Police Abuse

Cop Pulls Teen Over for Flashing High Beams, Tases Him, Eventually Shoots and Kills Him

Family is suing, saying everything the cop did from the moment he decided to stop their son was illegal.

|

family photo

Seventeen-year-old Deven Guilford was shot seven times by Sgt. Jonathan Frost of the Eaton County Sheriff's Office in Michigan this February. In June, Frost was cleared by a county prosecutor, who agreed with Frost's allegations that Guilford had attacked him after being Tased and that the officer feared for his life.

Guilford's encounter with Frost started on the road. Guilford flashed his high beams at Frost because, he told the officer after being pulled over, the police vehicle's headlights were blinding him. Frost insisted the high beams on his new SUV weren't on, and further, that a state law requiring drivers "use a distribution of light or composite beam so aimed that the glaring rays are not projected into the eyes of the oncoming driver" applied to Guilford flashing his high beams at Frost.

Frost asked Guilford for his driver's license at least six times before Guilford admitted he didn't have it. Initially, Guilford challenged Frost's authority to pull him over in what reads a lot like a road rage incident where the raging driver is an agent of the state. At some point, Guilford used his cellphone to call his girlfriend, whose car he was driving and at whose house he left his wallet and keys.

That's when things got ugly. Frost said he had received a bulletin about the threat the sovereign citizens' and militia movement posed to police officers. This was around the time the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) distributed a bulletin on "sovereign citizen extremists" to local law enforcement. Since then, there has not been a statistically significant rise in police fatalities.

This summer saw a string of police killings, but by then the "Black Lives Matter" police reform movement had replaced sovereign citizens as the boogeyman police apologists point to as evidence of a "war on cops." But before Black Lives Matter entered mainstream political discussion, the boogeyman role was filled by sovereign citizens. While cops find help on the right in pushing Black Lives Matter and the broader police reform movement as an enemy of police and an example of the "war on cops," when the sovereign citizens movement filled that role, cops got help from the left.

There were no known attacks on police officers in Michigan in 2015 perpetrated by alleged members of the sovereign citizen and militia movement. Yet Frost and countless other officers in Michigan and around the country got the same information, via DHS, warning of the threat to their lives. How much did it contribute to the climate of fear in which Frost shot and killed an unarmed seventeen year old for the crime of disagreeing with him?

This was not Frost's first encounter over his new SUV's high beams. According to the family's lawsuit, Frost had previously pulled over two other people who did the same thing as Guilford—flashed their high beams at him because his head lights were so bright. Neither of them were cited. But neither did they appear to challenge Frost's authority. Guilford did.

According to the report clearing Frost, Guilford's father and girlfriend said he focused on YouTube videos of police encounters. The report claimed the focus was "recent, sudden, out of the ordinary and may have influenced Deven in this traffic stop." That sounds like Guilford knew what his rights were and didn't want to permit Frost to trample that.

Frost did engage his body camera before exiting the vehicle to approach Guilford, so much of the encounter was caught on tape, though not the alleged assault nor the shooting. Guilford also tried to use his cellphone to record the interaction, but Frost eventually stopped that.

The Guilford family's lawsuit does not address the alleged assault of Frost. Instead, it argues the initial traffic stop and everything up to and after the alleged assault was an illegal action by Frost. They insist the prosecutor who cleared Frost interpreted the high beam law incorrectly, and that flashing your high beams at another driver is not against Michigan law. The family is seeking a jury trial.

Watch body cam incident of the video below:

NEXT: When Everyone Can Read the News About the War Except the Warriors

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. Ed, first may I say that your rant on Twitter earlier is one of the most perfect things ever.

    Secondly, it’s always convenient that when police officers are “attacked”, the body camera just happens to have missed the “attack”. It’s strange. Really.

    1. Yeah, well, maybe more funding would get them some stronger batteries that wouldn’t die all the time. Ever think of that?

    2. Especially this tweet.

    3. Haha, that is a great Twitter rant. You also got a bitchin’ profile pic, Ed.

    4. Ed ?@edkrayewski 7h7 hours ago
      The ideology of the American left is starting to look really fucking dangerous.

      “Starting”?

      1. it was only really dangerous before.

