What do you think about it? The family says they believe it was racially motivated. I'm not going to comment on that. I do think it was unjustified though. He was cosplaying or so it seemed to me, which is why he had the toy sword on his person, he was shot 6x in the back via the autopsy and witnesses say he was running away from the cops. Here's Darrien Here's mugen from samurai champloo "Authorities in Utah have altered their account of how a 22-year-old black man was killed by police, after an attorney for the man's family alleged that he was shot repeatedly from behind by officers while running away. The authorities also said that the two police officers involved in the shooting of Darrien Hunt last Wednesday had not yet been interviewed about the incident. The attorney for Hunt's family described this delay as “almost incomprehensibleâ€. Hunt died outside a Panda Express restaurant at a strip mall in Saratoga Springs on Wednesday morning following an encounter with two police officers who were responding to a 911 call reporting a man with a samurai-style sword acting suspiciously. After several days of silence Tim Taylor, the chief deputy attorney for Utah county, said in a statement on Saturday: “When the officers made contact with Mr Hunt, he brandished the sword and lunged toward the officers with the sword, at which time Mr Hunt was shot.†However, Taylor confirmed to the Guardian on Monday that Hunt was in fact alleged to have lunged at the officers outside a bank several dozen yards away from where he ultimately died. While it was outside the bank that Hunt was first “shot at†by police, Taylor said, it was not clear whether he was struck on that occasion." http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/16/darrien-hunt-shot-in-the-back-by-utah-police-says-family-attorney
Something's definitely fishy. I can't think of an instance where getting shot in the back 6 times is justified. As for the race being it's cause is a possibility. Only possible scenario is if he tried to attack an officer and tried to run. d[- _ -]b
...except it wasn't a "toy" sword, it was a replica with a rounded blade. Metal. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/16/darrien-hunt-shot-utah_n_5827298.html Even the wood ones are made to look realistic: This is nothing more than the usual race-baiting.
geee possibly attacked an officer and got shot for being a fucking DUMB ASS if you attack he police YOU WILL GET FUCKING SHOT doesn't matter what color you are... you are stupid for doing it "stupid is as stupid does" seems to be TOO MUCH of that in recent times
Well if you look at the case, he allegedly "lunges" at an officer in one area and gets shot six times in the back in another area. That picture was taken just before he was shot. What happened to innocent until proven guilty. The only account of him lunging is the police' account.
The two officers involved in the incident have not been identified by Saratoga Springs police department. They have been placed on paid administrative leave. An investigation is being carried out by the county's “officer-involved shooting protocol teamâ€, which includes officers from several different forces and agencies, according to Taylor, who said the county attorney's office would “review these findings and issue a statementâ€. “We haven't even interviewed the officers yet,†said Taylor. “We've talked briefly with them just to kind of get an idea of what the scene was at the time.†He said officers were typically interviewed within 48-72 hours of a shooting. One is now scheduled to be interviewed on Tuesday and the other on Thursday, more than a week after the shooting, he said. “I'm stunned. I find that almost incomprehensible,†Edwards, the attorney for Hunt's family, said after being informed of this by the Guardian. “You want to speak with the officers almost immediately afterwards, when their memories are fresh and before they have had a chance to corroborate their stories.†“The shot that killed Darrien, which was straight in the back, did not have an exit wound,†Edwards told the Guardian. “It raises the question as to how you can lunge at someone and be shot in the back at the same time".
After reading through similar threads, I assumed the assumption would be made at some point. Just throwing it out there.
Fishy , fishy . So many brothas dying all across america . Malcolm X is ROLLING in his grave . I clean table ... I clean mouth ... You breathe deep
If you have a sword, or what the cops think is a deadly weapon, then they can most certainly shoot you in the back. What if somebody is running away from the cops with a deadly weapon towards a playground full of children, or a store full of people? So now cops can't shoot anybody in the back ever. "He was shot in the back" is nothing more than empty rhetoric designed to stir the low-info crowd into raging buthurt. Same with the "hands up don't shoot" bullshit. Both catchphrases are designed and used to stir up people who have serious deficiencies in their critical thinking skills.
I wouldn't say that at all. If someone is unstable with a weapon and they clearly look like they're lunging toward an innocent person then no one would really have an issue with it. The problem is that there is no reports of this being the case. The cops claim he lunged back at them and that's why the shot, which seems a little inconsistent with being shot in the back. Not to mention the fact that they took longer than usual to interview the officers involved and are being very sketchy about the info they release. This case definitely seems like there is more going on to it than what's being released in the news. Seems that this kid was a little mentally unstable, and probably could have been detained non lethally. Of course I don't know cause I wasn't there, but based on all the evidence I've seen I would have to say it seems that the officers may have been a little too gung-ho in their decision to shoot. I don't know if you were talking about this specific instance or in general. I would agree being shot in the back isn't always unjustified, just that in this case it is very possible it wasn't justified because it contradicts the polices report of what happened. That's my .02
If he lunged at the cops, then tried to leave the area OR take refuge in a public space, then I have no problem with him being shot in the back. If he's got mental issues, then his family should've gotten him help. Thankfully, it's not the cops job to determine who's mentally ill and who's not. Could you imagine if cops had the authority to declare a person mentally ill? Mentally ill people can be just as dangerous, if not more so, than anybody else. I would rather they didn't walk the streets of my neighborhood with a sword pretending to be in a cartoon. If somebody like that approached my family I'd have done the same thing. And so would you.
Multiple things can be true - he may have behaved in a way that could be interpreted as threatening, and the cops in question may also be biased (possible evidence: They shot him 6 times - hard to believe that was necessary in any event.) But I also doubt that the cops deliberately decided to go and kill someone that day (even if they are outright racists, it isn't in their own best interests to do that) so more likely a case of a tragic misunderstanding, bad policing, and an over-reaction that may well stem from bias. There can be a cultural misunderstanding too as many people may not understand about "cosplay" and grown people dressing up as characters and carrying big swords around. I understand there may be some video of the incident so hopefully we can get a better idea of what actually happened. Leaving aside the appropriateness of a violent response in instances like this, I wonder why they didn't reach for their tasers instead of their guns?
You don't get it. I don't disagree with any of your statement, as I've said before. If that was the case then I have no issue with what happened. If what you described happened then it was still a tragedy but a justified tragedy. The problem is that the initial reports given by the department never indicated that he tried to run away after lunging at them or attack anyone else. If that's the case it either means the police officers are lying or misreported the events. Either way though it looks very suspicious because their report is being contradicted. This is why I think we need more of an investigation to figure out what happened. It doesn't seem a little bit suspicious to you that these cops never said anything about him running away yet somehow he ended up with a bullet in his back. It's not the cops job to determine who's mentally unstable but it is their job to weigh the risk of innocent bystanders and the attacker. If the attacker presents a high level of risk to another group of innocent citizens then a cop should react with lethal force. If the attacker present a very low level of risk to citizens and the police then they most likely shouldn't use lethal force. In this scenario there are no reports of darian having lunged towards innocent people or presenting an immediate threat to citizens which is why it is strange that he was shot in the back. If it really did go down like how you described and the cops where shooting to stop him from attacking others then where are these witnesses who felt their lives were threatened and why didn't they report any of those details. I don't think these cops were just going out murder someone. I do however think they may have acted inappropriately and made a poor judgement call which cost someone their life. Obviously I don't know for a fact cause I wasn't there but I think this shooting needs to be thoroughly investigated considering the fact that the only reports are being contradicted by physical evidence.