Police

Kentucky Deputy Won't Be Charged In Shooting Death of 19-Year-Old Trying to Leave a Party

|

Although the portion of the video of the incident that was publicly released (see this May Hit and Run entry) made his story seem improbable—as it seemed to show him approaching her departing car from the side with her front well past him—a grand jury in Boone County, Kentucky, faced with a prosecutor's death investigation evidence concluded that Samantha Ramsey did indeed represent a threat to the life of Deputy Tyler Brockman such that he was justified in shooting her four times from the hood of her car, into a car with three other passengers.

WCPO

Brockman was breaking up a party from which Ramsey and her friends were trying to leave, and he suspected she might be legally impaired. According to the investigator's report, she was, on both alcohol and marijuana.

The forensic report said tire tracks matching the car are on his foot boot, and that she indeed made a sharp left turn into him and knocked him to the hood of her car, making the shooting justified.

Accounts of the grand jury decision from Cincinnati's WCPO-TV, Cincinnati.com, and WKRC Local 12 from Cincinnati.

From the WCPO report:

One of Ramsey's passengers described it differently.

"We saw three cars, so we thought we could go pass," said Bobby Turner, who was in the backseat behind Ramsey when she was shot. "The officer was talking to somebody else. We was listening to music in the car. We didn't know the police was talking to us… I just saw him jump on the hood and start shooting."

From his perspective across the street, Josh Pitts of Covington said it appeared Brockman leapt onto Ramsey's vehicle.

"As she was trying to make a turn and leave the party, he jumped on the car and pulled his gun out and shot four times through the window and hit the girl," Pitts said.

Advertisement

NEXT: If NYC Cops Arrest Fewer Pot Dealers, Maybe They Will Deliver Fewer Beatings Too

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Friday afternoon nut punch…thanks, I needed that.

  2. As long as the, uh, jurors got to go home safe.

  3. Jesus Christ.

    So sad.

  4. The video isn’t conclusive evidence either way. It’s possible he leaned forward in front of the windshield after she stopped at the very edge of the frame. That would make it possible for him to wind up on the hood if she turns toward him and floors it.

    Still you know if a “civilian” did this he’d be riding the needle.

  5. “The officer was talking to somebody else. We was listening to music in the car. We didn’t know the police was talking to us? I just saw him jump on the hood and start shooting.”

    The video does contradict this story, though. The car slows down when the cop walks toward it and holds up his hand.

    1. Still, the only way he ended up in front of the car is if he got in front of it. He was well outside the arc of her turn.

      I have seen this many times. Put yourself in front of an already moving vehicle, blow the drivers head off and claim they tried to run you down.

      Hell, I saw a cunt….cop, sorry….do this to a guy in a wheelchair not long ago here on H&R. He put his foot under the path of the chair and then shoved a cripple down.

      1. This. The cop created the situation- he didn’t get immediate compliance that he wanted, and carried out a summary execution.

        1. Succinct!

      2. Still, the only way he ended up in front of the car is if he got in front of it.

        Who says he was in front of the car. He was to the side and wound up on top when she turned.

        He was well outside the arc of her turn.

        How did he get the tire tracks on his boot then.

      3. Were the tire tracks on his shoe added after the fact is my question.

  6. I would rather get hit by a passing car than shoot a teenage girl to death.

    Pain is temporary, chicks dig scars, but shame is forever.

    1. A shame they rarely feel. Especially when they are let off the hook like in this case.

    2. But the bloody minded rush of adrenaline from murdering a citizen in cold blood tapers off so quickly.

    3. An intoxicated teenage girl who hit a pedestrian?

      1. An intoxicated teenage girl who hit a pedestrian *who had put himself in front of the vehicle*. Even without training, you’d think prudence would dictate that you don’t stand close to moving vehicles.

        1. He was not in front of the vehicle.

          1. He was close enough to the side to get run over.

            1. Yes, that’s kind of necessary when talking to the driver. Are you expecting cops to stand 10 feet away when talking to drivers?

              1. I expect cops to stand several feet away until its clear the driver sees you and is complying with your order to stop.

                *Then* you approach the vehicle to have a face-to-face chat.

                1. How is the driver going to see you in the dark if you’re standing 10 feet to the side?

                  1. Have you heard of a flashlight? Cops have them. Also you avoid doing things like approaching moving vehicles with your own headlights directly behind you. You know, all those little things that us, untrained, peons know how to do to avoid getting run over.

                    1. She wasn’t facing his headlights.

                      You guys need to go back to geometry class.

                    2. OK, I’m done with you – we are obviously not watching the same video.

                      Its damn apparent that the officer is standing in *front* of his vehicle, with the headlights on and then walks forward and then to the left towards the driver, reaches the driver’s window as she makes a left turn onto the road.

                    3. That’s because of the angle. He was in front of and to the left of the driver, as was the camera. So he is between the camera and the driver, but he’s not “at the driver window”.

                      How did his boot get run over if he was at the driver window?

