Well you really need to watch the dash cam. It clearly shows that castile or the driver had already handed Officer Yanez the paper work and officer Yanez had the paper work in his hand when Philando Castile told him he had a firearm then Castile started moving and it is clearly heard officer Yanez saying don't reach for it, don't pull it out
Castile continued to reach for it what ever it was.
What he was reaching for we don't know.
Yes, we do.
I watched it:
21:05:52-54: Castile: "I, uh, do want to let you know I have a firearm..."
21:05:55: Second Officer: "Don't reach for it, though, man - don't reach for it."
21:05:56: Castile: "(unintelligible)"
21:05:57: Officer Yanez: "Don't pull it out."
21:05:58: Officer Yanez: (drawing his own weapon) "Don't pull it out."
21:05:59: BANG - First of SEVEN shots.
21:06:02: BANG - Last of SEVEN shots.
At that point, Officer Yanez says the F-word three times then repeatedly tells the guy he just fatally shot not to move.
Seriously? Here's what I see wrong with this picture:
1. Officers are taught clear, standard, and unambiguous terminology. "Don't pull it out" is not clear (it sounds too much like "pull it out" or "Ok, pull it out"). It almost certainly is not standard. Given the nature of the situation, most notably the Castile's calm voice, the unclear phrase and its non-standard terminology, it certainly wasn't ambiguous.
2. Officer Yanez's 7 shots is non-standard. Perhaps that's what he practiced on the range. You will tend to do what you practice.
3. When two people are speaking at you either at the same time or nearly the same time, it creates confusion, particularly in a stressful situation. That significantly added to the problem.
4. Officer Yanez's f-bombs clearly indicate he was out of his element. I've been in a number of life-threatening incidents I encountered while flying. Not once did I ever hear an aircrew member repeatedly drop F-bombs. Instead, they tool care of business, followed their training, and we did what we had to in order to save return to safe (or safer) flight status. Heart-pounding? Absolutely. F-bombs? No.
5. Judging by the following account, Castile was removing his wallet immediately after informing the officers that he was armed. Highly unfortunately mixup by Yanez: "According to Reynolds' testimony and
a police dashcam video/audio, Castile told the officer he had a firearm and had one hand in his pants pocket after being asked for his license and registration. Reynolds said Castile was shot while reaching for his ID after telling Yanez he was armed. The officer shot at Castile seven times.
6. Yanez was charged: "On November 16, 2016, John Choi, the Ramsey County Attorney, announced that Yanez was being charged with three felonies: one count of second-degree manslaughter and two counts of dangerous discharge of a firearm. Choi said, "I would submit that no reasonable officer knowing, seeing, and hearing what Officer Yanez did at the time would have used deadly force under these circumstances."
7. I agree with John Choi.
8. The same day Yanez was acquitted of all charges, he was fired by the City of Saint Anthony.
9. I agree with the City of Saint Anthony.
The time it took to go from routine stop to total screw-up was all of five seconds and involved four comments, one by Castile and three by the two officers.
That is confusing
to anyone, people. The average human brain is on the edge of being incapable of processing information that fast. On adrenaline? Sure. But Castile's voice clearly indicated he was upset at all, so he was just being cooperative, and his "I'm armed" is
Why are cops overly alarmed when suspects calmly tell them they're armed? Criminals do NOT calmly offer an "I'm armed" to cops any more than they OC. Properly trained cops should NOT become alarmed as Yanez did. In fact, cops should be trained to be cautious in that situation such that they recognize the calm voice, the freely given and calm comment by the suspect that they are armed such that the cops will NOT speed-jerk react and start blowing people away based on false
I don't agree with the civil unrest. That's no way to handle this sort of clear mistake that Yanez made. The protests are fine, so long as they remain peaceable, and serve as a clear reminder that a lot of cops are just poorly trained.
While I agree that Yanez should not have been convicted of manslaughter, given all the circumstances, that was indeed a reckless discharge of a firearm. However, in the light of his possibly poor training by the department, I would hate to see him spend ten years in prison. I do believe, however, he should have received at at least a year as a stern reminder to the force to tighten up their training, as well as to disqualify Yanez from being a member of law enforcement anywhere else (felon status).
Before some yahoo here says I'm
the one doing the armchair quarterbacking, here, they need to read Choi's comments to the press