Second Alton Sterling Video Vindicates Cops

A second Alton Sterling shooting video has surfaced, and this video destroys just about every Black Lives Matter lie on the incident. The video was taken by Sterling’s friend, Abdul Muflahi. A lot of the copies of this video have been repeatedly compressed and reformatted, and are of very low quality. Some of the videos are of a high quality, except the hosts intentionally blurred out details around the shooting; details which would support the officers. We sought out the highest quality video we could find that isn’t blurred out, and it’s hosted by USA Today:

Also for reference, we have the first video of the Alton Sterling shooting here:

This article will be treated as a continuation of the first video article: HERE

You may have watched the second video and failed to notice that there are several extremely noteworthy pieces of evidence. While the names of the involved officers have been released, we will avoid using their names for a short time out of respect for them.

One of the first items of note in the video is that Alton Sterling’s left hand was clearly restrained and under the control of Officer One. However, Sterling’s right hand is clearly not under control of the officers. In fact, Officer Two’s position would have made it all but impossible for him to effectively control Sterling’s hand. You can see moments where Sterling is moving his elbow, making a pulling motion. Officer Two can be seen fighting Sterling for control of his hand. Then, just before the shots were fired, you can see Officer Two’s hand is empty and clearly not holding Sterling’s hand.

Second Alton Sterling can freely move his right elbow

Alton Sterling can freely move his right elbow

Officer Two fights Alton Sterling for control of his hand

Officer Two fights Alton Sterling for control of his hand

Officer Two's hand lost hold of Alton Sterling's hand moments before shooting

Officer Two’s hand lost hold of Alton Sterling’s hand moments before shooting

 

Officer Two’s hand then follows Sterling’s hand towards his right pocket, and that’s when you hear shots being fired. Later in the video you can see Officer One remove a gun from Sterling’s right pocket. The only logical conclusion is that Sterling was reaching for his gun. If somebody has two police officers pointing guns at them, while telling them not to move after discovering their gun, and the person then reaches towards their gun, then it’s really obvious that they are trying to get to their gun. We have clear evidence here that Sterling was going for a gun at the time he was shot.

You may have also noticed in this video that the first shots didn’t appear to be fired by Officer One, as many had assumed. You can see Officer One’s pistol when the first shots are heard, and there is no visible muzzle flash. This means that the first shots fired likely came from either Officer Two’s gun, or Sterling’s gun.

We still don’t have many details on this case, but every day the new details all seem to support the case that Sterling was justifiably shot as a result of his decision to reach for his gun. We’ll keep you updated as more details come in.

  • I noticed that after he was shot and the fight continued, Alton looked like he was gain control and rolling on top of the officer. Just then the cell phone camera scans away. Then later it comes back after the scuffle is over.

  • Esteban G.

    I got no criminal history, I don’t go around breaking the law, I go to work everyday, I come home everyday and 90% of my free time is spent inside the house with the wife and once in a while the wife and I may go out if we can afford it, that’s it, but I will tell you right now, I am afraid of police, I’m a 33 year old Hispanic, and I seriously believe police will think I am a criminal or involved in illegal activities until I prove I am not, and for that reason alone, I will not call the cops, no matter what I may witness, and believe me, I live in a poor side of town, I see things all the time as I wait for the bus, but I’m too scared to interact with police because, I’m afraid that if I go to grab my wallet to show my ID I may get shot, I am seriously more afraid of the police than the trash that hangs out around my neighborhood, I saw a crackhead trying to break into my neighbor’s house and I decided it was best to confront him my self than to call a cop and risk the cop getting his perps mixed up, since the guy breaking in was white… luckily for me, guy ran away as soon as I yelled “HEY!!”.

    This post is not nearly big enough to explain why I’m so afraid of cops but lets just say I been “bullied” by cops far too many times and every time it ends with nothing but everyone wasting their time, even had a gun pointed at me because the cop thought I was an Illegal trying to smuggle illegals into the US (Trip to Mexico once with my buddies… never again).

    Also, I live in Phoenix AZ, hope that helps explain things more.

    • Will

      I am from Phoenix as well, you definitely don’t need to explain anymore than that. Lol I left the state because of how violent it was getting a few years back in my neighborhood. I live on the other side of the country now and I can rest easy knowing that my kids are safe and my wife as well. Things are getting way out of hand, and in due time we will all see the outcome of this..

      • Scott

        Always comply. If youve done nothing wrong and a cop confronts you, comply with their orders immediately and, you will live. I cant think of any cases of questionable police shootings where the suspect wasn’t squirming around, ignoring orders, grabbing for a weapon or fighting the cops. If you simply comply, the worst thing that could happen is, you spend a few minutes in the back of an air conditioned cruiser but, you are alive. It is exceptinally hard to make an arguement that your Constitutional rights are being violated or, that you’re being treated unfairly if you’re dead.

    • Rob

      Because the police responding to a call do not know whom the good guys or the bad guys are until they have been cleared. Common sense to me. Put yourself in their shoes if you have the balls to be confronted with life and death situations. I bet you would never respond to any incident with your guard down. And criminals even look like good guys on the outer shell.

  • David

    Esteban you’re stereotyping for what reason. You assume policemen are out to get you because of your race? You’re as silly as all the blacks the claim their the target to be killed! You idiots can’t see that without law enforcement this place would go to shit. Wake up or get out of here. If you think America is that bad then beat it!

  • All I have to say is if a cop stops you why not be smart and actually follow what the cop tells you to do… in so many of these videos and situations the person does not follow what the cop is saying to do… Does that give the cop to tackle you and handcuff you yes of course but if you have no reason to fight the cops then why do it… Does the cops have a right to shoot you for no reason and to take your life, hell no…. but why if one cop does something wrong do they all have to be punished…

    • Clifford

      yes

    • 2crows

      They all have to be punished because they and their unions are covering for the bad cops… Clean it up, come back to your community and we will trust you..

      • Jeff Klein

        Utter nonsense. “Bad”cops are weeded out constantly.

        By other cops.

        • 2crows

          Yeah… But they think “bad cops”are the cops that rat on other cops. Whistleblowers are the ones to get weeded out

      • Charles Flinn

        That’s fine, but what do we do about all the bad politicians, which is all of them?

        • 2crows

          Well they are mostly incompetent, I agree, but not directly responsible for the deaths of unarmed civilians, women, children, and family pets…

      • Chris Guess

        where’d you get these prejudiced ideas from?

    • THE1LVZ

      So where in this video was Alton Sterling running? from the beginning his hands are up and he gets tackled then he gets shot in the chest!!! what the f*** are you watching???!!! your white supremacy is really losing out right now

      • krackerjack

        stfu clown you have no idea what your talking about…he was actually tazered before all of this and then taken to the ground.you clowns always making excuses and throw stupid shit in the mix saying he was shot for selling cd’s. the truth always comes out..this thug should have never had a gun in the begining..talk about that dickhead punk bitch!!!

        • lacideshae

          You’re right. He shouldn’t have had the gun, but last time I checked a felon possessing a firearm carries a sentence of 8 years…. NOT a death sentence. They didn’t know, at the time of the call, that he was a felon. They weren’t called for a “felon possessing a firearm” they were called for a man pointing his gun at someone in the parking lot, which by the way never happened.

          • Stan Obama

            So if you taze a an armed suspect, and he doesn’t fall, you should just walk away. No harm no foul. I hopee the cops remember that the next time they are trying to help you.

          • lacideshae

            How did they know he was armed? And no I don’t expect them to just walk away, they could have pepper sprayed him. Or tazed Him again. Or simply explained why they were there and placed him under arrest, instead of tackling him. Of course he was on the defense after being tazed and tackled, but it doesn’t look like he was reaching for a gun. Why would anyone be stupid enough to reach for a gun with 2 cops on top of them with guns pointed in their face? He may have been resisting arrest but last time I checked that was punishable by arrest and jail time, not death. And would you really sit there quietly as the cops taze you for no good reason? Then proceed to tackle you and point guns in your face… Again for no good reason? I don’t agree with him resisting arrest but he wasn’t doing anything wrong other than selling illegal CDs but that’s not why the cops showed up. They showed up because someone was supposedly pointing a gun at someone in the parking lot. Not only was he not doing that, no one was. The call was bogus. The person didn’t say it was Alton sterling doing it or that the person was wearing a red shirt. They just assumed he was the suspect.