          2. There is no way from that video that she conceivably could have run him down unless he stepped in front of the car.

            What’s amazing about this story is that his life was never in any danger. Even if she hurt him, she could have been charged with assaulting a police officer. He easily could have gotten the license plate, in which case she was fucked either way and there was no reason to shoot.

            This is an instance where *even if* she hit him with the car, it would have been tremendously easy for him to get off the car and move away. If a non-cop did this, I would consider it murder just as I do now.

            1. There is no way from that video that she conceivably could have run him down unless he stepped in front of the car.

              Wrong. It can happen from leaning over the windshield too.

              This is an instance where *even if* she hit him with the car, it would have been tremendously easy for him to get off the car and move away.

              How do you know this?

              What’s amazing about this story is that his life was never in any danger. Even if she hurt him, she could have been charged with assaulting a police officer.

              I’m sure his widow and orphans would be cheering at the sentencing hearing.

              1. Shame she grazed him, rather than put him out of our misery.

            2. My sister got her foot run over at a party. I don’t remember her shooting anyone.

          3. He was not in front of the vehicle.

            To turn this around – how do you know this?

            Its not in the video. While I’m willing to accept that he got his foot run over, we only have the officer’s word that he ended up on the hood.

            1. It’s not logically impossible that he was in front of the vehicle, but unlikely considering he got his foot run over. I doubt he’s walking in front of the vehicle after that.

      2. An intoxicated teenage girl who hit a pedestrian?

        If someone bumped me with their car, even if the tire went over my foot, and I proceeded to shoot them to death, I would be in prison right now.

        1. No dispute there. But maybe you shouldn’t be.

          1. No, I definitely should be. That was a slow moving vehicle that he easily could have gotten away from. He made the choice to use deadly force rather than take actions which would not have forced him to kill someone.

            1. You need to settle with Agamemnon about how easy it is to safely get off the hood of a moving car.

              1. Its Agammamon, not Agamemnon. And there’s nothing to settle – *you’re the one who thinks its hard to get off the hood.

                I’m of the opinion that if she was moving fast enough to be a danger then he wouldn’t have had a choice about getting off – he’d have slid off and rolled down the street.

              2. It’s probably a hell of a lot safer to get off the hood,of a car doing ten miles an hour than it is to get off the hood of a cat with a corpse driving it or a panicked person who is being shot at.

                This cop is as big a fucking idiot as you are, fuckhead.

  7. But I thought police only killed black children (who always turn out to be fully grown young adults), never whites (and never young white girls)?

    1. No, they kill old people and dogs and cats too. They don’t care what color they are. Any chance to shoot off ordinance gives them a thrill. Otherwise their lives would be pretty boring.

  8. . . . knocked him to the hood of her car, making the shooting justified.

    If you can be on the hood of someone’s car and still be stable enough to get your gun out and fire it without falling off – then you weren’t in any danger in the first place.

    1. And another question – how do you run over someone’s *foot* and still get them on the *hood*. That’d have to be one long arse hood.

      1. The tires are further forward than the windshield on most cars. Presumably he wound up on the hood parallel to the windshield, not perpendicular to it.

        1. And somehow, in the space of about two feet, the tire came *off* his foot and then he ended up with enough of his body on the hood to *stay* there long enough to draw his weapon and fire several shots.

          Most people would likely have fallen *away* from the car. Even taking the swerve towards him onto consideration, unless she was trying to drive in a circle, this guy got those shots off in record time.

          1. Bull. I used to work at an oil change place where we put stickers on the windshield to indicate what the customer was getting, before they turned to drive in to the bay. Can’t tell you how many times idiots ran over my left foot and smacked my left arm as I leaned over the windshield because they tried to take off early. That was cars going relatively slowly — if they had been flooring it I probably wind up on the hood.

            1. And how would you have ended up on the hood? You were already leaning into the car and you only smacked your arm. The car isn’t going to magically scoop up your torso and pin you there for several seconds while you get a gun out and pop off a couple rounds.

              1. And if you watch the linked video you see that the officer was at the driver’s *window* as the car goes off screen.

                That means he’d have to have moved forward of the windshield (faster than she was moving, obviously) and *then* get run over as she drove away.

                Basically, to stop her he *put himself in danger* when simply getting her plate number and sending another patrol car after her would have been sufficient.

                1. And if you watch the linked video you see that the officer was at the driver’s *window* as the car goes off screen.

                  No, he wasn’t. He was still forward of the tire.

                  1. Uh, no he wasn’t – go watch the video. He’s clearly at the driver’s window as the car goes off screen.

                2. simply getting her plate number and sending another patrol car after her would have been sufficient.

                  Seriously? By the time the patrol car was roused she could have been anywhere. If it was your family that got killed by a drunk and stoned driver you’d be pissed the cops didn’t try to stop her.

                  1. So, you think its perfectly justified to use deadly force against someone who is *suspected* to be intoxicated?

                    I remind you that the officer didn’t *know* she was intoxicated during the encounter.

                    And he didn’t shoot to stop her from killing others. He shot because he ‘thought’ he was in danger.

                    We’re just pointing out that, to a reasonable person, there’s no evidence of any danger.

