such a gun rights advocate but you aren't speaking out about what happened to Mr. Castile.

Your right, a jury not convicting someone doesn't make them innocent. I used the verdict along with my viewing the dashcam to come to the conclusion that I don't see a murder charge.
I'll continue to refuse to give my opinion on a case 20+yrs ago of which I already admitted I didn't follow.
The only reason I can see someone pushing for me to answer is to say "see, he thinks the white cop is always innocent, while he thinks the black man is always guilty."

 

[sunshinehighway]

Your right, a jury not convicting someone doesn't make them innocent. I used the verdict along with my viewing the dashcam to come to the conclusion that I don't see a murder charge.
I'll continue to refuse to give my opinion on a case 20+yrs ago of which I already admitted I didn't follow.
The only reason I can see someone pushing for me to answer is to say "see, he thinks the white cop is always innocent, while he thinks the black man is always guilty."

That says more about you than anything else. It's odd your mind would jump to that being the intent behind the question. I took the question as challenging your assertion that a verdict absolves guilt in the court of public opinion.
OJ is a verdict people often use when the argument is made that a not guilty verdict means the person didn't do anything. I don't think it's a "gotcha" example because of race but an example of a verdict people commonly think was wrong.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

That says more about you than anything else. It's odd your mind would jump to that being the intent behind the question. I took the question as challenging your assertion that a verdict absolves guilt in the court of public opinion.
OJ is a verdict people often use when the argument is made that a not guilty verdict means the person didn't do anything. I don't think it's a "gotcha" example because of race but an example of a verdict people commonly think was wrong.

MEH, i made the same assumption.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

That says more about you than anything else. It's odd your mind would jump to that being the intent behind the question. I took the question as challenging your assertion that a verdict absolves guilt in the court of public opinion.
OJ is a verdict people often use when the argument is made that a not guilty verdict means the person didn't do anything. I don't think it's a "gotcha" example because of race but an example of a verdict people commonly think was wrong.

Really? With all the comments on this thread and in general today about how differently blacks are treated. What are the commonalities between these two cases? not guilty verdicts, that's it.

 

[MamaBelle4]

Really? With all the comments on this thread and in general today about how differently blacks are treated. What are the commonalities between these two cases? not guilty verdicts, that's it.

Okay, I wasn't involved in this part of the conversation, but how about Casey Anthony? Jury found her not guilty in the death of her daughter Caylee.

They're both white, so no one can pull the race card against you.

But, I hadn't commented before because our interpretation of the dash cam video is so wildly different. I cried, because I believe I saw a man murdered in cold blood. You think the video doesn't quite prove that and side with the jury.

 

[sunshinehighway]

Okay, I wasn't involved in this part of the conversation, but how about Casey Anthony? Jury found her not guilty in the deathouse of her daughter Caylee.

I brought that up. 3 Men acknowledged it in a round about way so I know he saw my post. S/he's ignoring that now because it doesn't fit the narrative of the OJ question being a gotcha black white question.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

Okay, I wasn't involved in this part of the conversation, but how about Casey Anthony? Jury found her not guilty in the death of her daughter Caylee.

They're both white, so no one can pull the race card against you.

But, I hadn't commented before because our interpretation of the dash cam video is so wildly different. I cried, because I believe I saw a man murdered in cold blood. You think the video doesn't quite prove that and side with the jury.

I watched the dashcam, gave my opinion of what I saw on the dashcam. I'm not a person that follows trials at all. Do you have a video of her killing her child? I'll watch it and get back to you.

I brought that up. 3 Men acknowledged it in a round about way so I know he saw my post. S/he's ignoring that now because it doesn't fit the narrative of the OJ question being a gotcha black white question.

I'm a guy. I'm not ignoring anything. Again I don't follow trials, I watched a dashcam and commented on what I saw. Stated that the jury also found him not guilty so I trusted what I saw in thinking the jury made the right decision.

I mean what are y'all looking for? Acknowledgment that a jury could get it wrong? Sure they can. Who said they can't?

 

[lisaviolet]

Honestly, I doubt his death would have been national news if he had been white. So yes, I think the NRA response (or lack thereof) would have been the same. We know police killed roughly twice as many white men as black men last year. Can you name even one of them? I can't.

No I can't Gumbo. And to be honest I actually had to look up Mr. Castile's name but I certainly remembered the event and him.

Most of the stories and coverage about people killed by police up here are about how police deals with the mentally ill and the issue of carding. We have issues of racism no doubt but we don't have a lot of police shooting so quickly in this city in general terms. Nor do we have the same laws surrounding the police and when it is lawful to shoot in such a manner. We have ongoing discussions between BLM and the police over a couple of issues. Some of which I agree with and some of which I don't. And I have never understood police chasing people on foot over many smaller issues. So escalation is a definite problem, whatever the race. And I have not had the best interactions with police myself and I am respectful. So of course their issues go beyond race.