  2. I’ll tell you what, if that were my son, this cop just wouldn’t show up for work one day.

      1. Not big enough. Maybe we can crowdfund to buy the parents one of these.

        NOTE TO ANY MICHIGAN PROSECUTORS WHO MAY BE READING: THIS IS NOT A TRUE THREAT, AS CURRENTLY INTERPRETED BY APPLICABLE SUPREME COURT STANDARDS.

        1. AS CURRENTLY INTERPRETED BY APPLICABLE SUPREME COURT STANDARDS.

          Do you really think there are prosecutors that give a rats ass for the Supreme Court or the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, at least as it applies to the little people?

        2. That is one boss chipper.

          I bet it smells like … victory.

    1. There’s a special place in Hell waiting for him afterwards.

      * NOTE TO ANY MICHIGAN PROSECUTORS WHO MAY BE READING THIS: AS I AM NOT A DEITY, I HAVE NO POWER TO PLACE ANYONE IN HELL, WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT EXIST.

      1. Hell is a town in Michigan. It is real.

        1. Wasn’t Lagos renamed Hell?

        2. Wait a minute, isn’t Milwaukee in Wisconsin?

        3. I live about 20 mins from Hell. It’s pretty much just a convenience store and a name. I was disappoint the first time I visited…

          1. I had similar feelings about Promised Land, which turned out to be just a truck stop. But I hear that Satan’s Kingdom is pretty cool.

            1. when in Lancaster Co, you can choose either Blue Ball or Intercourse…and if coming from Punxsutawney, if you pass by Anita you can find yourself somewhere between Panic and Desire

          2. It’s pretty much just a convenience store and a name.

            That does sound like Hell.

            1. Particularly with 7-11 prices for beer!

              1. *badoom-tish*

          3. There’s also a biker bar (which I guess you should probably expect in Hell)

            1. I hope it’s called “The Titty Twister”.

    2. WAR ON COPS

  3. If I was the kid’s parents, I would be investing in a wood chipper. Seriously.

  4. I keep watching it thinking, how in the hell is this going to escalate to death in the next 60 seconds? Holy shit, it just did.

    1. Because that’s who has gravitated to the job of cop…because of the very fact that they can get away with killing someone who does nothing but not sufficiently respect their authoritah.

      Remember, *you* could meet this cop (or his equivalent) tomorrow. Because your taillight is out, or because you forgot to signal. Or because he/she needs to fill their quota. Or for whatever reason. And if you do the wrong things, even inadvertently, they might beat or even kill you. And you can’t really do anything to prevent it other than doing your best to avoid cops at all costs.

      Fun, isn’t it?

      1. Don’t I know it. I’ve actually had to sit through an interview with a homicide detective before. I highly recommend not living in a shitty neighborhood where people get robbed or murdered. Easier to avoid the police that way.

        1. Easier to avoid the police that way.

          Not owning a car seems to help, too.

          1. Never, ever leave your house.

            1. I am white, reasonably clean-cut, and I live in a city where I don’t need to drive. Guess how often I have ever been hassled by cops?

              1. You just haven’t given them a reason yet.

                1. Yeah, right.

                  Anyway I was just playing on the impression I get that most interactions with the police happen in your car.

              2. You know who else was never hassled by the cops?

                1. Tom Pendergast?

      2. Serve and Protect

      3. I had a cop behind me this morning, in rush hour traffic, and I kept waiting for him to pull me over.

        He was continuously looking down at something and figured he was running my plate, since I didn’t immediately slam my brakes on and let him turn into traffic.

      4. “And you can’t really do anything to prevent it other than doing your best to avoid cops at all costs.”

        Lick boots. Bend over.

    2. Yeah that went from poor dumb kid, to holy shit, dead kid…really quickly. What happened to the day when they would just run the plate, call the owner, and then the parent? Nope, today its just “respek muh athoritah! Bang!”

  5. Hopefully this cop will feel the sting of justice when tax payers are forced to pay civil damages and he is at home on paid leave from work. That’ll teach him.

    1. TWO WHOLE WEEKS of paid leave. A man could really think about what he’s done.

  6. That sounds like Guilford knew what his rights were and didn’t want to permit Frost to trample that.

    Guilford had no rights. We should all know this by now. He didn’t, you don’t, and neither do I. Not as a practical matter anyway. If you fail to comply with an illegal command, then the cop will initiate force against you. If you fight back you will be severely beaten and/or shot. And nothing will happen to the cop. Nothing at all.

