God already decided. If you don't repent you go to the bad place..

And we don’t know that God hasn’t already decided to forgive him….how?

But do you feel by watching the video a few times and not hearing alll the testimony during six weeks gives you the right to act as judge and jury to find him guilty and sent to death row?

Yes because I didn't get tricked by slick talking liars.

God already decided. If you don't repent you go to the bad place..

Yep, but the jury’s opinion counts for acquittal or punishment.

While your opinion only counts to yourself….and maybe your wife, kids and kids’ friends.

And often times also to me …

Sounds to me like he is still saying what he did is right.

I see what you are saying. He has to admit it was murder.

But we don’t know if God saw it as murder….do we?

Yes because I didn't get tricked by slick talking liars.

Have your eyes ever played a trick on you?

I have heard of such a statement …

All his crawling etc would have exposed a gun.

Hmm….maybe.

I don’t know if that would or would not have.

I really don’t….I have no way of know that.

Not just looking at the video and assuming that.

the police are being trained to recognize and handle paranoia and paranoid personalities ...

...and to immediately kill them.

I've showed it to wife, kids, kids friend's. 100 percent agree cop was wrong.

As would any sane human being.

You forget who you are dealing with here - in Gatlin Bizarro World, cops are gods and can do no wrong.

On trial, Brailsford testified that he fully believed that Shaver was reaching for a gun.

A lie from your source told by a known murderer.

Oldest lie in the cop playbook - cop claims he "feared for his life".

Yes there is enough evidence in the video to put down the cop. Jury selection needs to be looked at, because those jurors were obviously not qualified.

I'd like to see how many were ex-cops or relatives of cops or prosecutors.

All his crawling etc would have exposed a gun. They made him play a life or death game of Simon says. He was on ground cooperating and that asshole just gunned him down because he wanted to "fuck" him like his gun said.

That written threat on the cop's gun should have been introduced as evidence of pre-meditation.

What kind of a sick, sadistic bastard has something like that etched into his gun?

All his crawling etc would have exposed a gun.

The contents of the body camera footage had been described to the public before, when Brailsford was first charged, but the video itself was withheld until this morning. NBC notes:

The detective investigating the shooting had agreed Shaver's movement was similar to reaching for a pistol, but has said it also looked as though Shaver was pulling up his loose-fitting basketball shorts that had fallen down as he was ordered to crawl.

The investigator noted he did not see anything that would have prevented officers from simply handcuffing Shaver as he was on the floor.

Forcing Shaver to crawl toward the police like this increased the likelihood that Shaver would lose balance and make wild movements, and Langley's bizarre orders were probably confusing even to a sober person.

Oh, and here's an interesting detail from the Arizona Republic:

The judge did not allow jurors to hear about an etching on the dust cover of the rifle Brailsford used to shoot Shaver, which said "You're f--ked," because he felt it was prejudicial.

the police are being trained to recognize and handle paranoia and paranoid personalities ...

...and to immediately kill them.

Not immediately….one second, if they make the wrong move.

I've showed it to wife, kids, kids friend's. 100 percent agree cop was wrong.

As would any sane human being.

You forget who you are dealing with here - in Gatlin Bizarro World, cops are gods and can do no wrong.

Nope cops are not Gods in my world and they should not be the enemies in your world. There are bad cops [1%] and the rest of the 1.1 million cops are good cops doing a great job.

Oldest lie in the cop playbook - cop claims he "feared for his life".

No lie

SCOTUS decisions:

Tennessee v. Garner

Graham v. Connor,

God Bless American and our system of justice.

I'd like to see how many were ex-cops or relatives of cops or prosecutors.

Don’t you think that the prosecutor would have definitely determined that and executed a peremptory challenges?

I do.

You are an idiot not to think so.

Police State Worshiping Cop Apologists Celebrate Death of Daniel Shaver on Facebook (And Liberty's Flame)

Now think of how scared that guy was when having to suddenly do all that at gunpoint, and conflicted by all the 'crawl' commands shouted repeatedly at him? Well?? Could you do it?? BTW... How does that Charley-horse feel??

The detective investigating the shooting had agreed Shaver's movement was similar to reaching for a pistol, but has said it also looked as though Shaver was pulling up his loose-fitting basketball shorts that had fallen down as he was ordered to crawl.

Of course, sitting in some nice easy chair slowly watching the video maybe frame by frame….it would possibly look that way to anyone. But the cop on the scene has ONE SECOND [a scientifically proven fact] to make a decision.

The investigator noted he did not see anything that would have prevented officers from simply handcuffing Shaver as he was on the floor.

Naturally. when the defense attorney asks the investigator: “Did you see anything that would have prevented officers from simply handcuffing Shaver as he was on the floor?”

The investigator will say, without even blinking an eye: No.

Christ, Bubba….why in the Hell did you bold print that. Such an obvious Defense attorney question and there was definitely not anything physically preventing the handcuffing.

