Pasadena Police slay unarmed black teenager

[Jacobtm]

A man was robbed and called 911 to report it, saying the thiefs had put a gun in his face.

The police then killed an unarmed black kid.

They say he ''reached for his waistband'', so 2 police fired 8 shots, killing him on a street corner.

He had no weapon.

And so the police blamed the killing on their state of mind, being told that these robbers were armed. So they arrested the guy who called 911, since apparently there was no gun to begin with.

And the dead kid? Well, I haven't found anything even implying he was guilty of the robbery to begin wtih.

Absolutely insane.

http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_20281352/911-caller-arrested-after-pasadena-police-kill-teen

I was once patted down by cops because I had my hand on my waistband as I was walking down the street. Luckily I'm white so they didn't kill me.

[Jacobtm]

"[Pasadena Police Chief] Sanchez said a videotape shot near the taco truck shows the 17-year-old (see below) reaching into Carrillo's car and allegedly grabbing both a backpack and a laptop computer. Sanchez said [dead man] McDade acted as a "lookout" during the alleged burglary."

....

"The 17-year-old robbery suspect was later arrested and was charged Tuesday with two felony counts of commercial burglary, one felony count of grand theft property and one misdemeanor count of failing to register as a gang member, according to the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office. "

And still they slayed an unarmed man on the street.

And this happened because they believed he had a gun, because of a lie told to the police.

Do you see the reason that people should be allowed a trial before being shot dead in the street?

[Jacobtm]

Jimrtex, can you think of any instance in which the police have ever been wrong in killing someone? Cuz you stick up for them an awful lot.

It's instructive. Many people simply like seeing this kind of violence. Surely it has nothing to do with the race of the departed.

They believe that it's especially justified against a criminal. This man was apparently an accesory to robbery, so some people rejoice in seeing him shot dead. Trayvon Martin had an empty bag that used to have weed in it, so some people think he had it coming. It's a sick attitude, looking for even the slimmest justification to end a man's life.

[Jacobtm]

And, how exactly would that differ in kind from someone kidnapping, or heaven forbid, murdering
George Zimmerman because MSNBC, and, others, lied about Zimmerman?

For instance, the Black Panthers have offered a $10,000 bounty for Zimmerman's kidnapping. Could their decision to advocate his kidnapping have something to do with MSNBC falsely claiming Zimmerman said, "He was acting suspiciously. He was Black." when Zimmerman said no such thing?

What the hell are you talking about man?

McDade was killed.

No one has killed Zimmerman.

Why are you trying to diminish the slaying of an unarmed man by speculating about someone else unjustly being killed?

[Jacobtm]

Is you last question rhetorical?

No it wasn't.

I got the impression you were justifying the slaying by providing the information that the slain was indeed suspected of being an accessory to robbery.

[Jacobtm]

The alleged lie told to 911 in the California case was no less prejudicial than MSNBC falsely quoting Zimmerman as racially profiling Martin as "suspicious" because he was Black.

But that has nothing to do with anything.

A man was shot dead without causing or threatening any harm to anyone.

And you're mad that Zimmerman has been maligned in the media after slaying an unarmed teen.

That makes no sense, unless you're just trying to avoid talking about the tragic deaths of teens who should be alive.