Disturbing Video Released of Fatal Police Shooting of Philando Castile

Seven seconds after Castile told a police officer he had a legal gun, he was shot seven times.

Seven seconds after Philando Castile informed a Minnesota police officer he had a firearm, the officer shot him seven times.

The Minnesota Departement of Public Safety released dash cam video on Tuesday from the fatal 2016 police shooting of Castile, which sparked protests and national coverage. The video shows the brief interaction between Castile and police officer Jeronimo Yanez after Castile was pulled over.

Castile, a licensed firearm owner, informs Yanez he has a gun. "Okay," Yanez says. "Don't reach for it then. Don't pull it out."

"I'm not pulling it out," Castile responds. His girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds, also says, "He's not pulling it out."

"Don't pull it out!" Yanez yells again, drawing his gun, reaching through the driver-side window and opening fire.

Watch the video:

As the video shows, it takes a full six minutes after Castile is shot before he is removed from the car and receives medical attention. By then, it is far too late.

Until Tuesday, the only public video of the incident was a Facebook livestream taken by Reynolds shortly after the shooting, as Castile, a cafeteria worker at a St. Paul elementary school, bled out in the car.

Yanez was acquitted of manslaughter charges from Castile's death last week. He has been fired from the St. Anthony Police Department. As Reason's Robby Soave wrote last year, Castile's death for the lawful exercise of his Second Amendment rights should be shocking and outrageous to all Americans:

In Minnesota, citizens are allowed to carry firearms if they have a permit to do so. Castile was merely exercising his Second Amendment rights. His decision to inform the officer about his weapon was courteous, but not legally required. Permit holders in Minnesota do not need to tell cops that they are carrying firearms unless specifically asked.

It seems fairly clearly, then, that Castile is in some sense a Second Amendment martyr: He was killed by a police officer because he was exercising his rights. We know, of course, that these kinds of things are more likely to happen to black Americans, regardless of whether they were doing anything wrong.

Also watch ReasonTV on the impact of live video on the Castile case and the debate over police reform:

Comments

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

Jesus, there was a little kid in that car.

[Half-Virtue, Half-Vice]

File under: Reasons Why True Justice Is An Illusion

[Chipper Morning, Now #1]

Fuck. This nut punch straight up pancaked my testicles. This is so fucked. I have no words.

[Half-Virtue, Half-Vice]

Fuck them for releasing this after the court ruling.

[Juice]

Wait, so the jury never saw this?

[CE]

The jury saw it, but believed the cop.

[Dan S.]

Believed what, exactly? What was his explanation for why he fired?

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

Watching the video, one feels really bad for the officer. You could see how scared he was.

[Trainer]

This is sarcasm, right? I don't feel sorry for a cop who empties his gun into a guy in front of the guy's girl friend and her child because he's "nervous" and then continues to scream "fuck" because he knows he has done something very, very wrong. . There are only 3 people I feel sorry for in all of this and the cop ain't one.

[bit15]

This

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

Look, the police are afraid. Afraid of everything!

Welcome to Hit & Run

[Gene]

Ugh, lurk longer.

[mad.casual]

The lack of audio for the first 45 seconds is bizarre. Like if;

An officer says "I'm going to stop a car and check I.D.s. I have reason to pull it over, the two occupants just look like people that were involved in a robbery. The driver looks more like one of our suspects just 'cause of the wide-set nose." A minute and a half later, "shots fired" is said on the audio.

hadn't been captured independently on the police band, you'd think officer friendly was just doing his friendly duty reminding motorists that their brake lights are out. Rather than mistakenly identifying and then killing a civilian.

I suppose leaving the evidence of mistaken identity would hurt his chances at making detective.

[Calidissident]

I don't know if Castile being black had any impact on Yanez's decision to shoot him, and I think in general there is a tendency among the left to jump to conclusions and/or overly focus on race in these cases to the point that it crowds out discussions about other very relevant issues. That said, I think the stop was clearly an instance of racial profiling. Seriously, a wide-set nose is justification for a stop? They might as well have said he was a black male between 4'11" and 7 feet to reference that Dave Chappelle bit.

[Lhall]

Yanez saw photo(s) of the armed robbery suspect and thought Castile looked like that person. "Looking like" isn't something that can be easily expressed in words, and it was probably not limited to both Castile and the suspect having wide noses.

[mad.casual]

If you're given a photo of a bank robber and you shoot to death or just apprehend a man who was not a bank robber, you're out of the running for the Sherlock Holmes award. If your job is to secure the peace and you disrupt it, your abilities as an officer of the peace should be in serious question. If you job is to serve the community and dispense justice, shooting an innocent man to death should call you abilities into serious question.

This man is no elite crime fighter and his superiority to the average person walking the street with or without a gun is demonstrably absent.

[Lhall]

The city did terminate his employment as a police officer, and another city probably won't want him as a police officer either, after this. Police departments generally realize that officers need to have a cool head and quick thinking. Which Yanez didn't have.

I hope he won't get hired as a security guard either, for the same reason.

[mad.casual]

The city did terminate his employment as a police officer,

Again, this is bullshit. The City/Department didn't as much terminate as much as agreeably part ways with Yanez. At least, in the private sector, termination usually means "Please don't contact us. If, for some reason you need to, you have the number of our HR and legal departments." rather than "We offer retraining and relocation services." which is what the City/Department claims to be doing.

[Calidissident]

The quote doesn't exactly instill much confidence that this was a reasonably justified stop - "The two occupants just look like people that were involved in a robbery. The driver looks more like one of our suspects, just because of the wide-set nose. I couldn't get a good look at the passenger." Come on.

[mad.casual]

It was two men involved in the robbery and, on this point, I'm sympathetic to Yanez, Castile does superficially resemble one of the robbers. It's more of a height, weight, race, ballcap, dreadlocks match but still.

The finer point is the limbo that copsuckers like Lhall invariably in officers' favors. Either you stopped the guy to check his taillight (not a felony or requiring violence) or you thought he was an armed robber and didn't follow procedure. The fact that Yanez escalated it arbitrarily not once, but twice, demonstrates a consistent negligence, even if only for the law.

[Lhall]

Yanez followed procedure in stopping Castile. He called for backup (Kauser). There was a police officer on both sides of the car before the stop.

[Meerkatx]

No comment from the NRA, or the GOP or Trump or her Trumplers and even here there hasn't been a tonne of comments talking about how a black man died for exercising his 2nd amendment rights, while white men run around towns with guns and rifles attempting to instill fear into other citizens and LEO's.

Shame on the jury who found a murderer not guilty, and I hope the feds bring the hammer down on Yanez and shame on Americans for not caring about the fact black men and women are considered fair game to murder by American government workers and agencies.

[Agammamon]

FFS. Now you're getting all spastic because you can't pay attention?

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

White hispanic men.

[colorblindkid]

More white people are killed by cops, and none of their shooters have been found guilty either. Yes I know black people are 3X more likely to be shot by cops, but they're also 7X more likely to commit murder. This isn't even about individual officers. It is about police unions and their training policies.

[Lhall]

It is about police unions and their training policies.

And likely their screening policies.

Yanez had no complaints on his personnel record at the police dept. before this.

He doesn't seem to be cool-headed and self-assured enough in frightening situations, though.

It actually sounds a bit similar to the officer who shot Tamir Rice, who had left a previous police job under the threat of being fired, for not seeming stable enough.

[ThomasD]

Because we all know just how much Meerkatx, and the WaPo, and the NYT, et al. etc, etc. value the input of the NRA....

[ThomasD]

We should maybe also note that the ACLU was wholly unhelpful by claiming Castille was shot for being black, when what really got him shot was being legally armed.

Something they simply cannot abide, hence the lies of omission.

[Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting]

No comment from the NRA, or the GOP or Trump or her Trumplers and even here there hasn't been a tonne of comments talking about how a black man died for exercising his 2nd amendment rights, while white men run around towns with guns and rifles attempting to instill fear into other citizens and LEO's.

Save this SJW racial consciousness stupidity for the campus coffeehouse, shitlib.