    1. Yeah but then

      NOTHING ELSE HAPPENED.

      So it’s all good.

    2. Any and every command by a brave law enforcement officer is a legal command, by definition. People like you with all this cop hate are bringing this nation to ruin. If you won’t obey the authority of our brave officers, move somewhere else.

    3. ” And nothing will happen to the cop.”

      Two words: paid vacation.

  7. But before Black Lives Matter entered mainstream political discussion, the boogeyman role was filled by sovereign citizens. While cops find help on the right in pushing Black Lives Matter and the broader police reform movement as an enemy of police and an example of the “war on cops,” when the sovereign citizens movement filled that role, cops got help from the left.

    Well, that and there’s reasonable evidence that the event that kicked off #BLM was more likely than not a justifiable shooting, which sometimes frustrates those of us who can’t seem to get any traction on dozens of other police shootings that didn’t seem to raise an eyebrow on the left.

    I mean, after all that guy was killing our children and denying the state life-bringing tax revenue by selling loose cigarettes.

    1. the event that kicked off #BLM was more likely than not a justifiable shooting,

      It actually started about like this killing did: A cop hassling somebody without any legal basis to do so. Remember, by his contemporaneous statement (since “revised” on advice of counsel, who should be disbarred) was that the cop who shot Brown did not know about the robbery when he stopped him.

      1. Uh, no. He yelled at him to get out of the street.

        Then he came back and stopped him when he realized he fit the description of the strong arm robbery suspect (since he was the suspect). That’s when the fight happened.

  8. The video has now been released and if you watch the roughly five minutes applicable to the case (below) I think you’ll see that this entire fiasco was completely avoidable? and it was Deven who could have prevented it, not the cop. I should offer the usual warning that the content may be disturbing to some readers, though it doesn’t actually show the moment of death.

    http://hotair.com/archives/201…..-deserved/

    1. Jazz Shaw is an unrepentant cop fellator and worshiper of authoritarian power – as long as it’s the kind that he likes.

      1. he’s loves him some goosesteppin. Is there any question what he would have been reporting unregistered Jews in 1934?

        1. Or would have been a capo if he was Jewish?

      2. Why does he have the name of a diabetic stripper?

    2. Just to see how culpable the officer might have been and the attitude he took, you need look no further than the opening gambit as Officer Frost approaches the driver side of the car and begins the conversation with Guilford.

      Frost: Hello. Need your drivers license, registration and proof of insurance please. The reason I pulled you over today was because you flashed me. I didn’t even have my brights on.

      Guilford: Yes you did sir.

      At this point, Frost’s tone is nothing but friendly. The only “weapon” he has in hand is a flashlight. He greets the kid, asks for the totally normal documents which cops ask for in every traffic stop and immediately lets him know why he was pulled over. Let’s stop and ask ourselves a question here. If this kid had simply handed over his license and registration, would this have ended in anything other than a warning and sending him on his way? The parents are claiming that it was an “unlawful stop” to begin with, but in fact it is illegal in Michigan to flash your high beams at another driver within 500 feet. It’s a civil infraction that carries a 2-point penalty on your license so yes, you can be pulled over for it.

      What a boot licking fascist.

      1. The fact that the cop immediately denied having his brights on, before Guilford even said he had flashed because the cop had his brights on, is pretty damning evidence the cop knew perfectly well that he had his brights on.

        1. Whenever a cop says something, it is safe to assume that the opposite is true.

        2. Even the worst person in this situation could just say “oops” and turn their brights off and gone about their day. What compels somebody to pull somebody over and murder them for pointing out that they made a small driving error? I feel like even the most hardened psychopath would be able to just move on…

      2. Wow. So, pretty much the equivalent of, “Well, if that nigger boy hadn’t looked at that nice white lady all lascivious and such she wouldn’t have felt threatened, and since making someone feel threatened is assault that lynching was perfectly justified as at least one auxiliary deputy was present at the time.”

      3. “It’s a civil infraction that carries a 2-point penalty on your license”

        Or summary execution, with the 2-point penalty being assessed against your next of kin.

      4. ” If this kid had simply…”

        bent over and not made a fuss about it, he could have taken his warning up the ass and been on his way in no time.

