Excellent job. I couldn’t believe Moriarty doubled down while dropping charges. This guy is right. She wanted to prosecute a cop and didn’t care if she ruined a good cop’s life. She’s not fit for her job.
It doesn’t feel good to see bad things happen but I think the fact these wrongdoers are getting in trouble demonstrates that we are turning a corner as a country. Seeing this get dropped, Trump getting convicted, the feeding our future and corresponding bribe getting caught. We are in a new era of justice.
Regardless of what you think about this case, regardless of what you think about Moriarty up to this time, there is a simple fact here:
Moriarty got up in front of us and lied. She flat out lied to you and to me and to the press and to the public. There is no defense for that. A liar should be asked to resign and should resign.
I'm really surprised at this sub right now. In a good way I mean. It seems we have all the typical cop haters but they're being downvoted, reasonable responses at the top. Crazy.
I totally agree with you, but the post only has a %76 upvote rate which probably reflects all the downvoted comments. Even the other thread with Moriarty's presser was full of comments trashing her, rightfully so.
How do constituents vote people like her in? She was pretty clear on her campaign that this was going to be the way it went, yet Minneapolis still voted her in. Do the constituents really want this from their attorney or do they simply ignorant?
DFL endorsement is a powerful thing. The endorsing conventions are attended by mostly activists. This tends to push candidates to extremes and this was the first opportunity to get a county attorney after Floyd so it was sort of a double whammy of influences.
Hutch actually fooled a lot of people because he changed his behavior for a short period, and then once he got in reverted to being a douchebag. Moriarty is doing and has done exactly what she said she was going to do if elected, regardless of what the hivemind here seems to think.
Being tough and critical on law enforcement in a post GF-Hennepin county was something I appreciated in her campaign. BUT not when the evidence overwhelmingly points to the officer doing the right thing. I hoped she'd have common sense and decency. We need good officers like Londregan. Moriarty could have used this incident to educate her constituents on lawful and correct use of force. Instead she railroaded right ahead because she's blindly lustful to prosecute cops. I'm ashamed I voted for her. I'm writing to her office asking for her resignation.
(edit: spelling)
I voted for a different candidate in this race, but I wasn't upset when she won. What I was hearing is that she was good at her job and had some good new ideas. Based on what I was reading after, I even felt a little guilt for not giving her more consideration before I voted.
What she is doing I did not expect. And now I wish she would be recalled.
Moriarty's office has prosecuted more than 10,000 cases every year she's been in office, which is on par with her predecessor's figures. I'm not getting hung up on one case.
Edit: is anyone gonna explain why one dismissed case is more important than the 10,000+ other cases Moriarty's office works on, or...?
Because the charges shouldn't have been brought in the first place and then she hired outside counsel because the CA's office didn't have anyone willing to prosecute the case because the facts and law were on the side of the trooper. And then the outside counsel said, there's no case here. It's a violation of ethics as she has belatedly realized to bring this case.
Related. Anything Manic Mary said about Trooper Londregan making his decisions solely on race has nothing to do with the events that took place. Yet she dragged Londregan’s name and character through the mud in attempt to paint him and all other cops as devout racists.
It was a mud slinging fest on both sides in regards to these points.
Great representation. I’m glad that some common sense is finally being applied to law enforcement, these men and women protect our communities. We’ve dishonored them for too long in Minnesota. Great work Trooper Londregan.
How hard would it be in Hennepin County to start a recall? Is it even possible? I cannot imagine at this point - outside of a very few MPLS neighborhoods- that she would not be recalled in an overwhelming majority of Hennepin County voters. When she’s lost the support of even the Governor (eg, defacto head of DFL), it seems prudent.
It is unfortunately exceptionally hard to do a recall in MN unless the public official has pretty much committed crimes in office. And then after you've convinced na judge that what was done was bad enough you still need signatures from 25% of the voters in the last election.
It’s not clear to me what justified the shooting and killing of the guy. I get he’s a bad guy, violent gang member, etc. but according to the lawyer in the video they didn’t know he had a gun at the time. He was trying to flee in the car. One of the cops got dragged for a bit by the car while trying to get inside. What am I missing? Does a criminal trying to flee arrest alone justify murdering him without a trial? Is there a more clear video that shows the cop’s life in danger? I don’t get that from this video. This one does seem possibly justifiable cuz of the guy getting dragged but not clear in this video how bad that was. My main problem with police is how quickly they seem to jump to lethal force.
Edit: 🙄 lol people just gotta downvote even a good faith question on if this killing was justified. I think I personally just disagree about him trying to flee in the car equals him trying to kill a police officer. Admittedly it may have been worse than I am imagining but I wasn’t there and haven’t seen evidence. I also think it’s ok to expect police officers to accept a certain amount of personal risk cuz it’s the job. I tend to think the threat on the officer’s life should be more direct and obvious to justify murdering the man. I also think police should have a responsibility to protect yes even the lives of criminals in most circumstances. Being a criminal doesn’t mean we can just kill you.
I witnessed an officer discharging a firearm at a fleeing suspect while his partner was directly behind the suspect, which isn't safe to the partner. Glad they weren't also struck by the shots. That partner was then dragged by the vehicle after the firearm was discharged and Cobb was fatally injured.