[Chipper Morning, Now #1]

Sorry bud, I am gonna have to agree with Meerkatz here. The NRA and GOA leaderships are full of racists and copsuckers.

[hello.]

You're gonna have to agree with the SJW grievance monger? Well what a fucking astonishing turn of events!

[rudehost]

shame on Americans for not caring about the fact black men and women are considered fair game to murder by American government workers and agencies.

FIFY

I don't remember a lot of national outrage over this one.
http://reason.com/blog/2011/12.....ct-to-a-ch

[Half-Virtue, Half-Vice]

My god.... that cop is a FUCKING COWARD.

[Kivlor]

I'm not sure "coward" really covers it well enough. It's right. It just feels... too common to properly describe the revulsion I feel toward watching that.

I can't think of a better word for the life of me though.

[some guy]

I don't think there is a better word in English. Cowardice is pretty shameful, but this goes beyond that. It was an act of overwhelming cowardice. Yanez was literally overwhelmed by his cowardice and acted in a thoughtless panic. Just the kind of person you want on law enforcement...

[IceTrey]

That was exactly his defense.

[Kivlor]

Well... I could have done without watching that. Damn.

I think I see how a jury would've let the cop go. Castile was told not to reach for it. Probably reached for his wallet. Cop warned him again. He continued. Cop shot him repeatedly. A lot of people are going to consider that a lawful order being refused, by an armed man.

Sick. I don't think I could have let him go. But I suppose I'd have been screened out of the jury pool.

[mad.casual]

Sick. I don't think I could have let him go. But I suppose I'd have been screened out of the jury pool.

That has been my rationalization.

I absolutely loathe the fact that there's a presumption of 'duty to retreat' (or against stand your ground) for citizens (armed or not) but an officer advancing and sticking a gun *into the car* in order to *shoot the driver* with innocent civilians downrange is acceptable.

It's like ticketing people for having dogs on leashes who aren't well trained enough while letting police use K-9 units to tear people limb from limb.

[Trainer]

At one point near the end (not watching it again to get the time) the cop describes how what he was reaching for was wider than a wallet or something like that. Leads to believe it was a wallet but the "nervous" perceived it to be a gun. Perhaps is he wasn't so nervous his perception would have been a little better.

Where was the gun anyway? I don't think I ever remember reading where it was.

[Lhall]

Castile had the gun in one of his pockets. It was found after his death.

[IceTrey]

He wasn't pulling out the gun he was getting his wallet like everyone who has ever been stopped does. You can even hear him say "I wasn't".

[TW]

We were taught in Driver's Ed to have our license and proof of insurance out by the time the officer comes to your car. Basically you don't want to be reaching for anything when the officer is walking towards you.

[IceTrey]

I was taught keep your hands visble on the wheel.

[some guy]

I can't remember what I was taught in school, but Reason has taught me to keep my hands on the wheel, to communicate my intentions clearly and to move slowly and deliberately. If the situation seems to be escalating (in the officer's mind) all you can do is return to that neutral position of hands on the wheel and hope for the best.

[Kivlor]

I was taught to have ID and insurance ready before the cop gets to you. If you can't do it that fast, or can't find one of the 2, both hands go up on the wheel and you let the officer know. If there is a weapon in the vehicle, then you should notify the officer early on, and ask them if they would like you to get out of the car so they can retrieve it / disarm you, or what their preference is.

I turn my car off, and place the keys on the dashboard where they are visible, so the cop doesn't think I'm crazy enough to try to drive off. That wasn't taught, just an observation I decided on. Most cops have been very appreciative of that. There was one exception, a woman cop who had a chip on her shoulder and was looking for anything to cause trouble. I seriously thought she was going to shoot me. Only time I've actually feared for my life in a traffic stop. After the traffic stop, she followed me all the way to my house, and back to my office. Freaking psycho.

[RabbitHead]

Except he had already handed his ID/insurance card to Yanez earlier. I figured he was going for his CC permit.

I actually got pulled over by Yanez once. I figured it was him, since St Anthony doesnt have many Hispanic cops. Now that I have seen the video, I'm sure. "Rolling stop" at a four-way. I got off with a warning.

[Calidissident]

I don't think he handed him his ID, just his insurance.

[Trainer]

The video confirms this. I believe they both say that he was getting his ID. I know I don't keep my ID and proof of insurance in the same place. I can quickly reach for my insurance in my glove compartment but I have to search through my purse for my license.

That's the problem with negative commands- they don't tell you what to do. He wasn't reaching for his gun so when the cop yelled "don't reach for [the gun]" it made perfect sense to him to keep reaching since he wasn't reaching for the gun. Maybe training in how to give a clear positive command is in order instead of training with that psychopath who teaches cops how to get away with murder.

Last time I was pulled over, I had just gotten a new wallet and my license was stuck in the slot with the little window in it they have just for licenses and I couldn't get it out. After trying for a few minutes, the cop said, "Don't worry about it, just make sure you don't do it again" and walked off. There are benefits to looking like a grandmother.

[Lhall]

when the cop yelled "don't reach for [the gun]" it made perfect sense to him to keep reaching since he wasn't reaching for the gun.

Yes, except that Castile did know that Yanez thought he was reaching for his gun, because he said "I'm not reaching for it". But then he kept digging for his driver's license, while Yanez repeatedly said "don't reach for it". It sounds like Castile was quite out of it, and didn't realize that digging in his pocket would make Yanez think his life was in danger, and might shoot him because of that. He just didn't grasp that.

Nor did Yanez grasp, in those few seconds, that Castile might still be trying to produce his driver's license. He was fixated on Castile's gun.

[Trainer]

The issue is the negative command. "Don't do X" means you can do anything else at all. "put your hands on the steering wheel" or "Put your hands up" or any number of positive commands would have made a huge difference in this situation.

[dantheserene]

K-
Does the video show that the victim was in fact reaching for anything, or do we only have a murder's word for that?

[Trainer]

I think both of the people in the car mention that he was reaching for the wallet so, though we don't see him reaching in either video, we do know he was reaching.

[reasonator]

That cop puts on a convincing performance as Guy Who Knows He Just Ended His Career. More convincing than his performance as Cop In A State Where People Have Guns Sometimes.

[Jerryskids]

Just remember that as a good citizen you are required to put yourself in the cop's position where he doesn't know if the guy he's just pulled over is an axe-murderer, an escaped convict, hopped up on the reefers or merely a psycho and any random twitch can be interpreted as an attempt to detonate the suicide vest he's doubtlessly wearing. Shoot first and ask questions later is the only way your humble public servant can ensure he escapes any accidental encounter with a member of the public, all of whom are trying to kill him.

[Lhall]

The police can't afford to be too trusting, because traffic stops are dangerous and a patrol officer makes probably thousands of them every year.

[jp12533]

The problem with the video is that at no time can you see what is happening inside the vehicle. So we can only assume what actually took place leading up to the shooting. I do think this cop was probably too quick on the trigger but neither I nor anyone who watches this video will ever know what truly happened. Only two people can say with certainty what occurred; the driver and the cop. It is situations like this that make me believe all police officers should wear body cameras. Only then can we be 100% sure of how a situation unfolds.

[Crusty Juggler - Alpha]

The problem with the video is that at no time can you see what is happening inside the vehicle.

The only action that could have precipitated the officer's response was if Castile pulled out his pistol and pointed it at the police officer.

Additionally, that it took six minutes for medical care to be administered to a wounded man is beyond shameful.

[mad.casual]

The only action that could have precipitated the officer's response was if Castile pulled out his pistol and pointed it at the police officer.

There's no way anybody who carries a firearm on a daily basis hears someone calmly say, "I need to inform you that I'm carrying a firearm." and immediately proceeds to 'Condition Red' and/or drawing their own firearm.

[Crusty Juggler - Alpha]

There's no way anybody who carries a firearm on a daily basis hears someone calmly say, "I need to inform you that I'm carrying a firearm." and immediately proceeds to 'Condition Red' and/or drawing their own firearm.

YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT'S LIKE ON THE STREET, MAN! CIVILIANS ARE EVERYWHERE!

[IceTrey]

His gf was in the passenger seat and saw everything.