    3. straight up cop sucking. he was on the ground. this cop is lousy at his job. and I suspect his injuries were self inflicted.

    4. exactly what he deserved

      For that statement alone, Shaw deserves a few things himself.

    5. Upon being told to exit the vehicle and facing arrest, an altercation took place which wound up with Deven being shot seven times. He did not survive the injuries.

      Passive voice for the WIN

    6. ::clicks link::

      ::reads::

      ::reads comments::

      ::sets computer on fire::

      ::burns ashes::

      ::shoots ashen remains of computer into the sun::

    7. So the cop couldn’t have prevented it?

      1. Hey, even a cop is only human. How on earth could he have not shot the kid, I ask you!

        1. What choice did you have, Earl? NONE!

      2. That is what I saw. The cop had no choice at any point in the whole scenario to act other than as he did up to and including shooting the kid? Really, are you cops really that powerless and incompetent that Frost could have done nothing NOTHING else?

      3. Procedures were followed. Prevention was unsuccessful. Death resulted.

    8. Yeah I read that over the weekend, its pathetic. And just to drive it home, this is the unedited title:

      Sadly, Deven Guilford probably got exactly what he deserved

      Also, they added it to their Top Picks section so it stay on the front page for longer, so this is an editorial thing and not just Jazz Shaw. And the comment section is as disgusting as usual.

      1. Why is it sad if it’s what he deserved?

  9. Did Frost’s SUV headllights comply with Michigan law on not glaring into other driver’s eyes?

    1. Yes, that’s why Guilford got the two extra bullets after he stopped squirming.

    2. Complying with the law is for the peasants, not their rulers.

  10. I am confused. Shouldn’t the fact that he failed to record the event according to policy and he prevented the kid from recording it, be evidence of premeditation?

    1. No. He’s a cop. He took an oath. That mean that everything he does is in good faith. Any violations of the law are to be overlooked because he took an oath and was acting in good faith. Did I mention that he took an oath?

    2. Just signing up to be a cop is premeditation.

  11. I’m glad to see that the parents are fighting back. It’s particularly heartening how their pushback has raised this to national attention.
    When it occurred in June, it was a brief mention on mid-Michigan local news and not much more. There was either no local outrage, or it was not reported (the likelier conclusion).

    1. There was either no local outrage

      Only black lives matter. The kid was white. Nothing to see. Move along.

      1. And you’re doing so much activism from your Cheeto-stained keyboard, you racist fuckhead.

        BLM is the primary outfit bringing these incidents to light, be the victims black or white.

        1. BLM covered this?

          1. It doesn’t seem to comport with the Bureau of Land Management’s mission, does it?

          2. No. My local rock station didn’t say a thing.

        2. Uh-huh. Not Photography Is Not A Crime, not the ACLU, not Reason, not Radley Balko, not the lawyers of the victims.

          It’s the year-old BLM movement. They’re the primary outfit letting us know about these cases.

        3. I did a quick google search for white victims covered by BLM, and all I got was pages talking of BLM activists demanding the lynching of white people.

          1. Google detected your racist intent, obviously.

          2. You need to turn off your privilege filter.

        4. Racist? Where the fuck do you get that from?

          1. Projection.

            1. I mean, you can say a lot of things about Sarcasmic, but I wouldn’t have thought “racist”.

        5. Trolly trolly troll

        6. Excellent news, Tony!

          I’d be grateful if you’d point us to some links illustrating the ways in which the BLM movement has drawn attention to police shooting white, asian, latino, or any other victims besides black people, or even one single event where a BLM presence has not booed the sentiment that “all lives matter”.

          I took the day off so take your time.

          1. BLM was all over the Zachary Hammond killing.

            To a person supporters of BLM are mentioning Guilford as a victim of the same problem–while All Lives Matter douchefucks are whining about BLM ignoring him, even though they’re not, even though it’s pretty fucking rich to demand that they do what you are not willing to do. Black protestors actually showed up to the courthouse. You can find this all on the Twitter and the Google.

            1. To a person supporters of BLM are mentioning Guilford as a victim of the same problem

              So it should be no problem to cough up a link or two, yes?

              1. Go to their Twitter.

        7. “BLM is the primary outfit bringing these incidents to light”

          Do a quick search of Reason for the phrase “Another isolated incident”, sweetheart

          Given how long you’ve dwelled here, your ignorance on this topic is astounding.