                    1. So, you think its perfectly justified to use deadly force against someone who is *suspected* to be intoxicated?

                      No. But I do think it’s justified to try to stop a drunk driver by approaching the vehicle and telling her to stop.

                    2. So, where and what does this have to do with the actual issue here?

                      Which is not whether or not the cop acted appropriately when he initiated the stop – I’ll stipulate that he did.

                      The issue is whether or not he was justified in using lethal force. And based on the evidence at hand, I’d say no.

                      The driver certainly acted improperly, but the officer put himself in danger by acting stupidly and likely could have resolved the situation non-lethally.

                      Again – if you have time to get out your weapon and fire off some shots, you weren’t in any danger on that hood.

                    3. Again – if you have time to get out your weapon and fire off some shots, you weren’t in any danger on that hood.

                      Again – you have no evidence of this.

                    4. From your “misspent youth”, what happens if you start trying to move sideways off the hood of the moving vehicle? That is Irish’s advice. Perhaps you could educate him.

                  2. Looked like the cop ran and jumped on the hood. Was he wearing steel-toed boots? I think he would have some kind of foot injury if not.

            2. I used to work at an oil change place

              Uh huh, sure you did.

      1. +1 Joe Mannix

    2. What evidence do you base this claim on?

      1. Mythbusters motherfucker!

        And its pretty damn hard to stay on the hood of a car when its moving, doubly so if the car swerves to the side even a little bit (knowledge hard-earned in a misspent youth). Harder to hold on with one hand while fumbling to get your gun out of the holster.

        1. Depends on the rate of speed. If it was going somewhat slowly he may not have been in danger of getting thrown off at that moment, but if she accelerated that would change very quickly.

          1. She wasn’t in a Ferrari.

            1. Adn keep in mind – this investigation didn’t find that the officer *was in danger* only that its likely he actually *felt* endangered.

              1. Which is what the standard is for self-defense, for everyone, not just cops.

                If someone points an unloaded gun at you and you shoot them dead, you may be justified in self-defense even though you were never really in danger.

                1. No – the standard for self-defense is how a *reasonable person* would interpret the situation (if they were in it). I’m a reasonable person and I don’t see anything there justifying lethal force.

                  1. Except you weren’t in the situation and you hate cops.

                    1. I’m not sure how that matters. Are you saying that since I’m not a cop and have never been ‘trapped’ on the hood of a moving vehicle and then shot the driver to death that I can’t possibly judge?

                      Maybe that’s the reasoning the grand jury used in deciding whether or not to proceed.

                      ‘Course that basically means only cops can judge cops.

                    2. “Detached reflection cannot be expected in the face of an uplifted knife.” — Olliver Wendell Holmes Jr.

                    3. You’re quoting that asshole? What kind of cunt are you?

                    4. Talk about ad hominem. That case established the standards of self-defense that protect us today.

                    5. And… My question is answered.

  9. “tire tracks matching the car are on his foot”

    Was he barefoot?

    1. Doherty’s mistake. It was his boot, which they have a picture of at the link.

  10. Another front in the War on Drugs that needs to end is alcohol prohibition for certain adults.

    1. She wasn’t 27, ergo she wasn’t an adult yet.

  11. Who taught these cops how to break up a party? Step 1 is blocking the driveway, cars work well. What is this cop BS of putting their feet below tires so they can then beat or kill people? Boone County needs a new sheriff and at least one new deputy.

    1. Just looked it up and Michael A Helmig run reelection running unopposed. Won’t be moving to Boone County any time soon.

  12. she was, on both alcohol and marijuana.

    Well, then it’s quite clear that the pig had to shoot her.

    I hope that motherfucker dies in a fire while suffering from cancer.

  13. It’s Tulpa

    1. Yup. He really jacks it hard when one of his cop boyfriends murder a white person. Dead black teens just doesn’t do it for Tulpy-poo anymore.

  14. That pig didn’t waste any time murdering that child did he? I hope he gets shot down. The sooner the better. PoS coward.

  15. Strangers on a Train. and the GJ too.

  16. According to the investigator’s report, she was, on both alcohol and marijuana.

    what about the shooter? roid free? no alcohol consumption in the last month?

  17. This whole thing is ridiculous. We’re sitting here tit-for-tatting how she drove, whether the could or couldn’t get off the hood.

    The officer was breaking up a party. That he ever got himself into a situation where he was putting himself between moving cars full of teenagers, and not just calling in for backup to arrest people at the ends of the block/road whatever, that’s the problem.

    Officers need to start thinking about the totality of circumstances they’re facing. The officer needs to think to himself that he’s breaking up a party for noise, some teenagers may be drunk, some may be underaged, some might try to run… if some run, I’m not going to create a situation where if one does run, I have to shoot him three times in the face to stop him.

    1. That would require a commitment to the community, as opposed to “the thin blue line”.

      Cops are like politicians, they may have gotten in to this for good reasons once upon a time, but eventually, almost universally, the power seems to go to their heads.

  18. Jumping on the hood of a car is the best option you have when you see a car coming towards you and you can’t get out of the way.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.