[jp12533]

Actually his girlfriend was the driver. Watch the video again. But either way she definitely saw the whole thing.

[IceTrey]

I think YOU need to watch it again.

[LoneWaco]

as I remember the story, the victim was the passenger.

[mad.casual]

He was originally, and mistakenly, reported as the passenger.

IANAL, but passengers aren't required to show license and registration and/or they can't forcibly act on people in the vehicle without the owner/operator's permission.

[Calidissident]

It makes absolutely no sense for Castile to have gone for the gun. He tells him he has a gun and then reaches for it immediately against the officer's command? And at the end of it all, the gun was still firmly in his pocket according to EMTs?

[Johnimo]

Why would ANYONE volunteer to the officer that "I have a gun." If you're carrying concealed, carry concealed and keep your mouth shut. And don't we ALL know that you keep your hands on the steering wheel or on the door of the car, through the open window?

I'm not trying to make excuses for this asshole officer, but SOMETHING went terribly amiss here. For god's sakes, I'm a white guy and I don't give the cops any reason to worry about where my hands are during a traffic stop. There's really no reason for cops to be stopping people for busted tail lights; just send them a ticket in the US Mail.

[Zeb]

In some states you are required to tell police if you are carrying. He was probably trying to play by the rules and do the right thing (which may have been naive on his part).

[IceTrey]

Not in Minnesota.

[some guy]

Still, it makes sense to tell the officer. Castille was (rightly) worried about how the officer would respond to discovering an unexpected gun in the car. He probably thought it would be best to get it in the open immediately rather than wait for the officer to discover it on his own. Castille just didn't realize Yanez was an overwhelming coward who thought Castille was a robbery suspect.

[Calidissident]

A lot of the time it's advised to disclose that to cops so they don't think you're hiding it if they see it or find it.

[Lhall]

Yanez stopped Castile because he resembled an armed robber seen on video a few days earlier. The taillight was a pretext.
Castile could probably have prevented his death by giving Yanez his permit to carry along with his driver's license and insurance card, keeping his hands in sight and letting the officer control the situation.
Yanez could have prevented Castile's death by telling him to put his hands on the steering wheel, which would have been standard police procedure once he was told Castile was armed. He didn't - he just kept saying "don't reach for it (the gun)". Castile said he wasn't reaching for the gun. He was apparently just reaching for his driver's license, but Yanez had no way of knowing that.
Yanez seems to have freaked out. He was already on edge because he thought Castile might be dangerous; then when Castile said he was armed, he got very alarmed and didn't think to tell him "put your hands on the steering wheel".
He shouldn't be sent to jail for freaking out, but he messed up badly enough as a police officer that he killed someone unnecessarily. He shouldn't be a police officer again, or have a gun. He doesn't have the cool head for it.

[some guy]

He shouldn't be sent to jail for freaking out, but he messed up badly enough as a police officer that he killed someone unnecessarily

If you or I "freaked out" and shot someone who, say, we encountered on our lawn, we'd go to jail for a few years for involuntary manslaughter. LEOs should be held to the same standard. In fact, they should probably be held to a higher standard since they actually have training on how to deal with these situations. Yanez was absolutely guilty of voluntary manslaughter and should be in prison.

[Zeb]

Yeah, that sounds like exactly what the charge of manslaughter is for.

[Lhall]

The classical involuntary-manslaughter case would be when someone drives while drunk, and they end up killing someone.

Or, someone is hunting and they aren't careful enough about where they shoot and they kill someone.

So they made a conscious decision to disregard sensible precautions. That's where the culpability comes in.

That doesn't seem to apply here. Yanez didn't do what he should have done - tell Castile clearly to put his hands on the steering wheel, rather than (confusingly) keep saying "don't reach for it".

But it wasn't a conscious choice. He seems to have forgotten his training because he was afraid.

If people start going to prison just because they forget their training when they're under stress or afraid, a lot of people would be in prison who don't belong there.

[Lhall]

Yanez was absolutely guilty of voluntary manslaughter

Why do you believe this? What the legal terms mean in practice is a matter for lawyers - and for juries, after careful instruction in the law. The jury spent a lot of time deliberately on exactly what "culpable negligence" and they decided this case didn't satisfy Minnesota's definition of second-degree manslaughter. Looking at the statute, I agree. Yanez had a reasonable fear for his life when he was told Castile had a gun and he saw Castile reaching towards his pocket. Especially since he thought Castile might be an armed robber.

And it's not equivalent to seeing some random person in your backyard and shooting them.

Yes, Yanez could have prevented being afraid for his life by giving the proper order, but he was freaked out and didn't. Is he supposed to go to jail for forgetting his training while he was scared? What purpose would that serve?

Some people have to be kept locked up because they're so dangerous that they can't be free. But Yanez doesn't seem like that. As long as he's not a police officer and not wielding a gun, he'd be unlikely to be dangerous.

[Calidissident]

His fear was not reasonable. He panicked upon hearing "gun." What kind of a cop killer calmly tells a cop he has a firearm before slowly pulling it on him?

[Lhall]

What kind of a cop killer calmly tells a cop he has a firearm before slowly pulling it on him?

Maybe they do. The police can't assume that it's safe just because the person said they have a gun. Traffic stops are dangerous for the officer - they're encountering some random person, who might be armed, and might have committed a crime and not want to be arrested. Yanez had both of those reasons to be afraid.

[some guy]

No, he didn't have any reason to be afraid. His fear was not reasonable at all. He made a bunch of unreasonable assumptions about Castille that led to an unreasonable conclusion.

That's why it's manslaughter. And the fact that two other people were in the car probably makes it reckless endangerment as well.

Maybe he doesn't deserve to be in prison for it. Maybe he just deserves parole and to go on one of those lists that keep you from possessing a firearm. I'd be okay with that too. But right now, justice was not served because Yanez can still own a firearm and can still get a job as a cop, even though he has clearly shown that he is mentally incapable of handling the responsibility of either. The only way to serve that justice would have been to convict him of the crime he committed: manslaughter.

[mad.casual]

I'm not trying to make excuses for this asshole officer, but SOMETHING went terribly amiss here. For god's sakes, I'm a white guy and I don't give the cops any reason to worry about where my hands are during a traffic stop. There's really no reason for cops to be stopping people for busted tail lights; just send them a ticket in the US Mail.

First, read up on the case. The officer didn't stop him for the tail lights... exactly. Police band radio matching licenses and timing record the officer as calling in Castile and his girlfriend as resembling a robbery suspects, he pulled them over specifically to check identites The functioning taillights are/were just an excuse.

Second, you're rather literally blaming the victim. Conflicting requests and expectations at the point of a gun produced the incidentally (usual) expected outcome; keep your hands on the wheel where I can see them and produce your license and insurance. I don't know about you, but Mrs. Casual and I keep the proof of insurance in the glovebox. She keeps it on bottom, I keep it on top. If I need to lock up a firearm when travelling, into the glovebox it goes. Rarely, if ever, is it coordinated such that producing proof of insurance can be achieved without touching the firearm. This is generally the reason for communicating that you have a firearm.

[Lhall]

Yanez didn't tell Castile to keep his hands on the wheel.
After Castile said he had a gun, Yanez said "don't reach for it (the gun)".
But Castile knew he was supposed to produce his driver's license. So he reached for that. And Yanez interpreted that as, he was reaching for his gun.
Yanez said a couple times more "don't reach for it". Castile said "I'm not reaching for it (the gun)" and continued fishing for his driver's license. So Yanez shot him.
It was a tragic misunderstanding on both sides, and it could have been avoided by Yanez clearly telling Castile to put his hands on the steering wheel.
It doesn't make Yanez a criminal, but it does suggest that he isn't suited to police the streets.

[mad.casual]

It was a tragic misunderstanding on both sides, and it could have been avoided by Yanez clearly telling Castile to put his hands on the steering wheel.
It doesn't make Yanez a criminal,

Yes, it does. He was acquitted of having committed the crime.

Cop or not, bank robber or not, if a misunderstanding occurs and someone winds up dead as a direct result, that's a crime. Full stop.

[Bill]

It tells me the coward is suited for a few years in jail.