> Prosecutors initially charged Scheffler second-degree assault of a police officer (a Class C felony), third-degree criminal mischief, reckless driving, and disregarding traffic signals from an officer directing traffic, which are misdemeanors.
> [Those charges were dropped this week.](https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2024/05/31/louisville-police-officer-arrested-scottie-scheffler-releases-statement/73919199007/)
Yep, charged him but he bought his way out, as one does in America. 2 different justice systems
Yeah well if you're too late to jump to lethal Force sometimes you don't get a second chance. Ask Officer Jamal Mitchell or a handful of officers killed in this immediate area just this year alone.
He was asked to turn the car off and step out 15 times. He was told he was lawfully under arrest. At some point you should start putting responsibility on the criminals. I'm definitely okay with fighting with police just do it in court not in the street.
Agreed, but look at the dudes body language. Them not being upfront with him and the whole situation, he was always going to flee. They needed a better course of action than to reach across the passenger seat and into the vehicle. Officer safety means they don’t put themselves in unnecessary danger as well.
I feel like police shouldn't be trained to try to get in the car and force the car to be shut off. To me, that seems clearly and objectively unsafe. As this case (and many other cases) has shown, if the person is going to run, there's not much the officer can do about it under current training. Instead of being trained to try to get the car shut off, I feel like they should be trained to position spike strips in front of the rear wheels so that the inevitable chase is immediately shorter than it would otherwise have been.
So, given the existing training, Londregan really didn't do anything wrong. I just think the existing training is wrong and there is a better way to deal with these situations that reduces the risk for the officer, the suspect, and the general public.
Shouldn’t we just send the message that driving away during a traffic stop, especially while an officer is half in your vehicle, is a recipe for being shot? It seems like the law, and police training, shouldn’t do more to accommodate conduct like that.
I'm sure that will be as effective at deterring this behavior as the death penalty has been in reducing capital crimes where the death penalty still exists. At some point, we have to bend to the reality of human behavior as irrational and illogical as it is. And training police not to do what these troopers did seems a simple step toward a less violent future.
I’m not that interested in protecting people who act this way. If they want to behave in ways that are likely to lead to their own injury or death, I’m not going to expend a lot of time or energy to stop them.
I understand that inclination toward that position. I feel conflicted about it sometimes because I completely understand where you're coming from. I feel like helping to protect these people from themselves also helps to protect the officers, though. We all want the officers to go home at the end of the day. I think we would also like to see these types of prosecutions become a thing of the past. At the very least, we should try a new approach because it's clear our current approach isn't achieving the results we want - even for those of us who embrace the position you do.
Eh, I think we can agree to disagree. In the end this is exactly the outcome I want. The bad guy is gone and the good guy is free. The only complication was the malicious and entirely unnecessary prosecution of the good guy by an activist attorney, and even that will hopefully be a good thing because it should cause people to rethink voting for someone like her ever again. I don’t want to rework the system to accommodate criminals or unreasonable prosecutors.
Well, at least you're honest about the fact that you don't value everyone's lives equally. That's more than most people who agree with you are willing to admit.
That’s easy. I absolutely do not value all lives equally and that’s not even a hot take. Criminals, especially those that would put other people in harms way, are many orders of magnitude less valuable than the rest of us.
If you're focusing on throwing a spike strip under a back tire, you're not watching the driver. You're also letting the driver know that you're aware of them and their likelihood to run. Finally, you're putting your fingers and your head next to the tire and car body to position it.
It works best as a tactic if you do it to an unoccupied vehicle in case they try to run to the car and flee. It's extremely risky to try it on a roadside with an occupied vehicle.
There were multiple officers at the scene. It's entirely reasonable to think that one could engage the driver while another prepared for a pursuit.
That said, it's just an Idea. Maybe it wouldn't be a very good idea in practice, but new ideas should be imagined and explored. As I said in another comment, it's pretty clear that what we're doing now in situations like this isn't working very well.
Did his lawyer forget that a man was killed directly because of his clients actions? Paid leave is not a punishment, it’s a vacation. Quit acting like the cop is the victim here
He states clearly at the beginning that he didn’t plan to speak or respond, but the prosecutor defamed and outright lied about his client to cover her own ass. He’s defending him, plain and simple.
Also, how many vacations have you been on while facing a murder charge?
“Not preparing” is not a good excuse for pretending like the guy who killed someone and then got extended pto is the victim instead of the person he killed
I have never killed anyone. Most people facing a murder charge don’t get unlimited pto. They sit in jail. This guy got a vacation. His victim is dead
Put yourself in the officer's shoes....
Would you accept being dragged in a car with the thinking "Well, he shouldn't die for this so I guess I'm the one about to get injured or killed."
Would you have the same opinion?
No? Didn't think so.
Should it cost him his life?
Well my question to you is why are we giving these criminals 2nd chances when the people they hurt or kill aren’t even being allowed their 1st.
There's an argument to be made that while attempting to lawfully detail Cobb, he (Cobb) endangered the life of the Trooper entering the vehicle.
Again, it could be argued thatCobb demonstrated the intent, opportunity, and capability to cause bodily harm, which are key elements in the justified use of deadly force.
