If htey thought she had a bomb, shooting her for all they know would have activated it. So I’m fairly confident they knew she had no explosive devices when they shot at her after she left her car and tried to flee.
The current spin from the left right now is that the police were heroic in that they were working without pay… Turns out they shot a frightened, mentally ill woman after she ceased to pose any risk.
@NS: your what if’s and your I’m fairly certains and assumptions of what the security officials thought are simply yet to be proven either way. There is no way for anyone to know what security thought or didn’t think, knew or didn’t know. And amateur speculation is that; speculation by persons who were not present and do not have the background, experience, or training to confidently come to any conclusions.
Also, attempts by anyone to make this into political issue or right versus left is ludicrous and I believe you know that. Or you are wired such that everything is a right or left issue, because this event is so far from such a thing.
So why did they shoot and kill her as she exited the car and tried to flee? I thought the risk was her ramming cars? Turns out she didn’t even do that. The cops crashed int he barriers. She humiliated them. She made them appear the be incompent boobs. A dental hygienist with mental problems embarrased them, so they exterminated her. It’s as simple as that. Why else is the media for the most part hiding that she was killed outside of the car?
The rest of the media is portraying it as they killed her while she was driving a car around trying to run people over. That’s not true. But that’s being presented as what happend. Why?
@NS. For the second or third time, what is your source that the driver was shot as she “exited the car and tried to flee” ?
Your argument that the police “exterminated her”, and used excessive force appears to be mostly based your claim she was exiting the car and trying to flee. If this was true, how would the police know that she didn’t have a weapon. What if she shot the first person she ran past? You are assuming way too much and making unjustified conclusions. I am not saying wrong conclusions, but to make conclusions at this point is absurd. I can’t answer your questions. They are based on hypothetical events. And, until ALL the facts are know, I am not going to flail about claiming extermination by the police.
So, what is your source that the media is covering up the facts of this case, and the driver (in your words) “exited the car and tried to flee.” ?
Lanier said Capitol Police officers pursued the speeding car eastbound and tried to stop it in Garfield Circle, just west of the Capitol lawn. A 23-year-veteran officer suffered non-life-threatening injuries when he crashed into a barrier.
Police had the woman’s car surrounded but she escaped, ramming a Secret Service vehicle as she fled. Lanier said police then fired their first shots at the suspect.
The driver made her way onto Constitution Avenue before eventually stopping in the 100 blocks of Maryland Avenue NE, near the Hart Senate Office Building.
Police then killed the driver after she got out of her vehicle and tried to flee.”
Thank you for providing your source. Apparently the media is not covering it up. Adds an additional item for the after-incident investigators to consider. And to verify this report given on the day of the event (?) is proven true. Very complicated case. Surely more to be learned.
@NS: UPDATE: Miriam Carey was NOT out of her car when shot, per NY TIMES. Questions about whether the police used the “correct” tactics are legitimate. But, as detailed below early accounts of such events are often inaccurate. Thus, many hypothetical questions no longer apply to this case. I have no opinion at this time as to whether the police did the right thing or wrong thing. That question will be responded to by the authorities after a review study. AFTER I read that study, then I will have the facts I need to volunteer an educated opinion. I am merely pointing out that any opinions registered today have as much longevity as an ice cube in Hades. Of course, asking questions is one way to learn facts and evaluate them. But, everyone should ask all the questions that “both” sides of the discussion would ask such that their “opinion’ can evolve. (Gosh, that would apply to just about any issue…..)
These are quotes from article:
1. “Initially, Ms. Carey was thought to have gotten out of the car when she was shot on Thursday afternoon. …. on Friday, new details emerged…” “Car bombs are one concern, as evidenced by the restrictions on vehicles around the Capitol complex, and officials said that by remaining in the car, Ms. Carey might have heightened fears that the car was an explosive threat. No firearms or explosives were found on her or in her car.
2. “Mr. Gainer, a former chief of the Capitol Police, pointed out that Ms. Carey had tried to breach a barricade at the White House and had fled at a high rate of speed despite being ordered to stop. Such behavior could raise the possibility of a car bomb.”
See, the sisters are saying their sister was freaked out by the police. While we can’t know what she was thinking, this is very plausible. I’ve always figured if anything goes wrong and the secret service orwhatever think you are a threat, you ar e dead, regardless of whether you were a threat or not. Hence why I never go by the whitehouse. Don’t want to risk even a minisculely low risk of someone powertripping.
Which story is more recent, the NY times or the USa today one? I had seen most other stories say she was either shot in her car, and a few saying they had mistakenly said she had gotten out of her car, but thos were older stories than the USA today one.
Do you think the police, the authorities/government would want people to know she got out of the car? If sheddidn’t get out of the car, why hasn’t he usatoday corrected itself?
@NS asked, “Do you think the police, the authorities/government would want people to know she got out of the car? If sheddidn't get out of the car, why hasn't he usatoday corrected itself??
I don’t know what the police, authorities/government want people to think. My god, there were a zillion witnesses. The facts will come out during the investigation.
The NY Times story was more recent. Why hasn’t USA Today issued a correction? Maybe they have. Or maybe a followup article gave an updated account.
So she was still in the car when shot, in fact, the car was in reverse…meaning she was trying to flee again.
@C_O: You are jumping to conclusions. The driver was not fleeing. It’s so obvious that she was attempting to back into a parallel parking spot. This was in order that she would not be blocking traffic before she exited her car and surrendered to the security officers. The liberal media is covering up the fact that the police knew she was parallel parking and that they knew she was going to surrender.
Also, the police should have taken a 2009 Ruhr University Bochum study into account. This study (per Wiki) study argued that a driver’s gender may affect parking ability. According to the research, female drivers took an average of 20 seconds longer to park than male drivers, yet were still less likely than men to park accurately. Liberals would have taken this study into account. Thus if the security guards would have been liberals, the driver never would have been killed!
This homicide investigator’s on-the-scene illustration provides information previously withheld by the liberal media. Don’t ask me how, but I was able to obtain a copy.
So she wasn’t out of the car after all. Oh well. Another scandal disproven by actual facts.
Because there’s no way the police would ever lie. There’s no such thing as a blue wall of silence. Funny how the USAToday, days after the events took place, stated she was killed outside of her car trying to flee.
Do you think the police would ever admit to any wrongdoing?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.