Jump to content
capt14k

Why was Dashcam disabled in Minneapolis Police Shooting

Recommended Posts

I know we have a few LEOS on the forum. Curious as to their responses. I was told more than once that the Dashcam automatically records once the key is in the ignition and continues recording for a period of time after the key is removed. Is this not normal practice? Keeping in mind Minneapolis just upgraded their dashcams and added bodycams to officers so they would have the latest technology. Yet nothing was recorded of a shooting of an innocent woman who called 911. Who was shot by the passenger while conversing with the partner who was in the driver's seat. So the passenger shot across his partner. Yet no video and no audio.
 
http://pamelageller.com/2017/0...lvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
 
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are million justifiable reasons why the dash cam didn't record anything.

There are million unjustifiable reasons why the dash cam didn't record anything.

There isn't nearly enough info out there about this case to make any kind of reasoned supposition.

This whole relying on immediate video footage is becoming a huge problem. Especially when being judged by folks that:

A) have no idea how the cameras work, what activates them, etc... and

B) Have no idea what policy states regarding cameras - hint, a lot of them say something to the effect of "when feasible activate before. If not, save you life then turn it on."

C) Have no experience regarding constitutional use of force and how it pertains to police work other that what they picked up on the last episode of Blue Bloods

Before the facts of the case are even investigated, this guy is being crucified simply because his camera didn't capture anything. That is wrong.

This may very well be a very tragic yet ultimately justified shooting (I would never call this a "good shoot", but it may be "in policy" or justified under use of force).

Or

This may very well be a complete and total shitshow and his guy should be brought to trial.

Or

This could be something in the middle.

The only ones who have an inkling of this are the investigators and witnesses.

Until more info comes out it is useless, and just plain wrong, to guess what happened that day.

 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He heard a noise and shot through the vehicle at an unarmed woman who was approaching the vehicle. If this isn't a bad shooting there is no such thing as a bad shooting. If you're too afraid to do your job you shouldn't be doing it. Police can not be allowed to shoot someone because they heard a loud bang and saw someone approaching. This was the woman who called 911. Not a chance I would ever call 911.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, capt14k said:

So the cameras don't necessarily automatically record when vehicle is turned on?

 

If it was recording it would have picked up the audio. Is that correct?

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

"Not necessarily." Is the answer to both of your questions above.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, capt14k said:

He heard a noise and shot through the vehicle at an unarmed woman who was approaching the vehicle. If this isn't a bad shooting there is no such thing as a bad shooting. If you're too afraid to do your job you shouldn't be doing it. Police can not be allowed to shoot someone because they heard a loud bang and saw someone approaching. This was the woman who called 911. Not a chance I would ever call 911.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

Good to hear you were there and know exactly what the officer experienced. You should call the investigators and tell them to wrap it up. /sarcasm

Seriously. Wait until all the facts are in before casting judgement.

We constantly cry foul that the media is biased, inflammatory, and fake when they print things that go against what we believe. 

This is the same media. Why are they suddenly so accurate? Because you want them to be right?

I am NOT defending this shoot.

I am also NOT passing judgment on the reasonableness of this cops actions at the time he made his force decision.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because there has been no statement to the contrary and the shooter is refusing to speak to investigators or make a statement. Because there is no video or audio. Because an innocent woman who made the 911 phone call is dead. Because the police have released a statement that no weapon was found at the scene. Because I fear that somehow someway this will again be determined to be a justified shooting. Hearing a bang and someone running up to the car is not justified.

 

Yes I understand the legal standpoint and strategy in not speaking. However if this was such a just action what is there to hide? Unfortunately the concept of protect and serve is dead. The courts have even ruled that police don't have a duty to protect and serve.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of those things don't matter and some of them are patently wrong when you actually read what the Use of Force laws are and apply them.

Since when is silence an admission of guilt. Police officers are allowed to remain silent just like anyone else. What's the first thing a lawyer will tell you if you get in trouble - even if you know you are innocent of any wrongdoing. I bet its something along the lines of "Shut your fool mouth". I read a story of a lawyer that had a trophy fish on the wall in his office. ON the plaque underneath was inscribed "If I would have just kept my mouth shut, I wouldn't bee in this office."