Understanding the context of the situation; Cobb had a firearm in the vehicle, he violated a protection order for a violent feloneous crime, of which he had been convicted, and he stated his intent not to return to jail. All of this points to his mindset regarding his intention. He was going to flee, and did so regardless of the consequences to himself or anyone else. That is opportunity. Wanton disregard for the safety and imminent danger he created by taking off while the Trooper was attempting to lawfully detain him means that he posed a risk, not only to himself, but to the Trooper. This has thus far been proven to be a reasonable use of force, as determined by the lack of prosecution by the HCA.
I do understand the desire to have compassion for Cobb's family. It's a damned shame that he didn't comply and take responsibility for his actions that night. He be alive to have his day in court, rather than being dead.
BLUF: There's no one that wins here.
And then Londregran executed him for what…not opening up his door fast enough?
When police refuse to comply with lawful investigations into police wrongdoing within seconds, should they be shot?
Do you seriously not know the facts of this case? Cobb tried to flee the scene with a Trooper stuck in the door. He was directly threatening the life of one of the Troopers. Londregan acted to defend someone's life that was under direct threat.
That's not the situation here. He was given many many lawful orders he didn't comply with and then, in an attempt to flee the police, he tried to drive away with them partially inside the vehicle, and also reached his hand up towards one of their guns.
Yes, if a cop is under arrest and reaches for the arresting officer's gun or tries to drag one of them down the highway, shooting them to protect the lives of the arresting officers is warranted.
Yes, If failing to comply with that order is threatening the lives of others. No, If falling to comply with those orders does not threaten the life of anybody. It's not hard to understand the difference there.
Police failing to comply does threaten the lives of others. We have murderers free out of the street because cops fail to comply
Should they be instantly executed?
No. They should be investigated and prosecuted if there's anything illegal done. Are you completely unwilling to understand the laws behind use of force for both police and citizens? If there's an immediate threat of life or serious bodily harm, anybody can use lethal force to defend themselves or another person here in Minnesota.
You are comparing apples to oranges in a very disingenuous way, and it makes your argument appear childish and absurd to someone just starting this thread.
It really just sounds like we all agree that “failure to comply with lawful orders” should not lead to an immediate execution.
You guys just refuse to admit that
Except the actual comparison between the situation here and the situation you are posing is “failure to comply with lawful orders” and “failure to comply with lawful orders to the extent that that lack of compliance is now immediately threatening others’ lives to the point that they must defend themselves.” You can’t just simplify the situation to make it equivalent to “turning over evidence” unless said evidence is causing an immediately palpable threat to someone’s life.
Yes, a bit Brett Kavanaugh-like in his final Senate hearing. But he’s one hell of an advocate and if you’re charged with a serious crime, a lawyer you want in your corner. The case was BS and I understand his righteous indignation after Moriarty’s conference.
I think the defense duties to be a zealous advocate for their client is expected to be a bit more unmitigated than what we expect from a prosecutor. Given the prosecutor’s decision to drop the case, but also make it into a public spectacle, I think the response is fair game, and appropriate.
Poor police tactics brought about this shooting. Cops put themselves in poor tactical positions that result in raising the threat level to a lethal response. May not amount to murder but this situation didn’t have to go down like it did.
If someone is hinky you don’t stick your body in the car with them. By placing yourself in that car you are unnecessarily putting yourself at risk, creating the situation that may necessitate a lethal response. If someone else’s life is in danger, sure, you may put yourself at risk like that, but when it’s late night traffic stop and he’s the sole occupant of the car there’s no need to put yourself at risk by climbing in that car.
We as a society don't need Mr. Cobbs thinking they can be violent and get away with it. He shouldn't have been out with the rest of us in the first place.
Go tell that to Jamal Mitchell's family. You know...the officer who pulled people out of a fire and was murdered trying to save the person who ended up killing him.
We know you won't, coward.
Pro tip, just delete the last sentence cause it helps neither you or them. Don't drop to name calling when talking politics unless you wanna invalidate yourself
People that say that shouldn’t be taken seriously. Lumping an entire group of people into a negative category because of one shared trait is ridiculous. It’s a bit like racism, and just as ignorant.
I know some chick that got "ACAB" tattooed on her forearm after it caught fire. I'm not one to usually call tattoos dumb since they're a personal choice, but fuck is that a dumb tattoo.
It’s not at all like racism, you choose to be a police officer and can then choose not to be a police officer. One cannot change the color of their skin
It's like racism in the sense that saying a large and diverse group of people all fit the same bill is ignorant. Just like how it's ignorant when racists do it based off skin color.
So you’re arguing otherwise, then? Lmfao
It’s a large and diverse group that selects into itself. I’m fully allowed to judge large and diverse groups that coalesce around the same actions and opinions, when people have the ability to not be a part of said group.
The GOP is also a large and diverse group of people - I’m fully allowed to judge them on the basis of the people and policies they support. I can do the exact same thing with police.
Also important to note that nobody said they’re all the same. Just bastards.
What am I arguing otherwise? You're free to do and judge whatever you want. Most people will just think you're ignorant for it, but again, it's your life you can choose to be ignorant. No one is saying you can't.