          • Chris Guess

            Did you watch the video? It shows one of the officers pull a gun out of his pocket! Did you not hear the one officer clearly shout, He’s got a gun! He’s got a gun! and it wasn’t until that the other officer drew his gun. If Sterling has his hand in his pocket with the gun he could shoot the cops easily through his shorts. And his right arm was under the car where the police could not reach it. You don’t know that he is not going for his gun by this video so don’t just assume that he is not unless you can show some proof that he wasn’t. All signs point to this pedofile, With a long criminal history with an illegal weapon tried to shoot two cops because he didn’t feel like be arrested that day. Good riddance, these two brave officers did the world a service.

          • Outtahereasap

            You dumb bunny…..they knew he was armed because they got a call describing him waving a gun around….that is why they were there!! They had to assume the call was legitimate, what choice did they have? It was!

          • Kay

            They were called out for a man threatening someone who had a gun. My God you’re stupid.

          • Outtahereasap

            Oh…..you are a joke. They were called specifically for the gun threat issue and you still don’t get it? They were told he was threatening with a gun. In your assinine world they were supposed to walk up and say pretty please give it to me while giving him opportunity to pull it out? There is a procedure, which they followed. Disarming him would be part of that if he failed to cooperate. You fail to realize if that man had got off a shot when he reached for his gun he could have hit an innocent bystander! We know you don’t give a damn about him killing the cop so why bother to mention that obvious threat. The taser didn’t work to subdue his resistance and attempt to pull his gun….so guess what…..

          • steven

            sir, they did not follow proper procedure, and they were knuckleheads. They put themselves at risk due to bad decisions and poor training and support.
            Tbe suspect did not have a weapon at ready when they tackled him. Tbey did not draw their weapons u til they were grappling. The officer’s surprised yell “he’s got a gun” implies that tbe gun was either unknown or not considered a tbreat until this yell happened.
            You do NOT EVER initiate physical attempts at control unless no other choice is available. You only tackle a suspect who is a future threat and attempting to escape AND the escape is plausible. And in this case, if a tbreat is perceived, and tbe taser doesn’t immobilize him, you back up, put one in his ass and/or dominant shoulder.

            You say tbey followed procedure but that just telks me you have never had training in close or small arms combat, or in control and custody. These officers are not criminals, but they are not fit to be officers, if only because they will put themselves at risk if allowed to return to this job.

            If you supportrt these two, you should want them to live, and benching them is the only way to mitigate tbe risk they represent to themselves.

            Seriously – tackle a big man when you don’t k ow how to control him on the ground, then pop 3 in his chest when he struggles, all the while not considering he is armed???

            Knuckleheads. period.

          • CD Ard

            Not to quibble about your assessment of their actions or reactions….but, if the 911 call is to respond to a man waving a gun…you will naturally assume he has the gun when you arrive. If they didn’t see the gun in his pocket until he reached for it….that is one scenario. If they saw it and yelled drop it….he didn’t. My point is simply that the whole reason for them being there was a man was waving a gun. That is a pretty high alert situation for an officer, knowing the subject is entertaining the use of the gun on someone.
            Whether he needed to end up dead or not is subjective. Paying for his prison time again, for being a dangerous lawbreaker isn’t my favorite use of tax dollars.
            Proper Procedure is in their world not mine. You can critique them all day if you choose. I am just glad the guy didn’t get off a random shot that could injure or kill.

          • steven

            Sir, given the surprused and fearful tone of the officer when he yelled ” he’s got a gun he’s got a gun,” plus the obvious fact that the officers initiated the grappling, I am not convinced that they kbew he had a gun until that moment the offucer shouted.

            If they suspected he had a gun and tried to wrestle with him, they made the poorest choice they could have. Listen, I am more concerned by parsecs about these officers’ safety than the perp’s sadety. They endangered themselves and created avoidable risk when they tackled him. This is the resukt of poor training or lack of adherence to proper engagement tactics they were taught if they had good training. This is simply not debatable, no one with any training in control or custidy could possibly say that tackling this man was an optimal course of action given the context, whether he was armed or not.

            I truly believe we dishonor police officers as a whole when we accept that they are all too often not receiving adequate training and support. It is like defending a child with a skil saw who is being called stupid for operating this saw improperly, because he’s not stupid, and then, because you think admitting his poor saw use implies that he is stupud, you let him continue.
            When he cuts his hand off, it will be too late to pull him asude and show him how to operate that tool safely.
            The real sin is that if the boy IS smart, you could have taught him to be a caroenter. If these officers are goid nen, then honor and respect would compel us to provide adequate training and expect excellence from them. You don’t show resoect by sending them back out and praying they don’t get kilked next time they make a poor decision. That is so incredivmbly wrong and disresoectful and heartless, in my opinion. it certainly negates the proposution that blue lives matter

          • Facts not propaganda

            First I have to question your experience in this type of matter. Second you obviously have no idea how police are suppose to deal with situations. Police don’t “put one in the shoulder or in the buttox”. To hear you spout such ignorance shows me you are trying to pretend you have some knowledge of police tactics. Oh and that bs about retreating when something doesn’t work. You truly are an idiot.police don’t retreat they run into the fray so jerk offs lime you can run. They started with verbal commands which Sterling refused to follow. Then they escalated force with the tazer which was not effective. They looked at the situation and had to subdue him some how and physical take down was the next step. As far as the officer yelling gun that us what an officer days to let the other know there is danger of a gun. Add in sterling was pulling his gun. They did follow procedure and until you have been in that situation shut the hell up.

          • John Mills

            Your not very bright, are you?

          • pennylane339

            ROTF

    • suse

      When did the cops become Nazi rulers? Be smart and bow down — whether wrong or right, is that right? Give them all the power to do whatever. You might be the one to light a cigarette one day and end up dead in a cell.

  • Nathaniel Smith

    I find something interesting and noteworthy from seconds 23-29 in this video. If you look at Sterling’s right thigh, you will notice what appears to be a dark “spot” on his shorts. Is it possible that this is a scorch mark from the weapon being fired from inside his pocket? Is it just a smudge on his shorts? I’m curious as to what it is. Anybody have proper video equipment to zoom and enhance?

    • steven

      more likely he pissed his pants when tased.

  • John miller

    As far as getting shot for reaching for your wallet. Is it the state law in Minnesota to notify the police that you are carrying a firearm apon being stopped. And secondary there is only the cops word against the woman’s word as to what happened before she started recording.

    • CD Ard

      Conceal carry permits include training on how to present to an officer when stopped. 1. if you have a weapon sitting open in your lap you are violating the permit. 2. If you reach for your wallet with the weapon in your lap you are appearing to reach for the weapon. (duh). You are supposed to have the weapon concealed. You are supposed to tell the officer immediately that you have a permit and a concealed weapon. Then you follow his instructions.

  • brad

    Implicit in “he’s got a gun, he’s got a gun” is one of two scenarios – that officer 2 felt it in the decedent’s pocket while he was trying to restrain his arm or that knew the decedent was going for it. Why else would he have immediately following the shots gone straight to the pocket where the gun was?

    • steven

      also implicit in this shout is that the officer did not know he had a gun before this moment, which is supposedly why they were arresting him.

      So why were tbey tackling a man who posed no danger? Who was armed but they did not know it or consider him a threat?

      Tbe answer is all up and down this tbread…They wanted him to OBEY. They should have only needed him to surrender. They tackled him in frustration, not because it was necessary and certainly not because it was tbe correct tactic. It was the worst tactic!! The outcome was avoidable. They acted incompetently, and put themselves in danger that was avoidable. Not good.

  • Pingback: BREAKING: NEWLY RELEASED VIDEO DESTROYS LIBERAL NARATIVE on Alton Sterling SHOOTING!! -()

  • Me and I

    If y’all noticed the officer yelled he has a gun twice and waited a few seconds before shooting and as far a the hands being restrained how could possibly see that with a cop in the way. The smug on the pants could it be when he was tackled or from the car that’s right there.

  • Kenny

    If any of yall believe this guy sterling was seriously attempting to reach and harm two armed officers, you all have mental problems. I assure you sterling knows how dangerous police are and didnt intentially commit suicide by reaching for a gun. These officers should not have handled the situation how they did. Period.