Why are you so stupid….really?

TRY IT NOW.

Get on your carpeted floor... on both your KNEES.... Cross one leg over the other and hold your arms STRAIGHT UP... and TRY waddling across the surface under those constraints. Not one or two motions... the entire floor-length... and SEE if you can hold and constrain your body upright successfully while doing so. Well!??

It is as you stated and you CONFIRMED in your previous post: “The detective investigating the shooting had agreed Shaver's movement was similar to reaching for a pistol …”

Standardized training and scientifically proven in most all policed academies, the police officer on the scene has ONE SCEOND to determine if he is reaching for a gun. Much documentation and a number of videos validate this.

In fact, an American-American preacher here in Phoenix [I could look up the article, it would only validate what I am saying] was a staunch vocal opponent to police procedures saying they were always too quick to shoot. He went through the “Shoot or Don’t Shoot” drill and now fully supports the right of police to make the decision on the spot.

Now think of how scared that guy was when having to suddenly do all that at gunpoint, and conflicted by all the 'crawl' commands shouted repeatedly at him? Well?? Could you do it?? BTW...

How does that Charley-horse feel??

But the cop on the scene has ONE SECOND [

Bullshit!

Get on your carpeted floor... on both your KNEES.... Cross one leg over the other and hold your arms STRAIGHT UP... and TRY waddling across the surface under those constraints. Not one or two motions... the entire floor-length... and SEE if you can hold and constrain your body upright successfully while doing so. Well!??

Completely immaterial and totally irrelevant….

You're a cop-worshiping tool. Piss off!

The judge did not allow jurors to hear about an etching on the dust cover of the rifle Brailsford used to shoot Shaver, which said "You're f--ked," because he felt it was prejudicial.

An inscription on a dust cover is a very common thing and many people do it. They run the gauntlet. There are a number of suggestions on the Web.

Brailsford had used the rifle in any number of other situations before and had never shot anyone. The fact that the inscription was on the dust cover had nothing to do with this situation since it never had before.

Remember: The inscription on the dust cover of the rifle didn’t cause Brailsford to shoot….it was Shaver’s sudden hand movement towards his waist that caused Brailsford to shoot.

Therefore the judge was correct is not permitting it to me mentioned at the trial since it was prejudicial.

You are attempting to use it here to prejudice others so the prejudicial point is well made….it would indeed have been highly prejudicial.

.it would indeed have been highly prejudicial.

Piss off - they didn't allow all of the video either you cop-sucking prick.

You're a cop-worshiping tool.

I worship no cops.

I am simply and humbly a charming, clean-cut individual who possesses great transcendence and the maturity to realistically see things as they factually are and not as I would biasly want them to be.

Piss off!

Not until the day comes that I can finally teach you that facts are your friends and not your enemies.

facts

Your blind allegiance to the State and submissive fetish for authority do not allow you to see any facts.

Keep licking those jack-boots!

I am simply and humbly a charming, clean-cut individual who possesses great transcendence and the maturity to realistically see things...

Get the fuck over yourself you self-aggrandizing prick.

Piss off -

Nope

- they didn't allow all of the video either …

There you go again….trying ever so hard to make a prejudicial statement.

Of course Deputy Maricopa County Attorney Susie Charbel did NOT show the entire 18-minute video….she only showed the entire portion of the video that depicted the killing. Charbel adequately covered everything necessary for the prosecutor and the defense as far as viewing the video in her opening statement.

It is during your moments like this for me to truly understand why you are such a simpleton …

… you cop-sucking prick.

When all you have left is insulting name calling….I guess that means you are finished and that you lose.

Get the fuck over yourself you self-aggrandizing prick.

I repeat:

When all you have left is insulting name calling….I guess that means you are finished and that you lose.

Of course Deputy Maricopa County Attorney Susie Charbel did NOT show the entire 18-minute video….she only showed the entire portion of the video that depicted the killing.

Oh - you mean they showed the part of the video that was beneficial to the cop?

Good grief - you're so predictable.

self-aggrandizing

If the shoe fits...

Self aggrandizement is defined as exaggerating one's own importance or power. An example of self aggrandizement is a candidate stretching the truth about his accomplishments to win the position.

Your blind allegiance to the State and submissive fetish for authority do not allow you to see any facts

No blind allegiance, just the facts….and here are the facts. You have presented confirmation in a previous post.

Shaver reached for his waistband after having been told specifically NOT to make any sudden movements.

Shaver was shot because he made the sudden movement.

Those are not my facts.

Those are the unanimous conclusions of a jury of Shaver’s peers after listening to six weeks of testimony and seeing the video.

self-aggrandizing

If the shoe fits...

Self aggrandizement is defined as exaggerating one's own importance or power. An example of self aggrandizement is a candidate stretching the truth about his accomplishments to win the position.