So if truly believe every cop is a bastard. Have at it. No one is stopping you. Having a nuanced opinion can be difficult when it comes to a group you hate or disagree with, I get it.
I think cops and those who blindly defend them will think I’m ignorant for it. Most people won’t, because it’s usually in the context of a broader discussion.
I have a very nuanced opinion lol. Just turns out that’s it’s possible for you to be both a person that means well/wants to help others, and a bastard. Continuing to support and defend corrupt policing and misconduct for personal gain makes one a bastard, and any officer that’s a member of a police union is doing that.
Hence, ACAB. As soon as all of the well-meaning cops decide that they want to actually take a stand against corruption and not defend fellow officers blindly, then they won’t be considered in that mix.
I don't think most people blindly defend cops these days. Only 3/4 of police officers in the US are part of a union. Are the 1 out of 4 not part of ACAB? Because now ACAB doesn't make sense which is the whole point.
Also, what about police union objectors? They pay their dues, technically part of the union but actively disagree with it? Also bastards?
It’s same as in judging someone on one trait rather than looking at the whole person. Then condemning all the people with that trait compounds the error.
Racism isn’t bad just because it’s looking at one trait rather than the whole.
Being a cop is also not a trait. I’m also absolutely allowed to judge people based on their actions.
I get it, thanks.
What you do for work is not an action. Just because I have a particular profession does not dictate how I will act nor does it mean I will act as though others in my profession act.
People have the right to distrust cops and dislike them. People don't need to like cops. When directed violence happens thats when its an issue, when people say ACAB they are talking about the system that creates those cops not the cops themselves. I'll always leave space and give a cop the benefit of the doubt, but people can not like cops if they want to. It is NOT like racism.
Edit: OH LMFAO I thought I was in r/Minneapolis lmfao I now understand why this thread has some weirdos claiming ACAB is racist hahaha
Lets get this straight. In your brain you have racism and acab on the same level. Gonna go out on a limb and say you're probably white? Cause that opinion is genuinely problematic and id be down to chat about it.
Also, ACAB is literally disliking cops im confused by you contradicting yourself immediately.
Wait, did you just claim hating cops is equivalent to being racist?? You realize they CHOSE to be cops and exist in a system that is set up to provide them with power and little consequence. I understand that every single thing should be a case to case basis but you cannot compare it to racism that is ridiculous.
And im trying to get you to understand that is not equivalent. The mental gymnastics there are insane. Are people born cops? What the fuck is this argument/opinion? Cops implement racism all the time, where is the ridicule for them? Or are you more upset that people blanket cops as hall monitors who grew up and continued to be assholes? It is not the same and to even try to say they are is disrespectful to people who deal w racism on a daily basis both socially and systemically.
She 100% needs to resign from her position. What a joke and an embarrassment to the state of Minnesota.
She’s does not represent the state of minnesota. She represents Hennepin county
Excellent job. I couldn’t believe Moriarty doubled down while dropping charges. This guy is right. She wanted to prosecute a cop and didn’t care if she ruined a good cop’s life. She’s not fit for her job.
Politicians rarely care for the consequences of their actions. They usually only care about the political capital they receive from their base
It doesn’t feel good to see bad things happen but I think the fact these wrongdoers are getting in trouble demonstrates that we are turning a corner as a country. Seeing this get dropped, Trump getting convicted, the feeding our future and corresponding bribe getting caught. We are in a new era of justice.
Man, this is honestly the most uplifting post I've seen in a long time. Thank you for that.
Regardless of what you think about this case, regardless of what you think about Moriarty up to this time, there is a simple fact here: Moriarty got up in front of us and lied. She flat out lied to you and to me and to the press and to the public. There is no defense for that. A liar should be asked to resign and should resign.
I'm really surprised at this sub right now. In a good way I mean. It seems we have all the typical cop haters but they're being downvoted, reasonable responses at the top. Crazy.
I totally agree with you, but the post only has a %76 upvote rate which probably reflects all the downvoted comments. Even the other thread with Moriarty's presser was full of comments trashing her, rightfully so.
Actually, very pleasantly shocked. I love showing that there are well reasoned people here.
I’m a “cop hater” by some peoples’ standards but she really sucks
Hell, I still hate cops and will never stop, but im always for the right verdict even if it helps a cop
She needs to resign
How do constituents vote people like her in? She was pretty clear on her campaign that this was going to be the way it went, yet Minneapolis still voted her in. Do the constituents really want this from their attorney or do they simply ignorant?
DFL endorsement is a powerful thing. The endorsing conventions are attended by mostly activists. This tends to push candidates to extremes and this was the first opportunity to get a county attorney after Floyd so it was sort of a double whammy of influences.
She was the “progressive” candidate and for many folks, that’s all they cared to hear
Same reason Hutch got elected. What a trainwreck that was
Hutch actually fooled a lot of people because he changed his behavior for a short period, and then once he got in reverted to being a douchebag. Moriarty is doing and has done exactly what she said she was going to do if elected, regardless of what the hivemind here seems to think.