          BLM is not only very-recent to the issue of police misconduct… not even existing as an org until the mass-media over-heated the Michael Brown shooting

          ….but they’ve been narrowly focused on ‘incidents’ that meet criteria that frame the issue purely as a racial one.

          BLM is nothing but a self-promotion exercise for a handful of black-student-activists who are more interested in identity politics than public policy vis a vis police.

          1. Choney’s ignorance on this matter is directly related to the fact that he loves cops and hardly ever comments on these types of articles because he knows that cops are necessary for implementing his preferred world view.

            Oh, and because he’s a racist piece of shit that only cares about black people when it suits his political agenda.

          2. Well, the movement does have a specific focus, and if you guys aren’t going to get off your ass and protest I don’t know where you get off demanding that BLM do anything. Their issue is primarily racial. The relative disposability of black people is their focus. Libertarians, for whom police brutality should be a major concern, seem to care more about whining about how unfair it is that this white guy didn’t get the attention that some black guy got. Meanwhile, nobody is desperately tearing into the history of these white kids looking for evidence of their past thuggery and various other excuses for why their murder was probably justified.

            1. Of course libertarians, for whom police brutality has been a major concern for 50 fucking years, DO protest, and HAVE been on the front lines of not only law enforcement reform but the outright removal of unjust and unconstitutional laws, etc.

              It’s only shithead liberals like you who jump on the bandwagon when it is politically expedient, only to fall off again when your TEAM needs to focus on better things like making sure 4 million people have health insurance they didn’t fucking want in the first place or your president insists on waging a drone war that bombs doctors and unilaterally assassinates American citizen’s with no due process.

              1. Such a fine job you’ve done these last 50 years. I’ll have to take your word for it that you were out in the streets. Maybe white guys do get the shaft. The MSM ignored all your protests for all that time and only started paying attention to police murders when the blacks started. Damn the luck.

            2. Libertarians, for whom police brutality should be a major concern, seem to care more about whining about how unfair it is that this white guy didn’t get the attention that some black guy got.

              I know I shouldn’t reply to it, but I can’t do anything but shake my head and laugh.

              You’d have to be a genius to be this dense.

            3. And there go the goalposts, right on time.

              I guess this is the closest we’ll ever get to Tony saying, “You’re right, I was wrong.”

              1. We’re on the same page here. All I did was respond to sarcasmic’s ignorant, unnecessary, and racist post.

                1. sarcasmic is neither ignorant nor racist.

                  He is probably one of the few posters here Tony who would actually cross the street to help you.

            4. Far too many on the left, such as those in BLM, start with the assumption that anything bad that happens to a black person is solely because they were black. If they were paying attention to ALL police shootings they might get a clue as to what the actual problems are, and might have a chance of solving something. Instead, they start with a narrative and search out only the evidence that seemingly supports that narrative, so they can feel good about themselves for caring.

  12. I feel sick having watched that video. That is murder. There are no words for how vile this is.

  13. So he brought this on himself, right? Oh, never mind… he’s white.

    1. He look like a thug to me. Oh wait…

    2. Now now. You know that bootlicking is color blind.

      1. Not always.

  14. I wonder if this was part of a new gambit. Buy suv with ridiculously bright lights and then use it as an excuse to pull over random people.

    1. A while back I saw a cop car at a stoplight that had all its brake lights out. Not just one, but all of them. It was obvious when he slowed to a stop and no lights came on. I thought about saying something, but then I realized that if they were all out, then it was probably because he pulled the fuse. That way when he’s hiding or creeping around at night, he isn’t blasting red light behind him. That and if someone does rear end him, he can just replace the fuse after beating the person up, and claim it was their fault. So I did nothing. Figured it was the safest course.

      1. It’s the new national whistleblower awareness policy: see something, say nothing.

      2. No need to pull the fuse. Many police vehicles (including motorcycles) have a “stealth” mode that disables all of the lights by flipping a switch. Perfect for late night fun and games.

  15. Listen, if you don’t obey their orders then you deserve what you get.

    1. WE MUST MAINTAIN ORDER

  16. I made this comment when I posted this last week on the lynx, but it’s true:

    I think this proves the old urban myth that you may be killed if you flash your high beams at a member of a violent street gang.