    • 4Bravo1

      So why did he resist arrest while two officers with guns drawn tried to detain him for threatening another with a weapon? You are an idiot. Period. (90% of the time when someone types “period,” they actually have no argument)

    • CD Ard

      If Sterling is so brilliant why did he as a convicted felon carrying an illegal gun threaten someone with it, knowing that could bring down the police ASAP. Your logic is upside down.

  • Joe

    I don’t see where these videos absolve anyone of anything, neither Sterling nor the police. You can’t see the critical movements in any way, shape or form and you folks are just speculating by claiming the video shows Alton reaching for what’s alleged to be a gun. While the video shows the officer takes something from his pocket after-the-fact, it’s not clear enough to verify that is, in fact, a gun. This video only raises more questions. Good lord, he could have just shot him in the upper arm and that would have ended the threat of him reaching for anything if that was truly a concern. Without a working bicep, the dude wouldn’t be grabbing anything. You folks are simply jumping to your preferred conclusions when other explanations are possible. I don’t know what happened because there is no clear view but these videos don’t prove anything about the point of contention.

    • 4Bravo1

      Shoot the arm? Brilliant. You have never been in combat or done any combat related shooting obviously. Amazing that you think you are an expert with no experience. I’ll tell you what, let me go for a gun in my pocket so I can shoot you in the face repeatedly and at the same time, you try to shoot me in the arm. Sounds fair, right?

      • steven

        Again, I have experience. I’ll tell YOU what: I won’t tackle you, I’ll draw my weapon, stay in your front line if sight at 3 meters, and demand you stand down while my partner flanks you.

        You go for your pocket gun, and I’ll put 2 slugs in your shoulder before you get halfway there. Ypu keep reaching I’ll put a third in your thigh about an inch from your nuts.

        You can’t hit a shoulder at point-blank, why you tackling someone? You can’t hit a shoulder from 3 meters, why you out on the streets carrying that toy you can’t use properly?

        • 4Bravo1

          Someone is a little full of himself. Like I said, you have no clue how hard any of that is, do not understand that action Beats reaction and if you get within 3 meters of a guy reaching for a gun and think you are safe, you clearly haven’t had any realistic training. Where did you get your ideas, a comic book? You certainly haven’t talked to a single respected firearms trainer.

    • CD Ard

      Ok…lets pretend it ended up being a phone in his pocket…..what does that change?
      He was already known to be carrying a gun! You are suggesting he is reaching for his phone while the police are subduing him, why? Oh yeah…to call 911.

      • steven

        if he was known to be carrying a gun, then why did tbey initiate hand to hand grappling – the worst possible tactic! – and why did the one officer sound so surprised and say “he’s got a gun!” twice while the gun was still in the man’s pocket?

        They had no idea he had a gun, or else if they did they are grossly incompetent. Either way, grappling showed that these officers had poir training and poir decision making skills.

        I, unlike you and these officers, have extensive close-quarter , small arms, and control and custody training.

  • Nope

    The first video is altered. However, the cops aren’t guilty. Check out this video from CNN that shows the cops still on top of Sterling when the first few shots are fired. The cop who has his gun out is kneeling there with his gun out when you hear two shots ring out. There are no muzzle flash and the cops arm doesn’t move. In his position there’s no way that he could have fired two times without his arm, let alone his hand, moving.

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/06/us/baton-rouge-shooting-alton-sterling/#

  • Thomas

    Clearly these police offers killed this man for no reason. Why did they need to violently throw this man to the ground? The police expect everyone to obey them regardless of the circumstances. Apparently citizens of this country have no right to ask a police officer why they have been stopped or detained us. The police expect us to shut up and obey or we will feel their wrath. This is not right! I am a 46 year old white male. I live in an affluent neighborhood in Chicago. I am a business owner and a long term member of my community. I have not only seen, but been a party to the games that cops like to play with us. When being pulled over or stopped on the street I have had cops throw me into a wall, throw my partner on the ground all because we asked the simple question, “what did I do?” When we reported the incident to the local police chief he dismissed our complaints by stating that we had just come across some “cowboy cops.” Like I stated, I am a married white man age 46, I am a white collar professional that owns a local business. I pay my taxes, both income and very high property taxes. I have no criminal record, I remain calm when dealing with the police, but I find that while the police demand my respect and expect me to do as I am told without reason, they offer me no respect. I am a speck of dust to them.
    Cops must remember that they are there to serve & protect – they should set the example of how to treat people. The fact that they have a badge and a gun does not give them license to run roughshod over members of the public. If a white man that lives in an affluent neighborhood in Chicago has had negative experiences with the police I can just imagine how terribly the police treat a person of another race via racial profiling and God forbid that person be a minority and poor. If the police expect our respect they must also give it.

    • 4Bravo1

      You sound like a jackass. The police were called to investigate a man threatening an innocent citizen while armed. So the police should not have the ability to ensure their safety and stop criminals? I don’t believe a thing you say. Your comments completely discredit you. You clearly don’t know anything about the specifics of this case.

      • lacideshae

        They were called for no good reason. There was no such man pointing a gun at anyone. The store owner came out and told be cops that, and they still shot him. If they did nothing wrong why did they steal the surveillance tapes from the store owner and erase them?

        • 4Bravo1

          You are a moron and didn’t read anything about the shooting, have no use of force experience, and hate the police as a religion. Steal the surveillance tapes. You have nearly the whole thing available to you in front of your eyes. Where is your evidence that they stole and erased tapes? No good reason is a man threatening someone with a gun. You are really a horribly biased and hateful human being who does not care about facts.

          • steven

            You do not have use of force, tactical, or control and custody experience either, son. Or if you do, you were poorly trained and lack the skills to do a dangerous job like policing.

            Picing requires skillful and smart people, highly trained and well supported. Not knuckleheads that bumble into a situation, choose the worst possible tactical position (grappling with a large man! Stupid!), and create a risk that requires them to shoot a man.

            Why does everything have to be all or nothing? Why can’t they be innocent of a crime but guilty of incompetence? Good men but poorly trained as police? Why does the justification of tbeir final act if self defense have to include an ignorance of and a denial that they made bad decisions and possessed inadequate skills??

          • 4Bravo1

            Who says they can’t be innocent of a crime but still incompetent? You are delusional and ignorant of tactics. Tell me which instructor or reputable training organization told you to try to shoot people in the arm when they are trying to kill you. Just provide one single name. Lol. I guess that settles that argument. Moron.

        • 4Bravo1

          You clearly don’t have a clue about the case. Where is your source for them erasing the video?

    • Rob

      No reason, they were struggling over the guys gun. If they had intentions just to shoot the black man, why dirty the uniform trying to get him to comply. But hood rats have to show their tuff…can’t show compliance or mutual respect to an officer doing a tuff job.

      • lacideshae

        They weren’t struggling over his gun. They didn’t even know he had a gun. They had tazed and tackled him for no good reason. Of course he was defensive and resisting. He had no idea why they were there or why they were assaulting him.

        • Chris Guess

          What?! Assautling him?! you mean arresting him? They are the cops, they arrest people and keep the peace. When they show up you just do what they say because that is what they are paid to DO! The are the law! You will find out eventually if you play it cool. If not, and you are abig sack of dumb meat like this guy you get tazed, and tackled and shot if you still don’t get the hint.

          • steven

            NO. The Bill of Rights prohibits unlawful search and seizure, and guarantees that citizens be told the charges against them. Police should give a citizen – for everyone’s safety and for reasons in tbe Bill of Rights – every opportunity to surrender without physical violence. You don’t tackle a large man…stupid!!! You order him, at gunpoint from just beyond his reach, to surrender. He don’t you call for backup and surround him. You don’t tackle him, that is stupid and dangerous. If ge goes on offensive, you put him down with 2 to the shoulder and ass. You don’t take him out with 3 to the chest unless he is armed and the danger of gunfire is clear and present.

            It is not criminal to defend yourself after making poor decisions that created the imminent danger. But it is not heroic either. It is stupid.

        • CD Ard

          You are so ignorant. The reason they were there was to disarm him. They knew he had a gun from the 911 call. He had just threatened a man with his gun and the man called 911. Of course he knew why they were there! You really cannot be this stupid.