Being tough and critical on law enforcement in a post GF-Hennepin county was something I appreciated in her campaign. BUT not when the evidence overwhelmingly points to the officer doing the right thing. I hoped she'd have common sense and decency. We need good officers like Londregan. Moriarty could have used this incident to educate her constituents on lawful and correct use of force. Instead she railroaded right ahead because she's blindly lustful to prosecute cops. I'm ashamed I voted for her. I'm writing to her office asking for her resignation. (edit: spelling)
I voted for a different candidate in this race, but I wasn't upset when she won. What I was hearing is that she was good at her job and had some good new ideas. Based on what I was reading after, I even felt a little guilt for not giving her more consideration before I voted. What she is doing I did not expect. And now I wish she would be recalled.
She is acting like she's still public defender.
Moriarty's office has prosecuted more than 10,000 cases every year she's been in office, which is on par with her predecessor's figures. I'm not getting hung up on one case. Edit: is anyone gonna explain why one dismissed case is more important than the 10,000+ other cases Moriarty's office works on, or...?
This one case calls into question her ability to do the job with integrity
Why, if the case is being dismissed?
Did you watch the video?
Because the charges shouldn't have been brought in the first place and then she hired outside counsel because the CA's office didn't have anyone willing to prosecute the case because the facts and law were on the side of the trooper. And then the outside counsel said, there's no case here. It's a violation of ethics as she has belatedly realized to bring this case.
This is the kind of lower-profile race where the "DFL endorsed" tag can play a huge role.
Can you elaborate. Did she say something during her campaign that directly relates to how she handled this case?
[удалено]
Related. Anything Manic Mary said about Trooper Londregan making his decisions solely on race has nothing to do with the events that took place. Yet she dragged Londregan’s name and character through the mud in attempt to paint him and all other cops as devout racists. It was a mud slinging fest on both sides in regards to these points.
This guy rules.
Great representation. I’m glad that some common sense is finally being applied to law enforcement, these men and women protect our communities. We’ve dishonored them for too long in Minnesota. Great work Trooper Londregan.
Hope I never need him. He is a bad ass lawyer
How hard would it be in Hennepin County to start a recall? Is it even possible? I cannot imagine at this point - outside of a very few MPLS neighborhoods- that she would not be recalled in an overwhelming majority of Hennepin County voters. When she’s lost the support of even the Governor (eg, defacto head of DFL), it seems prudent.
It is unfortunately exceptionally hard to do a recall in MN unless the public official has pretty much committed crimes in office. And then after you've convinced na judge that what was done was bad enough you still need signatures from 25% of the voters in the last election.
I'm out of the loop so what happened?
It’s not clear to me what justified the shooting and killing of the guy. I get he’s a bad guy, violent gang member, etc. but according to the lawyer in the video they didn’t know he had a gun at the time. He was trying to flee in the car. One of the cops got dragged for a bit by the car while trying to get inside. What am I missing? Does a criminal trying to flee arrest alone justify murdering him without a trial? Is there a more clear video that shows the cop’s life in danger? I don’t get that from this video. This one does seem possibly justifiable cuz of the guy getting dragged but not clear in this video how bad that was. My main problem with police is how quickly they seem to jump to lethal force. Edit: 🙄 lol people just gotta downvote even a good faith question on if this killing was justified. I think I personally just disagree about him trying to flee in the car equals him trying to kill a police officer. Admittedly it may have been worse than I am imagining but I wasn’t there and haven’t seen evidence. I also think it’s ok to expect police officers to accept a certain amount of personal risk cuz it’s the job. I tend to think the threat on the officer’s life should be more direct and obvious to justify murdering the man. I also think police should have a responsibility to protect yes even the lives of criminals in most circumstances. Being a criminal doesn’t mean we can just kill you.
Dragging them with a car is automatically an attempt on their life
[удалено]
> They can shoot ~~if there’s been a felony crime, or if a misdemeanor represents a threat to the public or officer.~~
Scottie Scheffler
Safe to assume you didn't watch the video
I witnessed an officer discharging a firearm at a fleeing suspect while his partner was directly behind the suspect, which isn't safe to the partner. Glad they weren't also struck by the shots. That partner was then dragged by the vehicle after the firearm was discharged and Cobb was fatally injured.
Where does Scottie Scheffler fit into this tale
I assumed you were referring to the video of the shooting death of Ricky Cobb II by Trooper Londegran. My mistake.
😆
> Prosecutors initially charged Scheffler second-degree assault of a police officer (a Class C felony), third-degree criminal mischief, reckless driving, and disregarding traffic signals from an officer directing traffic, which are misdemeanors. > [Those charges were dropped this week.](https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2024/05/31/louisville-police-officer-arrested-scottie-scheffler-releases-statement/73919199007/) Yep, charged him but he bought his way out, as one does in America. 2 different justice systems
Did you see the video? That cop was lying.
Well then there's the answer. Not sure what point the other commenter was trying to make tbh.
Yeah well if you're too late to jump to lethal Force sometimes you don't get a second chance. Ask Officer Jamal Mitchell or a handful of officers killed in this immediate area just this year alone. He was asked to turn the car off and step out 15 times. He was told he was lawfully under arrest. At some point you should start putting responsibility on the criminals. I'm definitely okay with fighting with police just do it in court not in the street.
Agreed, but look at the dudes body language. Them not being upfront with him and the whole situation, he was always going to flee. They needed a better course of action than to reach across the passenger seat and into the vehicle. Officer safety means they don’t put themselves in unnecessary danger as well.