    1. Yep, quality remark. Who knew it was true all along?

      COMPLY. OBEY. THE INNOCENT HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR.

      1. COMPLY. OBEY. THE INNOCENT SUBMISSIVE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR.

  17. Is there any autopsy report which shows where Guilford was shot? Front, back, side?

  18. After watching this video and a lot of others out there where officers seem to use excessive force, I think it may all boil down to the fact that the officers rarely, if ever, tell the suspect that they are being detained or under arrest. And, if they do tell them they are under arrest, it’s almost always after a scuffle is / has taken place (most of the time it’s during). From Sandra Bland to this guy, I wonder if the people would have ‘resisted’ if the LEO’s had simply stated, in a very clear and forceful manner that “at this time I’m placing you under arrest” or “At this time I’m going to detain you for your safety and mine”. This video and the Bland video are very good examples of this. In both videos, the suspects actually questions weather they are under arrest as the officers struggle to control them. I truly wonder if a struggle would have been necessary if the officers had been clear that they where placing the suspect under arrest BEFORE they start using force.

    1. But they can’t do that. If they announce that then they have to have justification, which they don’t. So they escalate until they have it.

      1. This… bark enough angry, contradictory commands out, eventually you’ve got a ‘resister’ on your hands, 7 bullets to the face, bitch. Justified.

        1. “I don’t have justification to write you a ticket. Is it okay if I just kill you instead?”

      2. I think that’s it. To arrest someone you have to have a reason, and “flashed hi-beams” is not an adequate reason, typically. At least not adequate enough to justify the paperwork the cop would have to fill out following the arrest and detainment.

    2. That’s because, before the scuffle, the officer has no legal ground to arrest or detain them. Not until the person fails to comply with illegal commands and pisses off the cop. At that point their life is forfeit.

      1. Right. So the cop says he’s detaining the driver, the driver asks what for, and the scenario plays out the same way. I don’t see what’s changed, Chappy.

        1. If the driver asks what for and the cop has no answer (legally the cop is supposed to answer the question) then I assume the cop has no legally justified reason. So the cop will initiate violence, claim resisting, and nothing else happens.

        2. Yes, I can see that happening, definitely. But, the difference is it takes some of the confusion out of a very confusing situation. I think once people realize that the LEO intends to arrest or detain them, they will be much more compliant. Because, most people at that point realize, shit just got real.

          1. I think if you’re the kind of person to ask if you’re being detained, you know they’re damn well going to try to detain you. In this I kind of agree with the bootlickers, in that it is confrontational. You’re calling the cop’s bluff. The problem is when the cops, being insecure babies, refuse to be called on their bluff and then escalate.

            But sure, you’re right that it would probably help if cops were straightforward from the start. But as the others have said, that’s not in their interest.

            1. “that’s not in their interest.”

              I agree with that 100%. And, that’s why it’s so imperative to require them to state their intentions. Then everyone’s cards are on the table and there is no bluffing going on. That’s the kind of uncertainty that needs to be removed from police / citizen interactions. And, I I really don’t think we are going to start getting a better class of LEO candidates any time soon. So, we have to take away the BS LEO bluster.

      2. “That’s because, before the scuffle, the officer has no legal ground to arrest or detain them”

        I’m don’t think I agree with that. At least not in this case. Bullshit or not, the traffic stop was legal and the officer did have the authority to detain him for not producing documentation. Now, you are probably right in that the LEO’s want more charges so they escalate unnecessarily. Which I think is why they don’t announce their intentions to detain or arrest. But, in this case their was probable cause for detention.

        1. How was this stop legal? It’s not illegal to flash your brights at someone in Michigan, according to the lawsuit, at least. Therefore: no grounds for the stop, therefore not legal.

          1. You might want to research that.

            LANSING ? The civil lawsuit filed over the shooting death of 17-year-old Deven Guilford has stirred questions over flashing your high-beam headlights at oncoming cars. Is it legal?

            The answer: It depends on the distance.

            http://www.lansingstatejournal…../73996998/

            1. Does the cop have a distance determining device in his car that can real-time determine the distance between his vehicle and another vehicle? If not, then this is basically another bullshit law for cops to abuse, isn’t it?

              1. Cops are trained to estimate distances with perfect accuracy. Same with estimating the speed of a vehicle. So if a cop says something is a particular distance away and/or traveling at a particular velocity, then he is always exactly right. Because training.