[mad.casual]

Third, I'm not entirely sure you carry concealed or keep up with policing around here. Carry concealed certainly means not waiving the gun around and/or not telling every grocery and bank clerk you're strapped. However, if someone who is within their rights to know if you're armed asks or if simply providing the information could reasonably (or ideally) defuse rather than escalate the situation, you provide the information. Point being, it's concealed *carry* not *concealed* carry. Further, not providing the information to police just makes sure that you get the nickel ride instead of seven to the chest and, in the hearing into your wrongful death, police get exonerated because you were carrying a weapon you didn't disclose.

[x'); DROP USER Tony;]

"The problem with the video is that at no time can you see what is happening inside the vehicle. So we can only assume what actually took place leading up to the shooting."

According to the police officer's testimony, he freaked the fuck out because Castile's hand on the wheel obscured his other hand. So he shot the motherfucker 7 times.

The cop's own testimony tells the story of a murdering coward.

[IceTrey]

What a copsucking jury.

[Calidissident]

Some of these cases, like this one, the Walter Scott trial (not an acquittal, but a mistrial in what should have be an extremely obvious guilty verdict), and the Kelly Thomas case really illustrate how the problem goes beyond cops and prosecutors, etc.

A large number of people will defend almost any action by a cop. Even egregious cases will get defended as long as there is the thinnest of fig leafs available.

[some guy]

Cops just aren't held to the same standard. The badge is basically a get out of jail free card. A century of public sector unions owning politicians and the media will have that effect on things.

[Troy muy grande boner]

The way pigs get to kill people, you'd think we are in banana republic or something

[IceTrey]

Don't forget about the dogs.

[TW]

In Minnesota, citizens are allowed to carry firearms if they have a permit to do so. Castile was merely exercising his Second Amendment rights.

If he was under the influence of a controlled substance (like marijuana), it was actually illegal for him to be in possession of firearm at that time. At which point you lose your permit to carry and can't reapply for a year.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=624.7142

[Zeb]

That's nice.

[Don'tBlameMe]

Minnesota and other states may want to revisit this statute. According to the government's definition of a controlled substance, hormone replacement therapy, painkillers, and ADHD meds are all examples of class B controlled substances. These are commonly prescribed drugs from doctors for valid medical conditions. There are probably a lot of people out there who should not be carrying a gun.

[bevis the lumberjack]

"If he was under the influence of a controlled substance (like marijuana), it was actually illegal for him to be in possession of firearm at that time."

As far as I'm aware there is zero evidence that he was under the influence of anything, other than the claim by the shooter that he detected a "slight" smell of marijuana. I'm sure that he didn't claim that as part of the effort to save his own ass, right?

[fizepec]

??????OMake 7500 bucks every month? Start doing online computer-based work through our website. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don't have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use this website.?.??????? ?????____BIG.....EARN....MONEY___???????-

[daskins]

Murder, plain and simple...

[Somebody else]

Why doesn't the other officer arrest the guy who just unloaded his gun into a car full of people who posed no threat? If there is a man running around shooting people, shouldn't an officer at least try to get the gun away from the shooter?

[ToCa81]

Absolutely disgusting. This piece of shit should be rotting in a cell. And as others have said, if the NRA wasn't a complete joke of an organization, they would be up in arms over this murder of a legally armed citizen.

[Harry Jones]

Be honest, no matter what the NRA does you hate them.

[ToCa81]

Not sure why you would assume that. I was actually pretty indifferent to them before this. I own a gun, but don't feel the need to join a little fan club about it. Don't really see the point anyway when said club locks their doors and closes their shutters when an issue that speaks directly to their cause pops up.

[Ankah]

I guess we will never know if it would have been different if he was victim was white, but I have a feeling if it was a good ol' boy with a sleeveless shirt and a baseball cap on a pick up truck the end would be the same.

Piss poor selection of a police officer, even worse training. At no time did he try to
"regain" (he thought he lost it) control of the situation.

My problem is not with him, because honestly, he may believe he was doing the right thing, what he was trained to do. My issue here is with the POS prosecutor that from the start fumbled this, by allowing the whole THC defense to stand.

[creech]

The local tv news last night showed cops in some burg in New Jersey holding guns on a doctor (a white man) who could clearly be seen holding a pistol. No shots fired, doctor eventually compiled with requests to put down the gun.
I really hesitate to guess what would have been the outcome if the gun wielder wasn't a white man in a doctor's coat and instead a black man in a say, UPS uniform.

[BestUsedCarSales]

Do we have any examples of a cop killing a civilian and actually getting convicted?

Also, really manslaughter was what they called that.

[Cyto]

Disturbing doesn't begin to cover it. I'd love to hear the jury's reasoning on this one. If you can just say "don't reach for it" and win the he-said / she-said over two people saying he's not at the same time, there's got to be something interesting to the story.

How in the world did they watch that and go "well, it seems like he exercised due caution and responded to a dangerous situation in a reasonable manner"?

Let's just presume that he indeed saw someone who just said he had a concealed carry license pulling out the gun they just told him they had. Go ahead and make that leap..... then what? How do you get from there to "the only reasonable thing to do is poke my gun into the window and shoot him from as close up as I can get"?

If he really thought the guy was the kind of weirdo who announces that he has a concealed carry permit before pulling out his gun and going on a killing spree, W\wouldn't the prudent response be to quickly back away to a position of cover and pull your weapon? Why leave so little margin for error? If the guy is a weirdo killer of that sort, couldn't you assume that the girl was just as weird and likely to blow you away while you were focused on the driver? Better to get clear and get to cover before making any decisions about shooting a guy who has yet to draw a weapon, let alone point it at anyone.

The fact that nobody in the chain of command thinks this is reasonable is what is disturbing.

[IceTrey]

Not to mention he had to have seen there was a kid in the car.

[Lhall]

Castile didn't tell Yanez he had a concealed carry permit. He just said he had a gun on him, as he was reaching for his license in his pocket.
Yanez said "don't reach for it". Castile said he wasn't reaching for it, not understanding that he needed to PROVE he wasn't reaching for it, by freezing or putting his hands on the steering wheel. And he continued to try to dig out his driver's license. So Yanez shot him.
Once a driver tells the police officer that they have a gun, standard police procedure would be to tell them to put their hands on the steering wheel. That reassures the officer that the driver isn't going to shoot anyone. Then, ask where the gun is.
This was especially important in this case, because Yanez thought Castile might have been involved in an armed robbery that happened a few days beforehand.
Yanez seems to have freaked out. He was already on edge because he thought Castile might be dangerous; then when Castile said he was armed, he got very alarmed and didn't think to tell him "put your hands on the steering wheel".
He shouldn't be sent to jail for freaking out, but he messed up badly enough as a police officer that he killed someone unnecessarily. He shouldn't be a police officer again, or have a gun. He doesn't have the cool head for it.

[mad.casual]

He shouldn't be sent to jail for freaking out, but he messed up badly enough as a police officer that he killed someone unnecessarily.

Bullshit. If these were two guys at a gun show, one asking the other to see his shiny new concealed carry permit, confusion ensued, and the other ended up dead; hard time for involuntary manslaughter would most certainly be on the table. Especially if he shot the guy with his girlfriend right behind him and his/her kid next to him.

[Lhall]

Maybe so, but what does that have to do with Yanez' case?

[mad.casual]

Maybe so, but what does that have to do with Yanez' case?

Well, your statement is highly subjective and largely unqualified (which only lends to its incredulity/nonsense), but several things;

Even in a situation where the shooting is wholly justified self-defense people are routinely jailed and then released. Moreover, people less trained to handle/prevent 'freaking out' get sent to jail for doing so all the time. Even without having killed anyone. Hell, I bet Yanez has sent people to jail for 'freaking out' and not killing anyone, people who are or were more justified in freaking out.

Obviously, the dust has/had settled and, technically, the law observed. However, from a libertarian perspective, the only way to really or totally avoid the notion of impropriety (it's not clear that you meant this by your statement) would be to convict and jail him.

My understanding is that the PD is assisting in Yanez' career transition. I hardly believe that a private company would do similarly and that the transition assistance is being done on the officers' dime or with union funds.