    • Shannon Anderson

      Exactly a D I’m sorry he didn’t deserve to die.. trigger happy people u ask me.

      • krackerjack

        i would have shot him 12 more times to make sure he didnt move

      • Jeff Klein

        No one’s asking you.

        • Shannon Anderson

          Freedom a fuckin speech did CTFU

          • CD Ard

            STFU…..
            Just a little freedom of speech.

      • CD Ard

        Who are you to determine who deserves what? I see you believe an officer deserved to die instead. You don’t think a felon threatening another citizen on the street with his illegal gun is trigger happy. Wow. Wow.

    • krackerjack

      wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh go cry to your mama bitch ass

    • nKhosi

      You live in the wrong area then; not the problem here in Western NC.

    • Chris Guess

      The man is being, arrested/detained. They tried asking him nicely. That didn’t work. So they had to try the not so nice way. That didn’t work either so the went to an even less nice way and tasered his dumb ass. That didn’t work either! so they had to tackle him! That didn’t work either because he tried to pull his gun on them from the ground, so they had to shoot him. Tjhe police are the authority. They don’t require your respect or anyone else’s. They require obediance. If some one IS obedient and THEN the cops get to rough that is when they cross the line.

      • CD Ard

        Nice and simply stated. Not to mention the part about being dispatched to handle a man with a gun….they weren’t simply driving by and randomly challenging citizens. Their goal was to disarm someone based on a 911 call.

      • steven

        They did not have to tackle him. It was a bad move. The worst tactical position possible. They – and he – would be far better off had they drawn, demanded surrender, and put a couple slugs in his ass if he refused and resisted.

        Close combat and grappling without a proper position of leverage and without sufficient training is a choice they should have known better than to make. And it was a choice….there were many better options.

        Remember…these guys put THEMSELVES in an un ecessarily risky position. To just ignore this and send them and others out again and again with no better training…man, that is disrespectful and uncaring to these men and all officers.

  • Mike Schaper

    We dont see the first part of the encounter, where the officers are approaching the man. For some reason this must have escalated. First, can we please take race out of this, there is no indication that the officers called the man nigger or spit on him or anything like that. Now, I know how some officers are, having been pulled over at various times in my life. In Oklahoma, I had 3 around me intimidating me for not wearing a motorcycle helmet,calling me “boy”. In Iowa, it was all attitude, having an officer block me from leaving with his car, and then threaten me, because he thought I “looked at him funny”. So, it is smart to avoid the cops, where ever you might be. If you cannot avoid the cops and are stopped, the next best thing to do is comply with what you are asked to do, this is just smart. What do you think will happen to you if you start giving the officer a blast of sh-t? Nothing good, that should be crystal clear by now. I disagree with police actions more than I agree with them, it seems these trained officers are really no more trained than you or I, and prefer just to shoot people, when they have other options. They FAILED to restrain this man. They failed to have control of the situation. Even if somebody does something stupid, does that person automatically have to die? The very least, the officers need to loose their jobs, even if they are found to be “right”. They did not do their jobs correctly, and people get fired every day for that.

    • 4Bravo1

      They tried to restrain an armed man and escalated appropriately to deadly force. They went above and beyond to avoid shooting this man. You are a complete idiot to say otherwise. You are totally untrained and lack any knowledge of the subject, why would you think your comment is in the least bit meaningful. So they should fire any officers who don’t immediately control a person in hand to hand combat? Really the most moronic thing I have read on the internet today.

      • Rob

        Exactly. If their intent was to out right murder this guy, why waste rolling around, struggling with him to try and get him to comply. They would have just walked up and shot him. But thugs just can’t follow instructions and have to show their hoodness.

    • CD Ard

      Well, hot shot…..you already stated you couldn’t see the entire encounter so you failed to make an educated judgement.

  • Aaron

    We have had several recent cases where a shooting by a LEO was questionable and even some that were without question unjustified. This is not one of them. This is a violent armed felon fighting officers. It is clear his right arm is not restrained. He has a gun in his right pocket. As a nation if tolerate officers who are clearly in the right to be vilified to fit an agenda all of the good decent and honorable officers will leave the profession. They put their life on the line….do everything right….survive the encounter only to be hung out to dry, how long before good people have no other choice but to walk away from the job? The only people left willing to do the job will be the last people we want doing it. This must stop.

    • steven

      or we could hire professionals, give them extensive training and proper support, use each incident to create better and more safe procedures, and treat them with respect by expecting tbeir best and compensating them for this excellence.
      letting tbem off the hook after they bumble through and create unnecessary risks for themselves, and then sending them out again with a thumbs up, is the most disrespectful way we can possibly treat these men.

      Gold star for incompetence, go back out there and try not to die. Sorry, no funds for training, but you’ll figure it out as you go…good luck!

  • tim brown

    I fail to see how this vindicates the killers. Shooting a man before he pulls his gun is murder. Always has been.

    • 4Bravo1

      You are a moron with no understanding of the law. It has never been murder to shoot a man attempting to pull a gun on two officers called by the public to check a man who was threatening others with a gun. Please crawl into a corner and never discuss use of force again. You don’t know the law in the least. Case law clearly proves you wrong.

    • cholly8524

      And all I saw was the second officer dig, and I mean dig in his pockets for his tiny ass weapon.

      • Jeff Klein

        A gun is a gun….

      • CD Ard

        You do not vindicate the large space between your ears.

    • Jeff Klein

      Actually it’s not, so….

      Your post is exactly why average citizens have no business interpreting these videos.

    • CD Ard

      WTF are you talking about? He is allowed to get off a shot first? You would make a lousy prosecutor for your claim.

  • Mike

    If two grown ass men can’t effectively neutralize the limbs of another, confidently, in a combat situation, they don’t deserve to carry a gun.

    All lives matter. This color separation stuff isn’t helping anyone. How blind are you?

    • David

      HUH? Always has been? What statue is that? Please educate me. If someone is reaching for a weapon – they’re an immediate threat. That’s the same BS that you hear from some stupid parents. They tell their kids “never swing the first punch”. Bullshit. It’s called imminent danger. You do not have to wait for someone to hurt you, before you defend yourself.

      It’s very apparent that you’ve never been in a situation where your life was on the line.

    • 4Bravo1

      You are a joke. I challenge you and any one of your friends to neutralize my limbs while I am armed. Care to take me up on it? You are arrogant, idiotic and clearly have no experience in such matters. You certainly will never be allowed to carry a gun for a living while demonstrating that kind of bravado and stupidity.

      • steven

        I’ll take you on, son. I won’t grapple with you. I’ll draw my weapon, demand surrender from 3 meters out, and pop 2 slugs in your ass if you make a move.2 more in your shoulder if you don’t stand down.

        Then you get to live a long time and ponder your stupudity, and my extensive training.

        • 4Bravo1

          You have clearly not taken a single defensive firearms from a reputable instructor.

        • 4Bravo1

          Delusional.

    • cholly8524

      And you still don’t get it do you? Well, I’m not going to teach you and the other clowns stating this was a good shoot. Wouldn’t expect you to say the truth anyway.

    • krackerjack

      you stupid lol

    • CD Ard

      Subduing a man isn’t as simple as you state. Yes, it will happen, but in the process he could reach for a gun. The taser didn’t appear to have effect. I think they did pretty good considering he was partially under a vehicle

      • steven

        No shit it ain’t simple!! So emwhy did they choose that action??

        Are you blind? They are not criminals, but that don’t mean they ain’t incompetent knuckleheads.

  • There’s also an important piece of evidence that I have yet to see anyone else identify, and which is readily discernible in the version of the video in which
    portions of the audio are not bleeped out (8-9 second mark https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCo_IvK7f6o). Immediately after Officer 1 draws his weapon and warns Sterling not to move, Officer 2 can clearly be heard saying (depending on the name of the other officer), “Blane/Lake he’s going for a gun!” It’s at that point that the first shots are fired. So, in addition to the verbal confirmation of a gun on Sterling, and movement indicating Sterling was reaching for said gun, there’s also verbal testimony by the officer himself that that’s in fact what he perceived Sterling to be doing. Not quite the “Gun! Don’t move! Bang!” narrative being perpetuated.