              2. Cops have magic vision. That’s how they can spot a seat belt violation a mile away, at night and doing 90 on the interstate.

              3. Yes, it absolutely is. But, I don’t think bullshit laws are going anywhere anytime soon.

            2. So the cop was violating this law with his defective headlights, right?

              Has anyone issued him a citation?

        2. the traffic stop was legal

          By what rational? Because pigs can just because. Don’t have to articulate any facts that a crime has or is in the process of being committed? Just because some sycophant SCOTUS fuck said so? So basically pigs ARE the law?

          for not producing documentation.

          So, basically, “papers please?”

          1. Yup, pretty much, unless you can see a different outcome when you hire a class of people to wield unchecked authority and bear arms against their fellow citizens.

      3. Did he ever tell the kid to get out of the car or did he just open up the door and grab him? I didn’t see him do that. It really looked like the cop knew he was on shaky ground and decided to make a point about the traffic stop so the kid got pulled from the car. That’s when it escalated beyond just an argument.

        Even with the kid being a dick about it…I really don’t see a reason to put 7 bullets in him.

  19. Anyway, good shoot.

    1. We are WINNING!

      Booyah!

      1. damnit Al, I have told you I NEED my smooches.

  20. The message here is if you deal with cops, you need to be the grown-up even if you’re a 17 year-old kid. Otherwise the petulant child is likely to kill you.

    1. The message here is that there are two ways to deal with cops: the path of least resistance, or sticking up for your rights.

      If you pursue the former, it’s just another interaction with the state, and by “interaction” I mean random periodic ass-fucking, and you just think of it as another form of taxation. If you pursue the latter, you’ve got to accept that the state stacks the deck in the cop’s favor. You might luck out and get someone who’s a genuinely decent person not interested in flexing his/her authoritah, or you might get a person who will escalate the situation until force is involved.

      At that point, you might get win-the-lottery lucky and prevail through the use of force and not go to prison, but more than likely you’ll get shot multiple times and the cop will get paid vacation. So, basically, the odds are very good that you’re going to get fucked once a cop notices you.

      1. ^ Pretty much this.

      2. “So, basically, the odds are very good that you’re going to get fucked once a cop notices you.”

        Most dangerous gang in town.

  21. Guilford had no rights. We should all know this by now. He didn’t, you don’t, and neither do I.

    But Sarcasmic, we are free. The Chevy commercial said so.

    1. The Chevy commercial says we’re ‘like a rock’.

      We can easily be thrown into a body of water, to sink to the bottom?

    2. The military types, present and former, around here would tell you that it is because of their bravery that we are free.

  22. This reminds me of that urban legend where the gang members are riding around with their brights on and when someone flashes them, they chase the car down and have a new member shoot the other driver as an initiation.

    1. Life imitates art.

  23. This truly seems like a new low in petty provocation leading to a police shooting. When did flashing your bright headlights become tantamount to flipping someone the bird? Isn’t it just a way of saying “Hey, other driver, your lights are blinding me, I can’t see and that’s dangerous, please turn them down”?

    I realize in Michigan this is against the law, at least depending on the distance, blah, blah, blah. But seriously, what human being — let alone police officer charged, ostensibly, with protecting the public — uses this as a pretext to hassle someone, and then tase/shoot him when that person doesn’t like being hassled?

    Answer: A sick, depraved, incredibly insecure human being. One who must have a deep-seated need for confrontation, and confrontation with weak, defenseless antagonists. The sort of person that tortures small animals for fun.

  24. The thing is the cop admits he knew his lights were blinding people. If you pull over 3 or 4 people in a matter of hours for flashing you shouldn’t you go see about fixing your lights? Isn’t it a safety matter? Blinding people while closing at 100+ miles an hour is incredibly dangerous. Was he purposefully driving around knowing he had an excuse to pull these people over?

    1. This assumes that an officer can ever admit they’re wrong about something. He’s right. Each one of those people who flashed their lights at him was wrong. h2h.

    2. Even if the light switch was on normal mode, it could be a manufacturer’s defect, too.

  25. Didn’t the Coroner’s Report show that Deven was DUI?
    He definitely wasn’t “mellow” on that video.
    This was covered at Hotair here….
    http://hotair.com/archives/201…..-deserved/
    I’m sure the family is alleging a lot of things….I hope they have proof to back it up.