[Lhall]

If other people get sent to prison when they killed someone because they had a reasonable fear for their own life - would that make it OK to do that to Yanez?

That seems like an injustice - does one injustice excuse another?

[some guy]

Yanez's fear was completely unreasonable. He made a bunch of unreasonable assumptions that led to an unreasonable conclusion. That was all on him.

So how do you propose to prevent Yanez from owning a gun or becoming a cop again without convicting him of something?

[Lhall]

>He made a bunch of unreasonable assumptions that led to an unreasonable conclusion.

Read the statement he gave after the shooting. He sounds quite reasonably afraid for his life. It's in the criminal complaint against him, and I also posted it below.

>how do you propose to prevent Yanez from owning a gun or becoming a cop again without convicting him of something?

He's unlikely to be hired by another police department after this. He can't be prevented from seeking a job as a security guard, although maybe people would be reluctant to give him such a job.

But, are we to put people in prison just so they won't seek a job as a security guard, or be able to buy a gun?

Maybe people like him shouldn't be allowed to own guns.

Ironically, he sounds like he's too sensitive for the job of police officer. Too reactive. Hopefully he has enough insight to realize that.

[mad.casual]

That seems like an injustice - does one injustice excuse another?

It only seems like an injustice if you ignore data and information selectively. Also, again, you haven't exactly clarified your statement regarding 'sent to jail'. It's not at all unreasonable for freaking out alone for someone to go to jail and then be released on their own recognizance. It's not at all unreasonable for someone to go to jail for freaking out and wind up being held until their court date. Yanez killed someone and did and will do less than Melodi Dushane

If you said Yanez was trained by the state at taxpayer's expense and failed to use that training properly and *that's* the injustice, or contributed to it, then no. Treating Yanez worse than you would treat a civilian is not exactly or really disparate or an injustice.

The only way you categorically say Yanez should not have gone to jail under any circumstance is if you value human life less than property, have a hard on for people in uniform, or both.

[Lhall]

The only way you categorically say Yanez should not have gone to jail under any circumstance is if you value human life less than property, have a hard on for people in uniform, or both.

How would it be valuing human life to send Yanez to prison?

It wouldn't be valuing his life, for sure.

And Castile is dead. If sending Yanez to prison could bring Castile back to life, I'd be all for it. But it can't do that.

The USA imprisons far too many of its people. Our culture has very punitive attitudes.

You seem to feel you're a libertarian. But imprisoning people who say the wrong thing when they have only seconds to think (as Yanez did) - isn't advocating for liberty. It's advocating for an even harsher criminal justice system.

[Kivlor]

The problem with your analogy is that it removes the whole part about stopping him because due to looking like the suspect / car involved in an armed robbery. That does change the situation drastically. Adding to that, when the cop walked up to talk to him, he says he's got a gun. Which makes the cop naturally more on edge.

Still, overreaction and unacceptable panic on the part of the officer. But I would wager those circumstances, plus being told "don't reach for it" repeatedly on video influenced the jury's decision.

Castile should have immediately placed both hands on the wheel to diffuse the situation. Yanez shouldn't have panicked and started shooting. It's a shit situation.

[mad.casual]

The problem with your analogy is that it removes the whole part about stopping him because due to looking like the suspect / car involved in an armed robbery.

Grr...
Is there a dead person? Yes.
Did Yanez cause their death? Unquestionably.
Did he do it on purpose? No.

There is no rider about motive with regard to involuntary manslaughter (that would defeat the purpose of defining it as *involuntary*. There may be a question or mitigation about him credibly believing his life was in danger but the crime and analogous ones, criminal negligence, reckless endangerment/homicide, etc. clearly, and intentionally, define intent as being immaterial in the cause of death.

In my example, it doesn't matter if one guy or the other just wanted to fuck with the other, thought they were sleeping with the other's wife, owed each other money, etc. I mean, what you're suggesting is, "I thought he had stolen my gun, but I was mistaken." would be an acceptable defense.

He was on trial for christsakes, do you think he should've been brought up on charges without the chance of being convicted and sentenced? How is that substantially different than just granting him some manner of police immunity?

[Lhall]

There may be a question or mitigation about him credibly believing his life was in danger

Of course there is. Kivlor made good points, I don't see that you rebutted them.

do you think he should've been brought up on charges without the chance of being convicted and sentenced?

I've wondered if he was charged because the prosecutor wanted it to look like they were doing their best, even if they didn't think they had a winnable case. They know the shooting of an innocent black man will enrage people, and if they didn't charge Yanez people would blame them.

[mad.casual]

I should've realized sooner that you're a fucking copsucker.

If it it was a case of mistaken identity and/or a 'freak out', the Zimmerman should've skated and Wafer shouldn't even have come close to a felony murder conviction. Instead, we have plain evidence of the facts that a crime was committed by the clearest definition the law can provide and that a conviction wasn't to be had because of a friendly court system and a public who's been whipped into sympathy thereby.

[Lhall]

we have plain evidence of the facts that a crime was committed by the clearest definition the law can provide

That's your interpretation of the law. Amateur legal opinions don't mean anything. They run the gamut. You could find lots of people opining that Yanez did absolutely nothing wrong, from a legal standpoint.

And what laws mean is defined partly by legal decisions, such as this one.

You want him in prison, for whatever reason. Too many people are in prison already. The USA imprisons a large proportion of its population, compared to many other countries. People in the USA tend to have very punitive attitudes.

[Trainer]

Isn't "mess[ing] up badly enough...that he killed someone unnecessarily" kind of the definition of a crime? Being a police officer has nothing to do with it.

[mad.casual]

If he really thought the guy was the kind of weirdo who announces that he has a concealed carry permit before pulling out his gun and going on a killing spree, W\wouldn't the prudent response be to quickly back away to a position of cover and pull your weapon? Why leave so little margin for error? If the guy is a weirdo killer of that sort, couldn't you assume that the girl was just as weird and likely to blow you away while you were focused on the driver? Better to get clear and get to cover before making any decisions about shooting a guy who has yet to draw a weapon, let alone point it at anyone.

The fact that nobody in the chain of command thinks this is reasonable is what is disturbing.

^This^

The 20 foot rule demonstrably shows that it's impossible to outdraw someone, even if they're a runner with a knife. The apparent police policy response is to use more force, move forward, and draw fasterer. I can only assume police use these domineering and para-military tactics lopsidedly as they would decidedly lose in some manner of actual or protracted battle.

I mean, Christ, IDK what the officer was carrying but if you thought driver and passenger were a danger, putting 7 in the driver point blank doesn't necessarily leave lots of room for error in handling the passenger.

[Lhall]

Castile didn't say he had a concealed carry permit.

[mad.casual]

7 bullets to the chest, point blank, is an execution.

[marciacasey4545]

I found a great site that focuses on stay at home mom's complete guide to gaining a serious amount of money in very little time. While being able to earn an passive income staying home with your kids. If you are someone who needs more money and has some spare time, this site is perfect for you. Take a look at...

follow this link?..????????????

Trump"s New Opprunuties See Here

[Lhall]

Once a driver tells the police officer that they have a gun, standard police procedure would be to tell them to put their hands on the steering wheel. That reassures the officer that the driver isn't going to shoot anyone. Then, ask where the gun is.
This was especially important in this case, because Yanez thought Castile might have been involved in an armed robbery that happened a few days beforehand.
But what actually happened was that Yanez asked Castile for his driver's license and insurance card. Castile gave him the insurance card. His license was in his pocket. So he reached for his pocket. He also informed Castile that he had a gun.
But Yanez didn't tell Castile to put his hands on the steering wheel. Instead, he gave the confusing command "don't reach for it (the gun)". Castile said he wasn't reaching for it, not understanding that he needed to PROVE he wasn't reaching for it, by freezing or putting his hands on the steering wheel. And he continued to try to dig out his driver's license. So Yanez shot him.
Yanez seems to have freaked out. He was already on edge because he thought Castile might be dangerous; then when Castile said he was armed, he got very alarmed and didn't think to tell him "put your hands on the steering wheel".
He shouldn't be sent to jail for freaking out, but he messed up badly enough as a police officer that he killed someone unnecessarily. He shouldn't be a police officer again, or have a gun. He doesn't have the cool head for it.