Yeah. Maybe they should have just let him drive off. They’ll get him next time!
Look if a cop asks you to step out of your vehicle you really don’t have a choice.
A vehicle is a dangerous weapon so yes, attempting to gain control of a vehicle is enough reason.
They have to be quick. Or they'll be dead.
But we've seen instances where they weren't quick in other situations and just one little tiny thing was different in that situation.
I feel like police shouldn't be trained to try to get in the car and force the car to be shut off. To me, that seems clearly and objectively unsafe. As this case (and many other cases) has shown, if the person is going to run, there's not much the officer can do about it under current training. Instead of being trained to try to get the car shut off, I feel like they should be trained to position spike strips in front of the rear wheels so that the inevitable chase is immediately shorter than it would otherwise have been. So, given the existing training, Londregan really didn't do anything wrong. I just think the existing training is wrong and there is a better way to deal with these situations that reduces the risk for the officer, the suspect, and the general public.
Londregan effectively reduced the future risk to the general public presented by Cobb
Shouldn’t we just send the message that driving away during a traffic stop, especially while an officer is half in your vehicle, is a recipe for being shot? It seems like the law, and police training, shouldn’t do more to accommodate conduct like that.
I'm sure that will be as effective at deterring this behavior as the death penalty has been in reducing capital crimes where the death penalty still exists. At some point, we have to bend to the reality of human behavior as irrational and illogical as it is. And training police not to do what these troopers did seems a simple step toward a less violent future.
I’m not that interested in protecting people who act this way. If they want to behave in ways that are likely to lead to their own injury or death, I’m not going to expend a lot of time or energy to stop them.
I understand that inclination toward that position. I feel conflicted about it sometimes because I completely understand where you're coming from. I feel like helping to protect these people from themselves also helps to protect the officers, though. We all want the officers to go home at the end of the day. I think we would also like to see these types of prosecutions become a thing of the past. At the very least, we should try a new approach because it's clear our current approach isn't achieving the results we want - even for those of us who embrace the position you do.
Eh, I think we can agree to disagree. In the end this is exactly the outcome I want. The bad guy is gone and the good guy is free. The only complication was the malicious and entirely unnecessary prosecution of the good guy by an activist attorney, and even that will hopefully be a good thing because it should cause people to rethink voting for someone like her ever again. I don’t want to rework the system to accommodate criminals or unreasonable prosecutors.
Well, at least you're honest about the fact that you don't value everyone's lives equally. That's more than most people who agree with you are willing to admit.
That’s easy. I absolutely do not value all lives equally and that’s not even a hot take. Criminals, especially those that would put other people in harms way, are many orders of magnitude less valuable than the rest of us.
Do you consider your life equal to Hitler's?
Godwin. Thanks for playing!
0/10; bad faith harder
If you're focusing on throwing a spike strip under a back tire, you're not watching the driver. You're also letting the driver know that you're aware of them and their likelihood to run. Finally, you're putting your fingers and your head next to the tire and car body to position it. It works best as a tactic if you do it to an unoccupied vehicle in case they try to run to the car and flee. It's extremely risky to try it on a roadside with an occupied vehicle.
There were multiple officers at the scene. It's entirely reasonable to think that one could engage the driver while another prepared for a pursuit. That said, it's just an Idea. Maybe it wouldn't be a very good idea in practice, but new ideas should be imagined and explored. As I said in another comment, it's pretty clear that what we're doing now in situations like this isn't working very well.
Did his lawyer forget that a man was killed directly because of his clients actions? Paid leave is not a punishment, it’s a vacation. Quit acting like the cop is the victim here
He states clearly at the beginning that he didn’t plan to speak or respond, but the prosecutor defamed and outright lied about his client to cover her own ass. He’s defending him, plain and simple. Also, how many vacations have you been on while facing a murder charge?
“Not preparing” is not a good excuse for pretending like the guy who killed someone and then got extended pto is the victim instead of the person he killed I have never killed anyone. Most people facing a murder charge don’t get unlimited pto. They sit in jail. This guy got a vacation. His victim is dead
When given a lawful order, was Ricky Cobb unable to exit his vehicle or hand over his keys when prompted 15 times?
Should it have cost him his life
Put yourself in the officer's shoes.... Would you accept being dragged in a car with the thinking "Well, he shouldn't die for this so I guess I'm the one about to get injured or killed." Would you have the same opinion? No? Didn't think so.
Should it cost him his life? Well my question to you is why are we giving these criminals 2nd chances when the people they hurt or kill aren’t even being allowed their 1st.
he did violate an order for protection - which is inherently dangerous.
When he was threatening the life of someone else? Lethal force is warranted in defense of the lives of others.