What does the availability of video and audio have to do with this? Why does the lack of it point to a coverup or bad actions? Newsflash - it doesn't.

Who cares who made the 911 call? I have arrested plenty of people that called 911 - even over their protests of "But I called you!"

The lack of a weapon at the scene isn't an automatic "bad shoot". Use of force has to be reasonable at the time it was used when considered by the force users peers. It ultimately doesn't have to be correct.

Hearing a bang that you interpret as a gunshot or other threat indicator and then  having someone running at you with an object in their hand in the dark can very well be complete and total justification to shoot a perceived threat.

What you think are absolutes are really just your feelings. Use of force law is clear with years of court rulings supporting it. Just because you fear it won't go the way you want it too doesn't mean it should.

Again, I am not defending or condemning this particular shooting. I am pointing out thought processes based on fantasy, emotion, and bad info instead of facts or evidence  - which we don't have - and laws.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal dashcam comes on automatically when the ignition is turned on. It records front and rear view, and audio. It's stays on at least 30 seconds after ignition is turned off. And it's not a high end Gobernment model. So, yeah there should be audio.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, diamondd817 said:

My personal dashcam comes on automatically when the ignition is turned on. It records front and rear view, and audio also. It's stays on at least 30 seconds after ignition is turned off. And it's not a high end Gobernment model. So, yeah there should be audio.

Police dashcams have to be set up to protect the privacy of the citizenry and to not run afoul of state wiretapping laws - including the recording of employees.

There will be triggers that determine when the camera starts recording. For example: an impact indicating an MVA, when you go over a certain speed, when you activate your lights, when you hit a button on the camera or portable mic... etc...

 

12 hours ago, capt14k said:

Maybe your right. I guess this case especially sickens me due to other possible underlying motives.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

And what would those be? This black cop just up and decided to ruin his life by purposefully shooting a random white woman? He got so sick of the BLM crap he decided to make a stat for the other side?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@High Exposure that is the issue, the courts have allowed use of force in far too many cases where we did have the facts, and no it was not justified IMO, but legally it was determined it was. Just because an officer perceives a threat does not necessarily give them the right to use force. I know many older and retired LEO's who agree with me. Especially cases where someone had a knife and multiple cops emptied their magazines into the suspect and the shooting was ruled justified use of force.

 

I have the utmost respect for law enforcement. It is a dangerous job, but is was a chosen profession. I feel there should be a higher standard for police use of deadly force not lower.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those possible underlying motives are for 1st Amendment Lounge. Look into his background a little closer. Not saying it is the case but the possibility is there.

 

I honestly wasn't looking to debate this shooting when I started the thread I just wanted an answer on newer dashcam technology and how they work. I guess the answer is there are many systems. That work many different ways.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's the first Somali Officer at that agency and a Muslim.

So what? 

If he was going to go on a jihad-rampage, why did he stop after one?

Stop trying to make this incident fit a narrative.

Be patient. When it is available, make a reasonable and informed decision based on available evidence and facts, not fear. Also realize that your non-experienced opinion doesn't trump constitutional law. Your opinion, and mine, is good enough to BS about the topic at the bar over a pint or two, it's important enough to put someone in jail. 

You know, do like we tell the Antis and other liberals to do. ;)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, capt14k said:

Maybe your right@Zeke. I guess this case especially sickens me due to other possible underlying motives. Which may not be the case at all.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am. Let your prejudices subside.  Let this take its course. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly..many will be happy because a black cop shot an unarmed white person. Those same individuals will claim justice and cry double standard if he gets charged. Regardless, if you weren't there stay quiet. Does it look bad yes but let the process run its course

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since that article claimed to be setting the facts straight why was there no mention of the 3 complaints filed against Noor, 2 from 2017 that are open, or the pending lawsuit he is party to.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) How do you know he has 3 complaints? Do you have access to his IA file?

2) I have had complaints filed against me and I am currently being sued. It is part of the job. Show me a cop with no complaints and no lawsuits and I will show you a slug in a uniform who is a do-nothing house mouse. In any event, it doesn't change anything. Answer this - If he didn't have any complaints and was the PD's MVP 10 years running does that make what happened more acceptable to you?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...