[Zeb]

He shouldn't be sent to jail for freaking out

Why not? Seems like exactly the kind of reckless and negligent behavior that defines manslaughter.

[mad.casual]

Even if you ignore the involuntary manslaughter, this kinda suggests that 7 shots to the chest is the proper way to apprehend an armed robber (who didn't shoot anyone) and bring him to justice.

In the larger sense or consideration; one man is dead, an officer has lost his job, and the convenience store robbery is still unsolved.

[Lhall]

How was it reckless or negligent? Yanez was reasonably afraid for his life, when Castile was moving his hand towards his pocket.

Negligence suggests courting danger by being careless. He wasn't being careless when he didn't tell Castile to put his hands on the steering wheel - he seems like he was panicked. It seems like he just didn't remember his training at a crucial moment.

As for recklessness - he's allowed to fire when he's afraid for his life.

The classical involuntary-manslaughter case would be when someone drives while drunk, and they end up killing someone.

Or, someone is hunting and they aren't careful enough about where they shoot and they kill someone.

So they made a conscious decision to disregard sensible precautions. That's where the culpability comes in.

That doesn't seem to apply here. Yanez didn't do what he should have done - tell Castile clearly to put his hands on the steering wheel, rather than (confusingly) keep saying "don't reach for it". But it wasn't a conscious choice.

If people start going to prison just because they forget their training when they're under stress or afraid, a lot of people would be in prison who don't belong there.

[mad.casual]

How was it reckless or negligent?

See above. Within 20 ft. if you haven't drawn your gun by the time you perceive a threat, the priority should be to retreat, not 'engage and draw faster'. This is per the FBI's recommendation. Moreover, it's not exactly clear that he handled pulling over a robber he believed to be armed and dangerous properly. Normally, you wouldn't present a full sight picture in the side window of an armed threat.

If people start going to prison just because they forget their training when they're under stress or afraid, a lot of people would be in prison who don't belong there.

Fuck you and your false equivocation, especially after trying to call me out on mine above. Not observing your training and not observing your training and killing someone are not the same thing. A drunk driver who kills someone is guilty of involuntary manslaughter, it doesn't matter whether he feared for his life or actually remembered his training. The facts are that he killed someone whom he didn't intend to.

[Lhall]

>Within 20 ft. if you haven't drawn your gun by the time you perceive a threat, the priority should be to retreat, not 'engage and draw faster'.

Possibly. Having lots of time to think about it in safety, it's easy to fault Yanez for what he did. But Yanez had only seconds to react, and was in fear for his life.

[SomeGuy]

you have some serious warped perception on reasonably afraid. Does that mean I can be reasonably afraid every time i see a cop with a gun?

dont tell me double standards bullshit because there isn't any. If there was it would be in the citizens favor.

[Lhall]

Does that mean I can be reasonably afraid every time i see a cop with a gun?

No.

A lot of people might have been shot if
a) the officer already thought they might be an armed robber
b) they have a gun, the officer doesn't know where it is,
c) they're digging in their pocket and they keep digging, while the officer repeatedly and more and more emphatically tells them not to pull out their gun. It looks VERY bad.
d) the officer didn't know they had a permit to carry.

Castile apparently told Yanez he had a gun as he was reaching for his pocket. Yanez had only seconds to react to this, and he couldn't see exactly what Castile was doing.

What Yanez did wasn't the best possible. We can, with lots of time to think about it, say what he should have done better. He didn't think fast enough or clearly enough.

But he doesn't belong in prison for that.

[SomeGuy]

jesus your dishonest...no surprised a cop cock sucker is dishonest. The officer said dont reach for gun and grab ID. He did exactly that.

If i see an officer touch his weapon He is fair game for me to shoot him with your logic. Officers are supposed to held to a higher standard not a lower standard you twit. Why would you hold them to a lower standard? You wouldnt; it defies basic logic.

[steve walsh]

You know who else is responsible for Castile's death? The people or person that put this ill-trained, incompetent cop on the job, that's who.

And, yet, our justice system finds no one responsible.

[Necron 99]

Oh he was trained, he was trained to be a "Bulletproof Warrior" and act before you think.

http://www.startribune.com/off.....386717431/

[Lhall]

Absolutely. If someone is culpable here - consciously chose to be careless about their job - it would be more like the police dept. for not training their people right, or not choosing them right.

And there are many ways this might be prevented in the future.

Equipping the police with tasers, for example. I read that tasers require special training, though. Blowing people away with a gun is apparently simpler. It's very sad if people have to die because police departments can't afford to train their people to use tasers.
Good gun control would also help, though it won't be very popular on this site. This wouldn't have happened in Germany, which has good gun control. The police would be less nervous if traffic stops were less dangerous.

[SomeGuy]

your the definition of a statist idiot who can't simply blame the murder for his own actions.

[Lhall]

Yanez' statement shows an officer who's doing the best he can in a situation that happened in a very short time.

A lot of people might have been shot if
a) the officer already thought they might be an armed robber
b) they have a gun, the officer doesn't know where it is,
c) they're digging in their pocket and they keep digging, while the officer repeatedly and more and more emphatically tells them not to pull out their gun. It looks VERY bad.
d) the officer didn't know they had a permit to carry.

Castile apparently told Yanez he had a gun as he was reaching for his pocket. Yanez had only seconds to react to this, and he couldn't see exactly what Castile was doing.

What Yanez did wasn't the best possible. We can, with lots of time to think about it, say what he should have done better. He didn't think fast enough or clearly enough.

But he doesn't belong in prison for that.

[SomeGuy]

your stance has been refuted by multiple members and it doesnt follow natural law or basic logic...jesus

[Bubba Jones]

When pulled over, I have my wallet out and my hands visible before the cop gets there.

Wtf was he doing that could have been mistaken for digging for a gun?

The problem for the jury is that it is too easy to imagine he had his hand in his pocket and was not complying with the cop's request to stop whatever the hell he was doing.

I find that a lot of people have trouble following simple instructions.

[mad.casual]

I find that a lot of people have trouble following simple instructions.

I find that if I answer peoples' questions literally rather than interpreting their intent it aggravates them. Especially authority figures. So, if I'm to keep my hands on the wheel, as you suggest, and the officer asks, "Do you have a license and registration?" I'm just supposed to answer "Yes." without removing my hands from the wheel.

If you want me to keep my hands on the wheel and retrieve my license and registration, you've non-verbally suggested conflicting actions.

Not that I've never been through a traffic stop, but the fault clearly lies with the guy who assumed he'd just pulled over John Dillinger.

[Lhall]

The problem for the jury is that it is too easy to imagine he had his hand in his pocket and was not complying with the cop's request to stop whatever the hell he was doing.

It's easy to see why Yanez thought he might be pulling out a firearm.

With the extra knowledge that we and the jury had, it doesn't sound like he was actually pulling out a gun.

But that's irrelevant for the manslaughter charge. What was relevant for the jury, was what Yanez knew at the time, and whether he had good reason to be afraid for his life.

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

...and it became abundantly clear that he did not have good reason to be afraid for his life. Reaching for one's wallet, which is what the vast majority of men do when stopped by the police, is not a valid reason, especially after he issued the directive to give him his license. Declaring that you have a legal gun in the vehicle is precisely the correct protocol. There was quite literally nothing that Castile should have been expected to do differently. If it was a simple misunderstanding, then why aren't there hundreds or even thousands of shootings a day?

[Lhall]

Actually, when someone who is carrying a concealed weapon is stopped by police, they're taught to give the officer their permit to carry along with their driver's license and insurance card.
Then, put their hands on the steering wheel, tell the officer where their gun is if asked, and wait for instructions - keep their hands in sight unless the officer asks them to get something.
So there's quite a lot that Castile did wrong.
He didn't give Yanez his permit to carry before telling him about the gun.
He didn't tell Yanez he had a permit to carry.
He didn't put his hands on the steering wheel after he told Yanez about the gun.
Yanez also made a mistake - once Castile told him about the gun, he should have told Castile to put his hands on the steering wheel.
Having made that mistake, Yanez was quite reasonably afraid for his life. Read his statement about what happened. It's in the criminal complaint against him, and I also posted it on this page.