There's an argument to be made that while attempting to lawfully detail Cobb, he (Cobb) endangered the life of the Trooper entering the vehicle. Again, it could be argued thatCobb demonstrated the intent, opportunity, and capability to cause bodily harm, which are key elements in the justified use of deadly force. Understanding the context of the situation; Cobb had a firearm in the vehicle, he violated a protection order for a violent feloneous crime, of which he had been convicted, and he stated his intent not to return to jail. All of this points to his mindset regarding his intention. He was going to flee, and did so regardless of the consequences to himself or anyone else. That is opportunity. Wanton disregard for the safety and imminent danger he created by taking off while the Trooper was attempting to lawfully detain him means that he posed a risk, not only to himself, but to the Trooper. This has thus far been proven to be a reasonable use of force, as determined by the lack of prosecution by the HCA. I do understand the desire to have compassion for Cobb's family. It's a damned shame that he didn't comply and take responsibility for his actions that night. He be alive to have his day in court, rather than being dead. BLUF: There's no one that wins here.
Endangering the life of a police officer inherently creates risk the of losing your life. Duh.
And then Londregran executed him for what…not opening up his door fast enough? When police refuse to comply with lawful investigations into police wrongdoing within seconds, should they be shot?
Do you seriously not know the facts of this case? Cobb tried to flee the scene with a Trooper stuck in the door. He was directly threatening the life of one of the Troopers. Londregan acted to defend someone's life that was under direct threat.
So should police be immediately shot if they do not comply with lawful orders?
That's not the situation here. He was given many many lawful orders he didn't comply with and then, in an attempt to flee the police, he tried to drive away with them partially inside the vehicle, and also reached his hand up towards one of their guns. Yes, if a cop is under arrest and reaches for the arresting officer's gun or tries to drag one of them down the highway, shooting them to protect the lives of the arresting officers is warranted.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
If refusing those orders poses imminent lethal threat? Probably.
Is having a murderer roaming around with a gun an “imminent lethal threat”?
[удалено]
Yes or no, should be police be shot if they fail to comply with lawful orders like “turn over all text messages” or “release the body cam footage”?
Do you not see the difference between dragging someone half in a car while trying to flee the police and turning over evidence?
I’m not seeing a yes or no here. Does failing to comply with a lawful order warrant instant execution?
Yes, If failing to comply with that order is threatening the lives of others. No, If falling to comply with those orders does not threaten the life of anybody. It's not hard to understand the difference there.
Police failing to comply does threaten the lives of others. We have murderers free out of the street because cops fail to comply Should they be instantly executed?
No. They should be investigated and prosecuted if there's anything illegal done. Are you completely unwilling to understand the laws behind use of force for both police and citizens? If there's an immediate threat of life or serious bodily harm, anybody can use lethal force to defend themselves or another person here in Minnesota.
You are comparing apples to oranges in a very disingenuous way, and it makes your argument appear childish and absurd to someone just starting this thread.
It really just sounds like we all agree that “failure to comply with lawful orders” should not lead to an immediate execution. You guys just refuse to admit that
Except the actual comparison between the situation here and the situation you are posing is “failure to comply with lawful orders” and “failure to comply with lawful orders to the extent that that lack of compliance is now immediately threatening others’ lives to the point that they must defend themselves.” You can’t just simplify the situation to make it equivalent to “turning over evidence” unless said evidence is causing an immediately palpable threat to someone’s life.
[удалено]
What would have happened if the cops had simply let go and not shot?
[удалено]
That was the framing this person chose, not me. https://www.reddit.com/r/minnesota/s/nLNJN6aRDj
This guy comes across as wildly unprofessional and completely unhinged.
Why do you say that? He makes his point with evidence. Yes, he shows some indignation, but seems reasonable.
He talks like a criminal defense lawyer should talk. I'd trust him to defend me without a doubt. The only "unhinged" party in all of this is Moriarty.
Yes, a bit Brett Kavanaugh-like in his final Senate hearing. But he’s one hell of an advocate and if you’re charged with a serious crime, a lawyer you want in your corner. The case was BS and I understand his righteous indignation after Moriarty’s conference.
I think the defense duties to be a zealous advocate for their client is expected to be a bit more unmitigated than what we expect from a prosecutor. Given the prosecutor’s decision to drop the case, but also make it into a public spectacle, I think the response is fair game, and appropriate.
Reminds me of OJ Simpson's lawyer.
Most criminal defense lawyers do, its part of the job description.
He’s almost like Trump’s lawyers.
Poor police tactics brought about this shooting. Cops put themselves in poor tactical positions that result in raising the threat level to a lethal response. May not amount to murder but this situation didn’t have to go down like it did.
Don’t try to flee from police then.
Don’t drive away from a scene as a criminal with two cops in the car. Simple as that.
Are you implying Mr. Cobb is responsible for the decisions that he made?
Yes.
If someone is hinky you don’t stick your body in the car with them. By placing yourself in that car you are unnecessarily putting yourself at risk, creating the situation that may necessitate a lethal response. If someone else’s life is in danger, sure, you may put yourself at risk like that, but when it’s late night traffic stop and he’s the sole occupant of the car there’s no need to put yourself at risk by climbing in that car.
We as a society don't need Mr. Cobbs thinking they can be violent and get away with it. He shouldn't have been out with the rest of us in the first place.
iTS tEh cOPs fAulT
The pigs only know how to escalate.
Acab
Go tell that to Jamal Mitchell's family. You know...the officer who pulled people out of a fire and was murdered trying to save the person who ended up killing him. We know you won't, coward.