I know the definition, so you wasted your time since the shoe doesn’t fit.

Right back at cyou …

Self-confidence is a superbly high feeling of great trust in one's own abilities, qualities, and power of judgment.

Now there is a shoe that fits me well….custom made for my handsome feet.

Good grief - you're so predictable.

No surprise, because I am always right.

A person always right can easily become predictable by any “intelligent” person.

I am therefore surprised you noticed …

I've showed it to wife, kids, kids friend's. 100 percent agree cop was wrong.

Alas, they were not on the jury. Which means their opinions are worth shit.

Of course Deputy Maricopa County Attorney Susie Charbel did NOT show the entire 18-minute video….she only showed the entire portion of the video that depicted the killing.

… they showed the part of the video that was beneficial to the cop?

No, you are extremely confused. It was the Deputy Maricopa County Attorney who showed the part of the video. It was not meant to be beneficial to the cop since she was prosecuting the cop and wanted him to be convicted. Had she not wanted him to be convicted, she would never have brought charges against the cop in the first place.

Oh - you mean …

What I mean is that we need to trust the judicial process and respect the courts’ decisions.

We must have confidence in the due process of the criminal justice system to review the facts completely and accurately.

If we don’t, then we have no justice system and without a justice system we have no law and order….then we have no country.

We should not cherry pick and support the verdicts we agree with….then be highly verbal to actively and profoundly condemn those verdicts with which we disagree.

I have no doubt should any similar facts as presented in this case with video to support it, ever be presented again….the judicial system will continue to do its job and the matter will again be placed before a jurors.

The guy didn't have a weapon. The other cops weren't stupid like the tattooed crazy looking murderer cop. You are a very weird person. You are blind to wrongs committed by the police. Probably because you are a retired cop who abused people.

conflicted by all the 'crawl' commands shouted repeatedly at him?

He was inebriated and that is why he was confused by the commands.

Could you do it?? BTW...

Probably not if I were as inebriated as he apparently was.

Could I do it being completely sober as I always am?

With the greatest of ease …

The guy didn't have a weapon.

You're so smart ... after the fact.

"You are blind to wrongs committed by the police."

What wrongs? The jury found him not guilty. You don't like our system of justice? How should we determine guilt -- an Internet poll?

He was inebriated and that is why he was confused by the commands.

His being drunk is what started the whole series of events:

"According to a police report, Daniel Leetin Shaver had been staying at a Mesa La Quinta Inn & Suites on business. He invited two acquaintances to his room for drinks. There he showed them a scoped air rifle he was using to exterminate birds inside grocery stores. At one point the gun was pointed outside his hotel window, prompting a witness to notify the front desk; the police were immediately called."

"Upon arrival, police gave Shaver and his acquaintance's detailed orders for several minutes, with frequent admonitions that failing to comply with them would get them shot."

His two acquaintances followed those instructions and were not shot. Shaver didn't and was.

His two acquaintances followed those instructions and were not shot. Shaver didn't and was.

Unfortunately....he paid a high price for his stupidity.

It was a tragic event….it was not murder.

It was a tragic event….it was not murder.

I agree.

He was inebriated and that is why he was confused by the commands.

Inebriated or not - trying to obey commands when all the cops were shouting is impossible.

His being drunk is what started the whole series of events:

Looks as if you want to take Duarte's "War on Drugs" to the next level and execute those who have had too much to drink while in a hotel room.

Looks as if you want to take Duarte's "War on Drugs" to the next level and execute those who have had too much to drink while in a hotel room.

Alcohol kills.

But the cop on the scene has ONE SECOND [

Bullshit!

Scientifically proven to be factual.

Do some research before you again let your mouth overload your ass….as you always do.

Completely immaterial and totally irrelevant….

You're a cop-worshiping tool. Piss off!

Why should I “piss off?”

Oh, because it is impossible for you to show that it was material and totally relevant….is that it?

Of course it is.

So, I can understand why you would want me to “piss off” …

He was inebriated and that is why he was confused by the commands.

Inebriated or not - trying to obey commands when all the cops were shouting is impossible.

Hey, asshole, you can’t be this stupid.

Well, I guess you can.

The man and woman who was with him obeyed the commands when all the cops were shouting and they did not find it impossible to do so.

Inebriated or not -

Geeze….I sometimes wonder why I ever bother with you.

His being drunk is what started the whole series of events:

Looks as if you want to take Duarte's "War on Drugs" to the next level and execute those who have had too much to drink while in a hotel room.

There is no next level and the parallel you are attempting to draw is unbefitting to anything that happened.

There was no execution, there was only a tragic event obviously started by a person being drunk and unable to rationally and correctly control his actions and the events he cause surrounding his actions.

Having “too much to drink” [the political correct way of saying just being “plain drunk”] is nwcwe a good thing to do.

Alcohol kills….wait, I think someone already said that.