But we aren't talking how many white men were killed by police. We are talking about a specific case where a lot of us knew it happened because his girlfriend put the time period after he died on facebook and that made your national news and ours. We are also talking about how a man was gunned down while trying to follow instructions. And I am further talking about how blacks are treated differently by the police. I have no clue how the white men who you are speaking of were killed by police. But if it was an awful and unjust situation like this one and I knew about it, I would be just as saddened and angry over the conduct. And speaking about how some people should not be police officers and/or better trained. Both situations would be the same.

But that does not negate any racial issues with this case. And by racial issues, I am not surmising anyone's actions were inherently racist. It seemed obvious to me that that police officer acted out of intense fear - whether part of that came from racism who knows - and was poorly trained.

_____________________________________________


As for the NRA, I appreciate you answering and giving your opinion. I sincerely hope it isn't racial. But I've now been educated on how close the NRA ties are to the police.

It is my hope that they do speak up. Or that some members do. Because Mr. Castile did what he was supposed to do and followed instructions about his permit and gun and is now dead.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

No I can't Gumbo. And to be honest I actually had to look up Mr. Castile's name but I certainly remembered the event and him.

Most of the stories and coverage about people killed by police up here are about how police deals with the mentally ill and the issue of carding. We have issues of racism no doubt but we don't have a lot of police shooting so quickly in this city in general terms. Nor do we have the same laws surrounding the police and when it is lawful to shoot in such a manner. We have ongoing discussions between BLM and the police over a couple of issues. Some of which I agree with and some of which I don't. And I have never understood police chasing people on foot over many smaller issues. So escalation is a definite problem, whatever the race. And I have not had the best interactions with police myself and I am respectful. So of course their issues go beyond race.

But we aren't talking how many white men were killed by police. We are talking about a specific case where a lot of us knew it happened because his girlfriend put the time period after he died on facebook and that made your national news and ours. We are also talking about how a man was gunned down while trying to follow instructions. And I am further talking about how blacks are treated differently by the police. I have no clue how the white men who you are speaking of were killed by police. But if it was an awful and unjust situation like this one and I knew about it, I would be just as saddened and angry over the conduct. And speaking about how some people should not be police officers and/or better trained. Both situations would be the same.

But that does not negate any racial issues with this case. And by racial issues, I am not surmising anyone's actions were inherently racist. It seemed obvious to me that that police officer acted out of intense fear - whether part of that came from racism who knows - and was poorly trained.

Don't disagree with any of this. Just stating that I believe the racial aspect (be it real, perceived, implied, or otherwise) is what made this "news". Obviously, the circumstances should dictate that, but that not typically the case.

I have to assume some portion of whites who die at the hands of police do so under controversial circumstances. We just don't generally hear about it.

 

[moon]

It's a simple question, but a bad comparison.

In one case, there is no question a crime has taken place. The question is, "who did it?".

In the other, there is no question who did it. The question is, "was it a crime?".

The two cases could not be more different. The notion that someone who is okay with what the jury decides in case A must automatically be okay with ANY jury decision is a real stretch.

Sigh...I don't know why I'm having so much trouble getting my point across... I'll try again. 3 men and a boat says that he didn't follow the trial, but the fact that the jury came with a not guilty verdict is enough for him.

So I asked if he feels the same way about the verdict in the OJ case -a case he says he didn't follow either.

So this is not about the trials. because he admittedly didn't follow either;yet he is satisfied with the Castillo's case result, based on the verdict. So, I asked about the OJ verdict, if he was satisfied with the result based on the verdict.

Was I clear this time?

Im sure juries get it wrong sometimes. Do you think they were wrong this time?

So now you say that you are sure get it wrong sometimes. Then why are you so sure this time it was right?

And you don't answer a question with another question. If you won't rely to my question, don't ask me anything.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

Sigh...I don't know why I'm having so much trouble getting my point across... I'll try again. 3 men and a boat says that he didn't follow the trial, but the fact that the jury came with a not guilty verdict is enough for him.

So I asked if he feels the same way about the verdict in the OJ case -a case he says he didn't follow either.

So this is not about the trials. because he admittedly didn't follow either;yet he is satisfied with the Castillo's case result, based on the verdict. So, I asked about the OJ verdict, if he was satisfied with the result based on the verdict.

Was I clear this time?

So now you say that you are sure get it wrong sometimes. Then why are you so sure this time it was right?

And you don't answer a question with another question. If you won't rely to my question, don't ask me anything.

I think their right this time because I watched the dashcam video. Do you have a video of the murders OJ was accused of?
If you don't want me to answer questions with questions, don't ask loaded questions.