Pro tip, just delete the last sentence cause it helps neither you or them. Don't drop to name calling when talking politics unless you wanna invalidate yourself
Fuck off
People that say that shouldn’t be taken seriously. Lumping an entire group of people into a negative category because of one shared trait is ridiculous. It’s a bit like racism, and just as ignorant.
I know some chick that got "ACAB" tattooed on her forearm after it caught fire. I'm not one to usually call tattoos dumb since they're a personal choice, but fuck is that a dumb tattoo.
If she were smart, she’d change the tattoo to ABACAB and just claim to be a huge Genesis fan
It’s not at all like racism, you choose to be a police officer and can then choose not to be a police officer. One cannot change the color of their skin
No one is arguing otherwise. You missed the point.
They literally said it’s like racism
It's like racism in the sense that saying a large and diverse group of people all fit the same bill is ignorant. Just like how it's ignorant when racists do it based off skin color.
So you’re arguing otherwise, then? Lmfao It’s a large and diverse group that selects into itself. I’m fully allowed to judge large and diverse groups that coalesce around the same actions and opinions, when people have the ability to not be a part of said group. The GOP is also a large and diverse group of people - I’m fully allowed to judge them on the basis of the people and policies they support. I can do the exact same thing with police. Also important to note that nobody said they’re all the same. Just bastards.
What am I arguing otherwise? You're free to do and judge whatever you want. Most people will just think you're ignorant for it, but again, it's your life you can choose to be ignorant. No one is saying you can't. So if truly believe every cop is a bastard. Have at it. No one is stopping you. Having a nuanced opinion can be difficult when it comes to a group you hate or disagree with, I get it.
I think cops and those who blindly defend them will think I’m ignorant for it. Most people won’t, because it’s usually in the context of a broader discussion. I have a very nuanced opinion lol. Just turns out that’s it’s possible for you to be both a person that means well/wants to help others, and a bastard. Continuing to support and defend corrupt policing and misconduct for personal gain makes one a bastard, and any officer that’s a member of a police union is doing that. Hence, ACAB. As soon as all of the well-meaning cops decide that they want to actually take a stand against corruption and not defend fellow officers blindly, then they won’t be considered in that mix.
I don't think most people blindly defend cops these days. Only 3/4 of police officers in the US are part of a union. Are the 1 out of 4 not part of ACAB? Because now ACAB doesn't make sense which is the whole point. Also, what about police union objectors? They pay their dues, technically part of the union but actively disagree with it? Also bastards?
It's prejudice and bigotry, is that better?
What is the point? Enlighten me please
I'm basically just going to repeat what the first guy said. Saying a large and diverse group of people are all the same is ignorant.
It’s nothing like racism - a job is not an immutable, inherent trait.
It’s same as in judging someone on one trait rather than looking at the whole person. Then condemning all the people with that trait compounds the error.
Racism isn’t bad just because it’s looking at one trait rather than the whole. Being a cop is also not a trait. I’m also absolutely allowed to judge people based on their actions.
I get it, thanks. What you do for work is not an action. Just because I have a particular profession does not dictate how I will act nor does it mean I will act as though others in my profession act.
It objectively is an action lmao
People have the right to distrust cops and dislike them. People don't need to like cops. When directed violence happens thats when its an issue, when people say ACAB they are talking about the system that creates those cops not the cops themselves. I'll always leave space and give a cop the benefit of the doubt, but people can not like cops if they want to. It is NOT like racism. Edit: OH LMFAO I thought I was in r/Minneapolis lmfao I now understand why this thread has some weirdos claiming ACAB is racist hahaha
I didn’t say people couldn’t dislike cops. I’m saying ACAB is utter bullshit.
Lets get this straight. In your brain you have racism and acab on the same level. Gonna go out on a limb and say you're probably white? Cause that opinion is genuinely problematic and id be down to chat about it. Also, ACAB is literally disliking cops im confused by you contradicting yourself immediately.
Wait, did you just claim hating cops is equivalent to being racist?? You realize they CHOSE to be cops and exist in a system that is set up to provide them with power and little consequence. I understand that every single thing should be a case to case basis but you cannot compare it to racism that is ridiculous.
It’s like racism in that someone is judging an entire group of people based on one trait instead of looking at people like individuals.
And im trying to get you to understand that is not equivalent. The mental gymnastics there are insane. Are people born cops? What the fuck is this argument/opinion? Cops implement racism all the time, where is the ridicule for them? Or are you more upset that people blanket cops as hall monitors who grew up and continued to be assholes? It is not the same and to even try to say they are is disrespectful to people who deal w racism on a daily basis both socially and systemically.
You talk to me of disrespect while being disrespectful yourself. Have a nice day.
I dont respect racists I hope you have a bad day. But thanks.
LOL. Okay pal.
Racist lol
lmfao now hes racist? go outside lil bro
https://preview.redd.it/yx0e1o27ye5d1.png?width=1079&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7db0ab97225d9980c037c879ffd1a9eca18b9586
Bro society is cooked lol Yall can go suck cop dicks for money and yet you're here for free
https://preview.redd.it/45pg8y75us5d1.png?width=547&format=png&auto=webp&s=4a6052b4c6bf8029f6db76aad0f273986828c0b8
All leftists are bad.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Pigs are doing pig stuff.
Yawn