  • Pingback: Kansas City Police Officer Shot - In Critical Condition - Blue Lives Matter()

  • 4Bravo1

    A perfectly legal police shooting. Good work guys. If there is anything to critique it is that you gave an armed suspect too many chances. Using a taser then going hands on against a reported armed person threatening others is not a great idea. Good thing you were aggressive enough and in control enough to make it work. Thank you. All of these other idiots don’t have a clue about the law or how dynamic situations like this can unfold, or are racist or otherwise bigoted.

    • steven

      It was a stupid, incompetent idea to go hands on, and they were not aggressive enough to make it work. They were stupudly aggressive and chose a tactuxalky in fdrior approach that they were not skilked enough to make work. They put tbemselves in unnecessarily greater danger by going hands on, and it ended in a death.

      How the hell do you see this as ok, that these guys were poirly trained and doing a dangerous job without adequate skills, and they put themselves in a situation where they were so afraid that they might be at risk of being shot that they killed a man point-blank and watched from up close as he twitched and died.

      That is not OK. They should not be doing this job with such a lack of training and support. They should not be choosing tactics which anyone with these skills would tell you was the worst possible choice in this situation. Grappling with a large man is a last resort.

  • ChasUGC1

    I’m African American. And, while I’ve seen many horrible video’s, where cops are clearly using excessive force, from Rodney King to modern incidents, I believe this shooting was justified. A obvious Thug(mouth filled with Gold Teeth), carrying a concealed weapon(GUN), and wrestling with the police? Come on, that is a recipe to get yourself murdered. How could this guy have saved his own life instead of acting like a bad ass? 1. Don’t carry a gun to sell CD’s. 2. When you hear the cops, toss the gun. 3. Obey the cops commands and don’t resist. 4. Don’t put gold in your teeth, looking and acting like a bad ass thug.

    • Bluedog

      Are you actually so mentally disabled you honestly believe saying your African American on post then reciting every ignorant bigoted sterotype a backward inbred hick could come up with, that people are actually going to believe you’re black?

      Jesus Christ. …just how mentally disturb are you?

      • Shannon Anderson

        Apparently they’re pretty dumb…lmfao wtf gold teeth got to do with? I come from an Italian family and my great-uncle had gold teeth. And he was in the damn military people are so f****** stupid

        • ChasUGC1

          I doubt that an Italian(I.E. Caucasian) is looked upon the same as an African American with gold teeth. I doubt that an Italian with baggy pants and no belt is looked upon the same as an African American. In this society, if you are African American, with baggy pants and no belt, you are likely a previous felon. Where as, if you are a Caucasian with baggy pants and no belt, you are just going along with the current hiphop style. Personally, I wish the young African American men, non-felons, would recognize this fact, and dress for success, and not for caution and targeting by police. Luckily for me, and where I grew up in Hollywood, Ca., the trend was the Miami Vice look, the punk rock look, or the rock star look. So, the police didn’t bother me on the street. African American parents, especially in poor neighborhoods need to be aware of the stereotypes and protect their children from it. Even when I was living in poorer neighborhoods, I dressed like a normal schoolboy, with my mind on my books.

          • Shannon Anderson

            Well how bout this my husband is fuckin black so I know wtf is going on… My kids are mixed. And yes Italian American I am there is not a bit of Caucasian in my grandmother. You think Italians didn’t have problems well they sure did. Believe me I’ve faced enough backlash for being with somebody that wasn’t my race. INCLUDING BLACK peeps. Anyone that has an issue with anybody of any gender or any color f*** off

          • ChasUGC1

            I think you have an issue that needs to be addressed. Black is a color and not a race of people. It is a color with a horrible definition too. I don’t understand why so many African American people accept being called “black”. I think they have been conditioned by society to call themselves whatever society deems appropriate at the time. Some young African Americans even call themselves the “N” word and they think there is nothing wrong with it. The definition of the color “black” is “evil”, “sinister”, and without light or goodness. Such as in the saying, “A person with a black soul”. Why would any race want to be defined so horribly as the color, black? I think it has a lot to do with self esteem in the race. There have been many, “based on true stories” movies about how young African American children viewed themselves as ugly, such as the movie, “Separate But Equal”. I noticed how you referred to yourself as Italian American or Caucasian. But, you referred to your husband as “black”, and the race as “black peeps”. It seems to me that you have developed some issue with referring to African Americans as “blacks” but, you have no problem calling yourself, “Italian American” or Caucasian. Why not give others the same respect instead of using a derogatory moniker on African American people? If you hang around people who refer to themselves as “black” or “N—-‘s”, I think those people have been conditioned by society to lack self esteem or self respect for themselves and their race. The terms “blacks” and “N—-‘s” denotes immediate caution and mistrust. It is rooted in the definitions of those words.

          • jjandk

            I have a sincere question for you since you have strong opinions about what folks should call themselves. What do you suggest my son call himself? He is mixed race, caucasian and negro. His birthmother is a North American of Italian decent and his birthfather is a North American of US Virgin Islands decent. He was born in the USA so he is a North American. He has moderately brown skin and more physical characteristics typical of the negro race than caucasian. African-American isn’t a race or a culture. Black-American is a culture but it’s not his. I don’t understand the requirement that every North American of the negro race identify as an African-American regardless of ancestry or black regardless of culture. I think my son should simply be an American.

          • ChasUGC1

            I think you have it wrong. Black is a color, not a race. If you are African, then you are of African descent. Once, you become an American citizen, you are African-American. It is just like Italians, who become American citizens. They are Italian-Americans, but they are just called Caucasian. Negro is just the Spanish translation for black. Just like Blanco, is the Spanish translation for white. Most Spanish speaking people refer to African-Americans as “blacks”, which is wrong. It is a color, not a race. In the U.S., unfortunately, if you are 1% African, you are African-American. If you are 50% Caucasian and 50% African, they will frown upon you, if you try to say you are Caucasian. In the U.S., they will still refer to you as the “N” word, if you are 1%. Most African-Americans, who have been in this country for 200 years, rarely have 100% African blood due to the rapes that went on during slavery times. At one time, some parent was likely mixed, when it comes to African-Americans. Black is a color, just like white. It is not a race. If you look at most Africans, they are a lot darker than most African-Americans who have been in the U.S. for a long time. But, in this country, they will still refer to you as coons, blacks, or the “N” word. It is wrong to refer to people with derogatory terms, but that is why we have these race problems in the U.S. Black anything, is not a culture. It is the African-American culture or race.

          • Sam Boden

            Quit with your shh already, you are standing in a shallow pool while claiming you are swimming. You spout all these somewhat historically accurate notions but the understanding of what it all means is so damn lacking. You are the perfect Tom, intelligent enough to sound like you know your stuff, but not enough to actually understand what you are saying.

          • ChasUGC1

            I guess you are one of those who hate on your own people. You have been well conditioned to hate yourself and hate on your own people by this society. I guess you don’t understand that “black” is a color and not a race. You will call yourself anything this society tells you that you are, regardless of how degrading it is for you. “African-American” is not a made up term. Just like “Italian-American” is not a made up term. It means that their origins are Italy or Italian and they are American citizens. Just like African-American means that we have Africa or African origins and are American citizens. But, society tells you that you can’t refer to yourself as African-American because it is gives you esteem. Instead, you must refer to yourself as “blacks” which is a demeaning term. And, you accept it. You do just what “Massa” wants you to do and you act just the way “Massa” wants you to act. I can see that you refer to your own people as Coons out of your hate for your own kind. This is just the way “Massa” wants you to act. You “hop Jim Crow”, just the way “Massa” wants you to do. You are still a slave to “Massa” in your own mind. He has well-conditioned you, my brother. Some of us have even been so well-conditioned to refer to our fellow brothers as the “N” word. I won’t under class and under mine my own people, because it would under mine me as a person of that race. I feel sorry for you, my brother, that you can see what you are doing to yourself and your people. When you hate on your own people, you hate on yourself. You say that you are half white and it is clear that you would prefer the white side, but society will not let you have it. So, you hate on the one side that will accept you, and you hate on it, instead of trying to raise it up. I’ll pray for you.

          • steven

            How about Mocha? Can I recognize that my lovely baby niece is the color of coffee? Can we call non-white people Starbucks, and specify dark roast, mocha, and latte?