    1. “Didn’t the Coroner’s Report show that Deven was DUI?

      A quick google shows absolutely nothing as far as that allegation.

      Given that this story has been in the news for 9 months you’d think it would be widely mentioned.

      so, you were saying something about alleging things for which there’s no evidence presented?

    2. What he deserved? Really? I think one of the primary obstacles to police reform is the fact that a lot of the “civilian” population are equally as psychopathic and cavalier about other people’s lives.

      1. “I think one of the primary obstacles to police reform is the fact that a lot of the “civilian” population are equally as psychopathic and cavalier about other people’s lives.”

        Pot, meet kettle.

  26. 4 people flash their lights at you.

    Do you decide that, hmmmm, they must all be wrong, so when the next guy does it, let’s fight about it or do you check your beams?

    and then if you’re right, be understanding if people are flashing you.

    1. It depends on *who* you are.

      Peasants flash their rulers as a way of requesting a beating.

  27. I can’t watch the video, but I see google images of the officer with dried blood on his forehead and down his face.

    1. Is the action that results in this blood visible in the video?

    2. Does it look to everyone that Sgt. Jonathan Frost left the blood for effect? It looks like all the blood comes from a spot in the middle of the forehead (he also has a black eye). From a distance it looks awful, but if you click the closeup you can see it’s dried. Who leaves blood on their face – including running into their mouth – long enough to dry? When a physician is putting in stitches it’s normal to wipe the blood away for better visibility.

    This look staged. Not as in completely fake but as in theatrically managed for maximum effect.

    1. Of course it is. Why ruin a cop’s life unnecessarily?

  28. I think when their cameras go mysteriously of before they are done with a stop they should be considered automatically guilty.

  29. https://www.gofundme.com/sgtfrost

    Makes me want to throw up.

    Why he needs the extra money is a mystery. The tax Payer is paying for him. At least it’s only 25 people in 3 months.

    1. Of course he needs extra money!

      Now that he has a bunch more time on his hands, but no more money than his usual salary, how is he supposed to live it up?

  30. WOW. The kid was being a dick, but what could he have possibly done from time he was tasered to justify 7! shots? How can anyone watch this video and think the cop was authorized to use deadly force at any point after that stop? Even if the kid punched the cop in the face and ran off after being tasered…7 bullets?

  31. The cop was attacked, and photos of his injuries exist.

    You know, the Tamir Rice shooting and similar incidents resulted from misunderstanding or police negligence. But something like this was entirely avoidable. How hard is it to show a cop your driver’s license and registration, and then contest the legality of the stop later?

    Immigrants (in addition to committing less crimes that natives) also comply with police demands more than natives. That’s why less of them die during police stops. I’m sure the cops violate their rights in many instances, they end up alive at the end.

    I end up shaking my head when details of any shootings are revealed. I honestly don’t know how American families (white and black) function. Do they say “you’re on your own now, bye” after their sons turn 21? They lose track of their socially maladjusted and mentally unstable sons for 2,5 years?

    1. ” How hard is it to show a cop your” ass when he asked so nicely?

      Bend over, and be quick about it!

  32. Two citizens fear for their safety. One shoots first. Dead guy was wrong.

  33. It seems the 17-year old kid did in fact attack the police officer and cause injury or injuries that are documented and reported in the following article:

    http://www.freep.com/story/new…../28893153/

    It’s hard to believe that this belligerent teenager could end up dead from such a trivial encounter, but it happened. If you choose to believe that the police officer faked his injuries and/or did not truly fear for his life, that’s your prerogative. The prosecutor made his decision based on the evidence available to him. If you have a police officer that sustained injury and went on record saying he feared that he would be killed by this young man, what evidence would the prosecutor use to charge the officer with a crime? The evidence includes a video recording of a young man who was not cooperating with a police officer after he (by the boy’s own admission) had committed a traffic infraction. It doesn’t matter if you thought it was okay to flash your brights or if you thought you were in a 35 mph zone doing 50 mph. The officer has lawful authority to require that you identify yourself and prove that you are permitted to be driving on public roadways. It’s a simple concept. Give him your license, registration and insurance card. The requirement to do so is nothing new. Do it. Complain later.

    1. Bend over now. Your rulers command it.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.