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

He wasn't allowed to get to step 1 -- how could he have done wrong? Are you seriously suggesting that Castile's fundamental mistake was telling the officer he had a gun?

[SomeGuy]

The problem is he gave 2 instructions. Give me your wallet and dont touch the weapon. He followed both orders and the cop murders him. Plain and simple. The man did nothing wrong and the cop is a murdering pussy POS.

[Lhall]

Perhaps the takehome message from this case is not so much "driving while black is dangerous" or "black people can't carry firearms", but rather, "if you carry a firearm, learn ahead of time how to handle encounters with police. Because the police aren't perfect".
Castile would probably be alive if he'd given the police his permit to carry along with his driver's license and insurance card, and kept his hands on the steering wheel until told to do otherwise.
Maybe Yanez did have bias against black people that made him more afraid, so that he shot Castile rather than waiting for him to fish out his driver's license. But that's part of "the police aren't perfect".

[ToCa81]

"Police aren't perfect."

I hear you man. They're always getting up to zany hijinks like panty raids and the murder of innocent civilians. Boys will be boys right? At least we all know now that it is the citizen's responsibility to be properly trained for these scenarios. Glad we cleared up the confusion.

[Lhall]

At least we all know now that it is the citizen's responsibility to be properly trained for these scenarios.

Whose responsibility it is, isn't the question. Yanez did mishandle the situation. He should have told Castile to put his hands on the steering wheel. Instead, he gave a confusing order, "don't reach for it", while Castile was reaching for his driver's license. Castile said he wasn't reaching for it, not understanding that Yanez couldn't simply take his word for something like that. And he continued to fish for his driver's license. So Yanez shot him, thinking he had his hand on a gun.

But again, the police aren't perfect, and people who carry concealed weapons need to know how to survive a traffic stop even if the officer does make a mistake. And even if the officer thinks they might be an armed robber.

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

Yanez gave the direct order to give him his license and registration. Was he supposed to say no?

Castile handled the situation EXACTLY as he was supposed to. He calmly declared that there was a firearm and that it was legal, and proceeded to follow the officer's instructions.

[Lhall]

Actually, when someone who is carrying a concealed weapon is stopped by police, they're taught to give the officer their permit to carry along with their driver's license and insurance card.
Then, put their hands on the steering wheel, tell the officer where their gun is if asked, and wait for instructions - keep their hands in sight unless the officer asks them to get something.
So there's quite a lot that Castile did wrong.
He didn't give Yanez his permit to carry before telling him about the gun.
He didn't tell Yanez he had a permit to carry.
He didn't put his hands on the steering wheel after he told Yanez about the gun.
Yanez also made a mistake - once Castile told him about the gun, he should have told Castile to put his hands on the steering wheel.
Having made that mistake, Yanez was quite reasonably afraid for his life. Read his statement about what happened. It's in the criminal complaint against him, and I also posted it on this page.

[Lhall]

PS It's similar to rape prevention for women. Teaching women rape prevention strategies doesn't imply that rape is not a crime or that it's a woman's fault if she gets raped.

Similarly, lessons can be learned from these police shootings, about how to not get shot. And that useful lesson may get lost in all the talk about racial discrimination or how bad the police are or how juries should be more willing to convict them. Especially since those other things are important issues that people have strong opinions about.

Also, there are other questions that matter, may get lost among the hot-button issues. For example, why are toy guns sold that look a lot like real guns? That's how Tamir Rice got killed. He was playing with a toy gun and someone who didn't know him saw him. He was a big black kid - 5'7" and 200 pounds and only 12 years old. And the police drove up and fatally shot him because they thought he was an active shooter and was reaching for his weapon.

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

And what lesson is to be learned from this shooting? You've said that Castille's made two mistakes: 1) not putting his hands on the steering wheel even though the cop specifically asked him to reach for his license and registration; 2) informing the cop that he had a gun instead of keeping it secret. So the lesson here is that we should withhold information from police and not do what they ask?

Castille literally did nothing wrong or unreasonable. The fault is entirely on the police officer. Did Yanez intend to kill someone that day? No. Was his inability to perform the duties of the job enough to land him in jail? I would argue no (but that's only because I don't believe that involuntary manslaughter should be met with imprisonment). But it's absolutely absurd to suggest that Castille shared any culpability whatsoever.

[Trainer]

"Castile would probably be alive if he'd given the police his permit to carry along with his driver's license..."

Um...the problem is Castile never got to his drivers license because the officer shot him while reaching for his wallet and we can only assume that his permit was in the same spot as his license- his wallet. And he was reaching for his wallet when the officer shot him so he never had the opportunity to reach for his...Oh,never mind.

[Lhall]

Yanez' statement after the shooting gives a good idea of what was going through his head:

"He [Castile] was sitting in the car, seat belted. I told him, can I see your license. And then, he told me
he had a firearm. I told him not to reach for it and (sigh) when he went down to grab, I told him not to
reach for it (clears throat) and then he kept it right there, and I told him to take his hands off of it, and
then he (sigh) he had his, his grip a lot wider than a wallet."

"And I don't know where the gun was, he didn't tell me where the fucking gun was and then it was just
getting hinky, he gave, he was just staring straight ahead, and then I was getting fucking nervous, and
then I told him, I know I fucking told him to got his fucking hand off his gun."

Yanez said that Castile "kept his hands in view" up until the point at which he asked for Castile's license and insurance. After receipt of his proof of insurance, Yanez said Castile told him that he had a firearm at the same time that "he reached" down between his right leg, his right thigh area and the center console," Yanez said that, as Castile was reaching down to his right, " he turned his shoulder, kept his left hand on the steering wheel and then canted his upper body and blocked my view of his right hand,"

(cont.)

[Lhall]

Yanez said:
"And, at that point I, was scared and I was, in fear for my life and my partner's life. And for the little
girl in the back and the front seat passenger and he dropped his hand down and, can't remember what I
was telling him but I was telling something as his hand went down I think. And, he put his hand around
something. And his hand made like a C shape type um type shape and it appeared to me that he was
wrapping something around his fingers and almost like if I were to put my uh hand around my gun like
putting my hand up to the butt of the gun ...
And then I lost view of it. Cuz he kept canting his shoulder and then I believe I told him again I can't
remember don't do it. And then he still kept moving his hand and at this point I looked and saw
something in his hand. It was dark inside the vehicle. I was trying to fumble my way through under
stress to look and see what it was to make sure uh what I was seeing. But I wasn't given enough time
and like I said he had no regard for what I was saying. Didn't follow my direction. And, uh he started
reaching out and then pulling uh away from his uh his right thigh. I don't know if it was in his pocket or
in between the seats or the center console. But I, I know he had an object and it was dark. And he was
pulling it out with his right hand. And as he was pulling it out I, a million things started going through
my head, And I thought 1 was gonna die.

(cont.)

[Lhall]

And, I was scared because, I didn't know if he was gonna, I didn't know what he was gonna do. He just had something uh his hands and he, the first words that he said to me were, some of the first words he said is that he had a gun. And I thought he was reaching for the gun. I thought he had the gun in his hand, in his right hand. And I thought he had it enough to where till he had to do is just pull it out, point it at me, move his trigger finger down on the trigger and let off rounds. And I had no other option than, to take out my firearm and, and I shot. Urn I shot him.I don't remember the first couple shots, I, believe I remember the last two shots, And I believe one of the shots went into his left arm. Um, as I was shooting uh I, I kept watching him. And, I, I remember smelling the gun smoke and the bright flashes from the muzzle. And then I heard, a couple pops uh from my firearm. Um and then my partner was on the opposite side of the vehicle, Uh watch, looking in and I directed my
gunfire down as best as I could. Away from, not trying to put the little girl's life in jeopardy or the passenger or my partner because they were, in the line of my fire.