            But, you know, my buddy J is truly black. no denying it. He is beautiful and jet black. It ain’t his race, it is his color, and it ain’t bad, it is just his color. My wife is jealous of his skin, she gets sunburned. I think my baby niece is the lovliest child I have ever seen, on the skin and in her heart. Someone ever tells her that black is evil and she needs to call herself what YOU say is right and needs to conform to a style that YOU approve, I tell her that the Mo Fo who said that is a piece of nothing and his opinions are not worthy of being heard by her beautiful mocha ears.

            And she is not African American. She ain’t an immigrant, though I got nothing against immigrants. She has no African family or nation. She is an American, with African, English, and Jewish-Armenian ancestry..

            Black is beautiful. White is the absense of hue. Black is the absense of hue. Tbe difference between the two is not a duality, it is a gradient. Black is not the absense of light, black simply absorbs the light that white reflects. The light shines on both, wherever there is light. In the dark, we are all black and invisible. With enlightenment, we see each other and see that the entire gradient, superwhite like my wife or superblack lime my buddy or mocha like my baby girl or latte like me, is all beautiful.

            Don’t go telling us that black is ugly and evil. Tell that to someone who gives 2 shits what you call yourself. We’re all going to Starbucks and having a frappucino, with whipped cream on top and chocolate drizzles.

          • CD Ard

            Nooooooooo! Starbucks donates to and supports Hillary!

          • ChasUGC1

            Race is not a color, it is a nationality. You really don’t seem to get it. It is great if you are called white, because that word is defined as pure, without blemish and full of light or goodness. We know that is a lie because there are a lot of evil white people. But, if you are called black, instead of African American or African, it is defined as evil and sinister, such as “A person with a black soul”. It is also a lie. Our entire society is based on lies, and this is the problem. We can’t stereotype Caucasian people with positive labels, whites, and negative labels if they are African Americans, calling them “blacks”. It is racist. Caucasians have called and labeled the African Americans with the “N word” for so long that now even the young African Americans refer to themselves with that horrible moniker. And they have been so conditioned by this racist society that they see nothing wrong with referring to themselves by that horrible, demeaning moniker. We need to stop labeling people with derogatory monikers. We need to call African Americans, African Americans, instead of labeling them with the derogatory monikers of “blacks” or the “N word”. This is the root of the problem in America. We live in a racist society, and it always has been this way. The police are just part of that system, and they have also been conditioned to devalue the life of “blacks”. We are a threat, by definition, evil and sinister, and we are being exterminated. But, clearly you have been well conditioned by this racist society, and you just don’t get it. Why is the “N word” used only on African Americans, when it is defined as “ignorance”, and that definition fits many Caucasian people as well? People who don’t get it are ignorant, and the “N word” should be used to describe them too. But again, this is another example of the racism in American society, using derogatory monikers to demean people only because of race. The problem with the police is that this racist society has conditioned them as well, and then gave them guns, and weapons to target the devalued lives of “blacks”. It is racist, plain and simple. And anyone who doesn’t get it is ignorant, and they should, by definition, be described accordingly, with the “N word”, regardless of race.

          • Sam Boden

            My father is a black and my mother is white, I’m black. Your son is black, and shouldn’t hesitate to identify as such. He also is American without a doubt. This ChasUGC1 character is a fraud.

          • CD Ard

            Why can’t you simply call him an American?

          • Sam Boden

            “I doubt that an Italian(I.E. Caucasian) is looked upon the same as an African American with gold teeth. I doubt that an Italian with baggy pants and no belt is looked upon the same as an African American.”
            – Yet…yet you use that as a “reason” for blacks (yes black, Africa-American is a made up political term much like Hispanic) to get shot. So you are saying that since we are profiled, we should make sure to modify our behavior and appearance. That is to conform to oppression. And you have the nerve to call that lady ignorant. An abused wife should not provoke her husband right? You, my friend, are what we blacks, successful and not so successful, call a coon. You are a bigger contributor to our strife than a baggy pants wearing gold tooth-er. You are a traitor. I hope they have a place for you on their bus, because ours is full…..of ni**as.

            And to save you some time; I work in the criminal justice system, I have a first hand, every day knowledge of the issues of crime, who commits it, profiling, and prejudice. So save your armchair socio-analytical bull**** for an African-American or your white friends, cus I’m black cuz, wearing a suit, and frankly do not give a sh**.

        • Outtahereasap

          You will just have to recognize that is now a badge of honor in gangster world…sorry

      • ChasUGC1

        I am not “black”. That is a label that you seem willing to wear. Just like the label that young African Americans use on each other. They have been so conditioned by society that they see nothing wrong with calling their own people the “N” word. IF you have a mouth full of Gold Teeth and carry a concealed weapon, you are going to be labeled negatively by society and, the police they hire to enforce those labels. What I am saying is don’t give them an excuse to label you. How are you going to get a decent job with a mouth full of gold teeth? Think about your future. I embrace a different ideology, a Christian ideology. I don’t embrace the Thug life. I don’t have tattoo’s all over my body; mouth filled with Gold teeth; I don’t carry a concealed weapon, and I don’t refer to my people as “blacks” or the “N” word. I respect my temple, and I respect all other people, regardless of race.

        • noname

          You are ignorant. Do you know how many successful hardworking business people are out there with ENTIRE body suits of tattoos and gold teeth. That means thug to you? Actions are what make people. You are arguing the very same thing this world tries to eradicate… that a person is judged on what their skin (or teeth) look like. Tsk Tsk

          • ChasUGC1

            You are the one who is ignorant. You are ignorant to how this world really works. Why do you think that when someone applies for good business job, that they cover up their tattoo’s? Even jobs like McDonald’s will likely not hire you if you have a mouth full of Gold teeth. In business, it is repulsive.The only job you can get is a musician, basketball player, or maybe an actor. But, even actors are normally required to cover up their tattoos for a role. Did you ever see Angeline Jolie’s Tattoo’s when see was starring in the movie, “Tomb Raider”? Tattoo’s all over your body and a mouth full of Gold teeth is NOT how most businesses want to be represented in the industry. Try going to a business job interview with baggy pants hanging down, your underwear showing, and a mouth full of Gold teeth. I seriously doubt you will get that job.

          • noname

            Thugs and dealers won’t get jobs because they don’t know how speak intelligently or how to be respectable about their appearance (ie tats on faces, baggy pants, ripped shirt). But anyone who really knows “how this world works” as you say, have no problem. These are the people I’m defending. The hard-working, educated people. That even though you have tattoos, you can cover what you need to survive in the business world. I love tattoos and have quite a few but I know how to be businesswoman. Yes I am a woman with tattoos all over and still manage to hold down and office going government job. And FYI… I have never had a problem during interviews about my tats because I know how to be professional about it (probably never knew I had them). I am not as ignorant as you think. Yes, appearance has a lot to do with it! I agree 100%. I do now see you said “mouth full of gold” while I thought you meant 1 or 2 teeth… yes a gold grill is pretty trashy and I def wouldn’t hire someone like that for my company.

          • CD Ard

            Ugh. Tatoos are disgusting. I believe people do that to get attention. There is no other logical explanation. It looks awful. All of them.

          • steven

            People do much of what they do to get attention. It is just the type of attention, the value of the attention, and the value if the manner of attention- seeking that makes tattoos bad, and commenting on discus … good? ok? acceptable?

            Tattoos are no different in a day than haircuts or clothes. they only take on more questionable valuations when it is realized they are permanent. But unlike hairstyles, a strategically placed tattoo may never ve seen by anyone but your intimates.

            To each his own, but i live in Oregon. If i won’t hire simeone with tats ir purple hair, i will be denying myself some of the best and brightest people available.

          • bob

            Yes noname and those successful hardworking tattooed businessmen with a gold grill and they are called DRUG DEALERS bingo.

          • ChasUGC1

            Exactly. So, why label yourself that way as an African American? If you must be a drug dealer, don’t stick out.

          • Paul Tiller

            The old saying, you never get a second chance to make a good first impression! Thugs run with thugs and intelligent people run with intelligent people! That’s just the way it is.

