Nooooo.. If I wanted to start trouble I would say, "Why didn't the cops just tell OnStar to shut off his car. "

could be, any idea where the rest of that video is so we can see if he was shot as soon as he opened door?

There you go again. There was no one 5 feet away. As for the 4-5 shots fired, it's pretty clear that the officer, who fired his first shot after the suspect had reached the sidewalk, also fired a minimum of 7 shots.
Maybe you need to watch the video again, so you don't make more unfounded statements. Your credibility is suffering.

So wait, you're saying there were no witnesses except for police and cameras? The news were interviewing ghosts?

And by the way, my credibility has nothing to do with any of my posts except procedures. Everything i have stated was to say there is not one clear story out yet....

I only know of the 30 minute news chopper video on youtube.
It does not show all the answers though.

To me, it appears the driver was uninjured UNTIL he was walking away from the police. (shot in the back) Maybe it went all the way through including his stomach, but as an opinion only.. to my eyes he was shot in the back.

Another news report said the driver was a minorly disabled veteran who called his son saying something like , "I'm so scared, why are they chasing me??"

The dude was handling that vette pretty well though, He didn't look scared to me. (again, just an opinion)

Just saying there were no non-officers 5 feet away like you stated. The 4-5 shots is wrong too. If you truly intend to wait for credible evidence then you should wait and stop posting fabrics of imagination or hearsay.

NOW all of a sudden something smells fishy:lol:

I also take into affect witnesses, but not 100% because in a situation like this tragic they can get it wrong. For instance, the witness, whether he was 5 ft or 25 said he heard 4-5 shots IIRC. Those 4-5 could be in the 5-10 range, but highly unlikely it 110 shots like someone on here suggested. The witness also stated he heard police shout don't move, or get down, something along those lines. The exact words can't be verified, but unless he's making it up, he heard them shouting commands.

PS. Witnesses are neither fabrications nor hearsay.

And that's cool that you have an opinion, but others on here are saying absolutes and "clear as day" "facts" that only encourage cop haters to fuel their anger. That's why I just try to show that there are other possibilities... I have nothing to lose or gain if these cops were right or wrong, but I know for a fact it makes an officer's job, and a departments job a lot harder when the public is against them... Just wait to see the truth is what I try to instill.

However, when you tend to repeat the same type of possibly inaccurate statements that you accuse others of doing, it's your credibility that suffers right along with those people you blame.

I understand you're kinda new here, but you can talk to yourself for a while, because I'm through with your dribble.

Now your really showing your stupidity or staying with the BLUE FOP CODE, he was a great guy and cop, until he got divorced and with a new hoe, that new pussy got him on drugs and the bar life, he even got in a fight backing our side, and he road a goldwing :lol: I dont drink or do drugs, but he knew my reputation and was confident I wouldn't tell, squealing was always preached as a sin in my family:yesnod: and what makes you think he had his wits about him, drinking doing lines in public, also I never said coke:crazy2: it could have been meth or gun powder:lol: and he only lost his job because of continuing threats to the new girl and assault repeatedly, it couldn't be covered up any more and he kept his pension but part of the agreement was loss of fire arms and cant work in law enforcement any where. and I still get my get out of ticket card from other officers as I make the best potatoes salad in the world worthy of a PBA card

No I am not incorrect - You are wrong. A police officer has to justify deadly use of his firearm. Feeling like you are in life threatening situation is not the same as being in one. This is the whole point of their job. And there are heavy consequences when they make the wrong decision.

Again if it is one patrol car maybe your scenario might hold water. But there where around 25 police cars and a helicopter. There was backup x 20. Guy crashed and was unarmed. he stumbled out of his car- are you saying he stumbled out in a threatening - lethal force required manner? ALso your Someone might get killed by this imaginary gun scenario you know how else an innocent bystander can get shot - by cops acting like a firing squad. This is how 9 civilians caught police stray bullets at the Empire State Building shooting. That guy was armed and had just killed someone so that was the correct move by NYPD even though people got hurt. It was JUSTIFIED.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/24/justic...-empire-state/

Also I can only assume you don't understand how cameras work. The human eye has much more ability to see in the dark than any camera. If there is enough exposure to be captured by any type of camera without going to IR or night Vision the human eye can definitely see it. That is why movie sets have to light up entire blocks at night to get exposure on Film. Digital is way better but still not 1:1 with the human eye. So this "too dark to see" narrative is completely incorrect.

This is going to end badly for all the cops that fired shots. At the very best they will only be fired. And this is going to cost LA millions in legal fees and more bad blood created about over zealous LA cops.

Oh no, please be my friend, you seem like such a cool guy.

Read over what i have said, The only "facts" I have stated are from witnesses and/or those facts that are being reported, NOT my opinions as facts. If anything I have said is shown to be wrong, I don't make excuses, I say I was corrected. As in the case of the red light/green light that hytech9 has shown us. Unless that was altered, it shows a green light for the vette. Did I tell him he's a liar? No i said it appears he had a green light...

My friend, you are completely wrong. If an officer can articulate he felt there was imminent danger to himself or others he can use deadly physical force. If the first firing officer claims he saw an object that appeared to be a gun because of the lighting conditions, etc he can be justified in his actions. Of course there has to be a certain amount of evidence to back that up, or not dispute it. (example: many of our vette inside door handles are black. If the driver was holding the door handle while he was getting out an officer could mistaken that as a gun and feel himself, another officer or a civilian is in imminent danger of getting shot or killed he can open fire.) Officers are human, they are not robots that can quickly "calculate" to a 100% degree if someone is going to die. If LAPD has completely different rules then point me to the procedural law and i will read up, but thats how it is in NY, and I'm sure it's not that far off there too.
You are also making arguments that may be true in some situations but not in others. For instance, if a large guy picks a fight with a small cop and he has, let's say, brass knuckles. The cop gets hit and starts to lose consciousness. If he feels, if I go unconscious this guy is going to take my gun and kill me, he will most likely be justified in killing him. Now, same scenario, except the small cop has 25 units back up and shoots cause he's going unconscious, he probably will not be able to prove he was in fear of his life because there were 50 other cops to help subdue the guy...

Another issue in play in these situations: A police officer can be found justified in a situation, but still lose a civil suit because proof is different.

PLEASE help car wont start
I went to start my car today and it wouldn't start I checked the battery and its good. I just replaced the FOB batteries last week and they worked perfect. Im also considering buying a catch can. Id love some suggestions/opinions.:shrug:

There were also reports of UFO`s over LAX that night. Maybe there is even more to this whole thing?

You mean the people that ran a red light and were hauling ass down a city street?

I hope they are cited as well.

So you feel that the people in the red car and the Police are to blame and that the perp is an innocent victim, is that correct?

Do your think the people in the red car deserved what happened to them?

Just trying to understand your point of view. Please elaborate.

Corvette driver identified, brother interviewed:

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/bro...out-1484006743

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/...it-speaks-out/