So that was what it looked like from Yanez' point of view, unless you believe he was lying. He was afraid for his life and he thought Castile was actually holding a gun, so he shot him.

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

Wrong career choice for a chickenshit with poor vision.

[mad.casual]

He was afraid for his life and he thought Castile was actually holding a gun, so he shot him.

"I was drunk and didn't mean to hit the pedestrian, but I feared for my life..."

Maybe somebody found you at a dinner party and tried to kill you, compelling you to jump in a car while drunk. You shouldn't serve the same amount of time as the local wino who stumbled out of the bar at 3 a.m. and hit the paperboy but it doesn't change the fact that you killed someone without intent.

As I point out above, even if you set aside the manslaughter charges. You (the royal you) have a dead/executed civilian, a terminated officer, (a rightfully outraged public,) and a *still* unsolved convenience store robbery. Clearly, something is being done wrong (and terminating Yanez doesn't fix it).

[Lhall]

Yanez' statement shows an officer who's doing the best he can in a situation that happened in a very short time.

A lot of people might have been shot if
a) the officer already thought they might be an armed robber
b) they have a gun, the officer doesn't know where it is,
c) they're digging in their pocket and they keep digging, while the officer repeatedly and more and more emphatically tells them not to pull out their gun. It looks VERY bad.
d) the officer didn't know they had a permit to carry.

Castile apparently told Yanez he had a gun as he was reaching for his pocket. Yanez had only seconds to react to this, and he couldn't see exactly what Castile was doing.

What Yanez did wasn't the best possible. We can, with lots of time to think about it, say what he should have done better. He didn't think fast enough or clearly enough.

But he doesn't belong in prison for that.

If officers start being sentenced to prison because they don't think fast or clearly enough when they're in danger of their lives, it would be an injustice and it would cause them even more anxiety about their traffic stops - and very likely cause more fear-induced incidents, where either the officer gets shot (because they don't shoot someone who pulls out a gun), or the officer shoots someone (because they're even more on edge).

The fact that people are sometimes sent to prison when they shouldn't be, doesn't make it OK to do that to Yanez.

[Trainer]

The one part of training that Yanez did follow was to make sure to repeat the party line- "I was a afraid for my life." It should be said soon, often and loud enough for everyone to hear. It should definitely be said in anything that will be shown to a jury. Even if you shoot an unarmed man in the back who is 30' from you as he's running away, you have to say it. Even if you shoot an unarmed man in the back while he's lying on the ground with his hands behind his head, you have to say it. Even if you shoot an unarmed kid walking home from the store who has tried to avoid you and you're only a cop wannabe, you have to say it. Even if you shoot an unarmed person in their own home who had called you for help, you have to say it.

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

In my view, the major problem here isn't that skittish people have chosen a career in law enforcement. And it isn't that racial bias. It's that we, as a society, have assigned heavily armed patrols to the task of making sure a light on your car works, and this activity has the overwhelming support of people across political party lines, including libertarians.

Look at the absurdity of this video before the shooting ever took place. You have two guys, hands on their guns, strategically positioned to win a gun fight (as they're trained to do), approaching the car to inform him "you only have one active brake light, it's on the passenger side, your driver's side is out." If this wasn't tragic it would be a scene from Monty Python's Flying Circus.

There are cheaper, more effective ways to enforce vehicle safety regulations. Ironically, the car was performing exactly as it was designed to do. It's called redundancy.

[SomeGuy]

the issue is petty stops and the fact police can shoot someone on a whim without an issue. The rules of engagement for a citizen and agent of the state are no different. If anything rules of engagement for a citizen is looser and stricter for a cop.

[Lhall]

Yanez stopped Castile because he looked similar to an armed robber he was supposed to be on the lookout for. That's why it was a two-cop stop. He called for backup before stopping Castile.

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

Yet he used the brake light as the pretense for the stop. It's evident from the video. If there was not a brake light issue, he would have approached the issue MUCH differently. It's no secret that the police use inane reasons (brake lights, inspection stickers) as an excuse for sniffing around as a way to circumvent the 4th amendment.

[SomeGuy]

yea lhall is blatantly lying and using post death cop spinning lol.

[lilliangonzales445]

Start making more money weekly? This is a valuable part time work for everyone? The best part ,work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week

??????????/

[sweettea71]

The lesson is don't reach for anything unless you are told. You sure as hell don't reach for anything after you were told multiple times not to reach. The kid in the car doesn't matter. Having a permit for the weapon doesn't matter. What matters is listening and if he did he wouldn't be dead. Sad, but true.

[SomeGuy]

fuck you statist douche bag. Does this mean I can shoot a cop when he touches his gun for fear of my life? Of course not.

There is no double standards for police and people you POS.

[Lhall]

Yanez didn't tell Castile to put his hands on the steering wheel, which is what he should have done. So it's certainly not all Castile's fault.

Castile did listen to Yanez saying repeatedly "don't reach for it (the gun)", because he replied "I'm not reaching for it". And he wasn't - he was just trying to dig out his driver's license.

Somehow he didn't realize that digging for his driver's license was giving Yanez the impression that his life was in danger - and that he might get shot because of that.

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

He was told by the officer specifically to reach for his license and registration. He was proceeding with that directive. He didn't, in fact, reach for his gun. Obviously there was a miscommunication and it was exacerbated by the cop being skittish.

[SomeGuy]

wow you could tell right when he said he had a gun the guy went pure panic mode. What a fucking pussy. He went straight to his gun and nothing was going to stop him from shooting that guy. He clearly had it in his brain he had to shoot the guy.

What a shit jury and shit system. This fucker deserves life in prison.

[mysmartstuffs]

More white people are killed by cops, and none of their shooters have been found guilty either. Yes I know black people are 3X more likely to be shot by cops, but they're also 7X more likely to commit murder. This isn't even about individual officers. It is about police unions and their training policies.

My recent post: Warlord Optin Review

My recent post: Lifetime.Hosting Review

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

Good point about police unions. Regardless of where people stand on this issue, most reasonable people accept that it's a tough job and that there should be high standards to ensure that the person is right for the job. Officer behavior and ability should be heavily scrutinized, and officers who don't meet a set of stringent criteria should probably be replaced (there's certainly no shortage of candidates).

The police unions are a major force that seems to be preventing this. And republicans, for some reason. The "blue lives matter" crowd seems to get off on the idea of a Serpico environment.

[mysmartstuffs]

He shouldn't be sent to jail for freaking out

Why not? Seems like exactly the kind of reckless and negligent behavior that defines manslaughter.
My recent post: SociChief Review

[Lhall]

Yanez' statement shows an officer who's doing the best he can in a situation that happened in a very short time.

A lot of people might have been shot if
a) the officer already thought they might be an armed robber
b) they have a gun, the officer doesn't know where it is,
c) they're digging in their pocket and they keep digging, while the officer repeatedly and more and more emphatically tells them not to pull out their gun. It looks VERY bad.
d) the officer doesn't know they have a permit to carry.

Castile apparently told Yanez he had a gun as he was reaching for his pocket. Yanez had only seconds to react to this, and he couldn't see exactly what Castile was doing.

What Yanez did wasn't the best possible. We can, with lots of time to think about it, say what he should have done better. He didn't think fast enough or clearly enough.

But he doesn't belong in prison for that.

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

"a) the officer already thought they might be an armed robber"

The office was wrong.

"b) they have a gun, the officer doesn't know where it is,"

It's not illegal to have a gun, nor is merely having a gun on your person a dangerous scenario, unless you're the type that thinks gun ownership is intrinsically a threat.

"c) they're digging in their pocket and they keep digging, while the officer repeatedly and more and more emphatically tells them not to pull out their gun. It looks VERY bad."

The officer directed him to dig into his pocket. It was one of the first things he told the guy to do.

"d) the officer doesn't know they have a permit to carry."

Why does this matter? Suddenly it's a dangerous situation when there's not a permit involved? A permit is a state construct, it doesn't change reality.

[JunkScienceIsJunk]

Also, how come dozens, if not hundreds, of police officers every day are capable of handling this situation without killing the person?

It's an insult to the thousands of skilled and capable (and not skittish) police officers to set the bar so low.