          • CD Ard

            Yes, it does to me. They are sending me a message that they are tough and in control….gangster/thug. Tatoos are scary. Ethnicity has less to do with it.

        • Chris Guess

          You seem to be jumping to conclusions about why the police were trying to arrest this guy. I haven’t seen any actual info about what probable cause they had or didn’t have. That is an entirely different discussion about whether the cops acted in self defense or not. But I would be interested to know if there was anything in the police incident report.

          • Outtahereasap

            They got a 911 dispatch call from that locale stating a man with his description was waving a gun around. That is probable cause to assume he still had possession of the gun on arrival. It is their duty to respond to such a call to protect innocent people that he might shoot. Good grief.

          • CD Ard

            Probable cause to arrest him was a 911 call describing him, his location and his brandishing a gun in a threatening manner. They would have to assume a citizen was in danger, so deescalate and disarm the man to prevent harm and danger. They can’t call dispatch a liar and just drive by. I doubt if they ever saw his gold teeth. He probably wasn’t smiling. He may have been high which would explain a few things about his erratic behavior.

      • Cindy Fitzpatrick

        I think his point was exactly that. If your a convicted felon child rapist with a felony record as long as your arm. You DONT carry a big red flag waiving it . LOOK AT ME>I”M OUT HERE COMMITTING MORE CRIMES . FELON IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM. Doing my BEST to get your attention !!!! HELLLLLOOOOO MCFLY. Did you not think that through before you posted it . Jesus Christ !!!!!!

        • lacideshae

          Child rapist? Where the hell did you get your information? Carnal knowledge of a juvenile and child rape are 2 completely different things. Also he wasn’t waving a gun around. And lastly, when they pulled up to the scene they had no way of knowing he was a felon. He could have had a legal concealed carry license for all they know.

          • CD Ard

            You just don’t get it do you. Under the law…statutory rape IS rape of a child. The officers were called to the scene by dispatch 911 for the purpose he was showing, or waiving, or brandishing a gun in a threatening manner. They were on alert the guy was entertaining shooting someone based upon dispatch. If conceal carry is legal there….he would have done the correct thing. Hands in the air and immediately stated to the officers he had a conceal carry permit with weapon in his right pocket. That is part of the test to get the permit.
            His behavior from the time just prior to 911 call up to the moment he was shot was completely out of line, illegal, and posed a danger.

    • Chris Guess

      That isn’t murder, that is suicide. Don’t even use the word murder. That is a legal term of art. You haven’t murdered anyone unless a court says you are guilty of murdering someone.

      • ChasUGC1

        I don’t need a court to tell me what I know. I WOULD need a court to try to get away with it.

  • Michelle Boggs Dobson

    actually…according to authorities it proves alton’s gun never left his
    pocket and Alton was shot 2 times in the chest and then another 4
    times. It does not vindicate the cops.

    • Shannon Anderson

      This video is sick. I hate to say,it but I’d rather see them beat him and him still be alive. But that wouldn’t happen because then therel would be proof of racism it’s much easier to shoot somebody I guess and say they were fighting the cops xcetera

    • krackerjack

      cry me a river…i guess you studied law lmao

  • 2crows

    Try Dillon Taylor and tell me what you think

  • krackerjack

    doesnt matter..he is dead..another convicted rapist off the streets with a felony that should have NOT carried a gun by law..you people try to find excuses for every little thing to make cops look like killers. when a mother fuckers tells you not to move and a gun in your face and you move..news flash you deserve what you get esspecially when reaching for a gun..end of story. like it or not 99% you will be shot!!!

    • lacideshae

      And where did you get your information about him being a rapist? He was charged with statutory rape. His son who has been seen all over the news in tears over losing his father, was the product of that so called “rape” the mom was 14 and sterling was 20. Although illegal, and immoral , it was consensual. No rape occurred. Also if you’ve been tazed you will have involuntary muscle spasms, so them yelling don’t move is seeiously idiotic. He doesn’t appear to be reaching for his gun, that’s a complete assumption. He was a felon in possession of a firearm, and should have been arrested and charged with such crime…. By a JUDGE. It is NEVER the cops right to take justice into their own hands and kill someone over something they should have simply been arrested for.

      • Cathy A. Lockhart

        Regardless of the product of the action, statutory rape IS rape. A 14 year old child is not old enough to give consent. I agree sometimes the law is used vindictively, like when a 17 yo has sex with a 16 yo they’ve been with for 3 years, but he was a TWENTY yo grown ass man having sex with a 14 yo child. That’s not only statutory rape, it’s child molestation!

        • lacideshae

          Not at all. Girls lie about their age all the time. Have you seen a 14 year old girl lately? They look like they’re in their 20s. I don’t think a 20 year old should be charged with rape and called a child molester for having consensual sex with someone he thought was of age. Do you ask for ID every time you sleep with someone?

          • MikeAT_ACW

            Madam, I don’t know what Narcotics you are on but please pass them down, I have a serious headache.

            From a Reuters puff peace. (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-louisiana-police-sterling-idUSKCN0ZM2J4):

            “…According to the Louisiana Department of Corrections, Sterling was convicted in 2000 for a crime against a minor that led him to spend about four years in prison and be registered as a sex offender.

            A court document reviewed by Reuters showed that he was accused of having sex with a 14-year-old girl and impregnating her when he was 20.

            Sterling was arrested several times after his release in 2004. His most recent conviction was in 2011 for illegally carrying a weapon, the Corrections Department said….”

            Seeing your writings show you to be clueless, I’ll type slow so you can follow it.

            Sterling is a CONVICTED FELON. By Louisiana law, he cannot possess a firearm, end of discussion. He knows that because he is a felon and he was arrested five years ago for, did you get this, “illegally carrying a weapon.”

            2. He raped a 14 year old. You may not like that, but he did, the child cannot consent.

            3. The officers were told he was armed, he started to fight them, Sterling was moving his hands towards a weapon. At that moment, the officer has “reasonable fear for suffering loss of life or serious bodily injury and he may use deadly force.” You can Google the quote if you want to.

            4. If the waste of sperm had simply put his hands behind his back, been arrested, he could have been out of jail in a matter of hours. He is dead because he tried to use an illegal weapon on two cops. Get it, he is the reason he is dead.

            Understand another thing, we (cops, yes, I’m a police sergeant) are not justice. We are order. We insure, to the best of our ability, harmony in the streets. But we do a difficult job and it is never a pleasant view.

            If Sterling though he was innocent, the place for that discussion is in a court. He has no legal authority to assault those officers.

            BTY, don’t worry. If you are in Baton Rouge, I have no question if Mr Sterling’s hood rat friends would try and forcefully get a donation of money or other things, those two officers will be there to protect you from those animals.

          • Outtahereasap

            Wow! just…wow! Thank you! Well said! I would like to add to your comments and facts that when the guy goes for his gun it isn’t just you officers under threat. His waving arm could fire an uncontrolled shot that could injure or kill bystanders. That is what you are doing …protecting and keeping peace!!
            Thank you so much for what you do to protect your community!

          • steven

            Sargent, do you believe it was tactically optimal and the best way to minimize risk to themselves and bystanders for these officers to tackle this large man and grapple with him?
            Did they demonstrate to you a high level of control and custody training in that video?
            If they saw him as a threat prior to initiating that wrestling match they wrre ill prepared to win, why did they engage unarmed and not step back, draw weapons, and put 2 slugs in his thigh and shoulder?
            If he was not a threat prior to tackling him, then they put THEMSELVES AND BYSTANDERS at risk by initiating a physical struggle that was tactically inferior to coersing or imposing control from 3-4 yards out, with one officer in front and the other flanking his dominant side. You give him tbe opportunity, under threat of weapin fire, to stand down without physical engagement. No cooperation, wait for backup. He gets aggressive or reaches for weapon, 2 slugs in non- lethal areas like ass and shoulder.

            If they don’t have the training to recognize the superior tactical approach, the procedural knowledge to know better than to grapple except as last resort, the training to quickly control such a grapple, and the weapons’ skill to hit a shoulder or ass of a large man from 4 meters, why are they being asked to do this serious job that requires these skills??

          • ChasUGC1

            So, I guess your idea is just to shoot “Americans” who threaten you.

            And, you call yourself patriotic? I call it fascist, racist and anti-American. The police have no problem taking into custody the 13 year old white kid, who killed his father and shot up a school. But, they just kill a 13 year old African American kid who had a toy gun, and was no threat to them except that which was in their racially motivated, perceived mind. And then they kill another African American who had an electronic cigarette. Are the police really so stupid that they can’t tell the difference between a gun and an electronic cigarette? But, the police had no problem taking into custody a white kid who killed eight or more African Americans who were just praying in church. Are we at war now against American citizens because of their race? Or, have we always been at war because of race? Are we really talking about “Blue Lives Matter”? Are we really saying that its “Black Lives” vs. “Blue Lives”? Are white people giving vests, guns and other weapons to the police to kill African Americans on the streets? This is what you are justifying, and you really call yourself an American? Why not just call yourself an American Nazi? It is just more white supremacist BS. And, the courts are letting these cops get away with it, because the system is racist and it has always been this way. It wasn’t about “All Men Are Created Equal” in the beginning, when these statements were obviously a lie because the country had slaves. It wasn’t true 200 hundred years later when there was segregation, Jim Crow laws, hangings and rapings of African Americans. And, it still is a lie today. And the military people are obviously supporting this Nazi fascist system to target African Americans. Even the military had segregation, two hundred years after the constitution was written. How do you think we got the Tuskegee Airmen? Face it, this is a racist country, denigrating people because of race, and labeling people with derogatory colors to demean them, and justify their racism. You refer to us a “blacks”, a lower form of life, and this is why the police are assassinating us.

          • warrior41882

            You should go and be a Police Officer for a few years, or perhaps a prison guard.
            Then come back here and read what you wrote.
            You are a Twit.

          • warrior41882

            Thugs going for their guns always just stand still to take a slug in the shoulder or thigh from officers that backed away.
            Dude!!!!

          • warrior41882

            Bravo, well said and to the point.
            I have been arrested and jailed several times, yes I was pissed off at the Cops, however it was me,my doing that got me there in the first place.
            Alcohol and drugs ruin lives and families.

          • Outtahereasap

            You are making excuses for rape and molestation, why? An adult has the FULL responsibility of knowing the age of a person he/she is with. I don’t believe for one minute that any of them don’t know if they choose to know. Ignorance is not a choice or an excuse under the law.

          • suse

            I believe it’s more of who gets to play judge, jury, and executioner here.

          • CD Ard

            Oh, so your belief is “screw the law, I’ll be my own judge and jury”? seems to fit this dead Guy’s MO, as well.

          • suse

            Which laws? The ones that the civilian peons are all to abide — or the ones they make up as they go along to exert their “authority” — and, thereby, breaking the law by violating every code written to “prove” their belief that their badge gives them, et al., privileges that others do not *enjoy.The guy has no “MO!!” HE’S DEAD! He was accused, arrested, and executed in one fell swoop . . . Good job serving and protecting! Am I to feel “safer” now that the “criminal” is dead — and the “good” guys are still out there free to work again?

            * You know . . . life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness(?) . . . but mostly LIFE (here).

          • jane

            14 and 20 is cool?

          • pennylane339
        • dtwenty7

          It is the age of consent in 17 different States..

      • Stan Obama

        So you wouldnt have any problem with an adult man “not raping” your 14 year old daughter? That’s disgusting.

        • lacideshae

          Of course I would have a problem with a 20 year old sleeping with my 14 year old. But who’s to say she didn’t lie about her age? Girls don’t look their age anymore. When I was 16 people always thought i wS in my 20s and I don’t even wear make up. Look at the girls who are pros at hair and makeup. 14 year olds look like they’re in college. So what if a 20 year old thought he was sleeping with a 19 year old. Does he deserve to be charged with rape then? Do you ask for ID every time you sleep with someone? We don’t know what exactly happened to lead to them being intimate but it was consensual. I wouldn’t press charges on a 20 year old and ruin their life if they didn’t know how old my daughter truly was. My cousin was 20 when his 15 year old gf got pregnant. Thankfully her parents never pressed charges and they have coparented for 20 years now and my cousin has gone on to marry a wonderful woman and they’ve had 2 kids of their own, the girl has also had 2 more kids of her own. My cousin is a supervisor at a plant, is very successful and just built a big beautiful house. The girl has a great job with the state, is dating an amazing guy, and also just built a big beautiful house. If her parents had pressed charges, my cousin wouldn’t have been able to be successful because he would have trouble finding jobs. And his reputation would have been down the drain before he was even old enough to drink. I don’t agree with 20 year olds sleeping with 14/15 year olds, but I also don’t agree with pressing charges on a 20 year old when the 14/15 year old was willing and it was consensual. Men mature much slower then women. Have you met a 20 year old male lately? They might as well be 15. My whole point is people keep saying he was a child molester or a rapist, and that’s not the case. We’re not talking about a grown man touching a 6 year old. We’re talking about a teenage girl who probably looked and acted much older than she was and likely lied about her age.

          • Outtahereasap

            Statutory rape is statutory rape. You can’t take the word rape out of it, she was a child….you cannot claim he did not know. It is a heinous crime and may have been coercion, or threats, if not forced. A child is a child. Your disgusting bs makes me ill. No one is above the law that is made to protect a child.

        • robert owen

          You are an idiot! I’m a doctor and I can tell.

          • Dave Zavistoski

            You’re a dr? Lol and that’s the best comment you could come up with . Your should try dumbass that sums it up little better.

          • dtwenty7

            Went to the same Med School as Harold Bornstein..

      • Kay

        Rape is rape, she wasn’t old enough to consent and he was far one enough to know it was wrong. Didn’t matter that he was “involved” in the child’s upbringing either, he was a pathetic excuse for a father, and he was a registered sex offender because of what he did, not to mention he was carrying a loaded firearm which would have landed his worthless ass back in prison for at least 10 years. So good riddance!

    • suse

      You’ve got two DickyDoos sitting on you. You are crushed, can’t breath, etc. ANY human is going to move. How many people are going to die before change happens?

      • CD Ard

        BS….your little melodrama is not what is in the videos.

        • suse

          VERY little, huh? He’s dead — THAT is what is in the video. Asshole.

  • tremayfreon cauldwell

    Too clear even for further discussion. LE was absolutely “in the clear” for resorting to deadly force. Medals–and paid vacations to Maui–are what’s called for.

    • lacideshae

      Tazing a man, tackling him, pointing guns in his face and ultimately shooting him 6 times for no good reason deserves paid vacation to Maui? They responded to a bogus call and assumed that was the suspect. They had no way of knowing he was armed. He likely resisted arrest because he hadn’t done anything wrong and they hadn’t told him what he was being tazed and tackled for. This is absolutely police brutality and murder. If the cops had nothing to hide and truly did their job why did they steal the surveillance tape from the store owner then erase the tapes?

  • Michael Guillory

    You move I shoot. Any movement from then on made him seem wrong. All this shit is stupid. The real news is north Korea declared war on America. Stop watching destractions

  • lonebear

    A reasonable person would not have had any doubt even from the first video. It wasn’t rocket science to figure out the guy was trying to grab something in his pocket. I don’t get the reasoning with people that do things like this. Even if the reason a cop is detaining you is dead wrong, going peacefully and working it out is a far better option than pulling something like this and dying like this guy. There are cops that have done and are going to do the wrong thing and it gives good cops a bad name but people suddenly act like a cop has no right to self defense. Common sense and waiting until the facts are in to start “protesting” have gone out the window.

  • Tacticalterry

    Media says he is innocent and cops are guilty so it must be.

  • lacideshae

    The officers tazed him TWICE before shooting him. When you are tazed your body starts to convulse. You have involuntary muscle movement. It’s likely that his right arm was twitching. He didn’t reach for his gun. No matter what sort of past he had, do you really think anyone would be stupid enough to reach for their gun with 2 police offers holding you down with guns pointed right in your face? No one would be that stupid.

    • Outtahereasap

      He reached for the gun and struggled to get it out of his pocket while they struggled to pin his arm which was under the vehicle. He had been waiving the damn thing in the air on the street, so someone called 911 describing him waiving a gun around.
      Was that simply taser twitching too?

      • Outtahereasap

        People high on drugs don’t respond to tasing….also people high on drugs do stupid things like waiving guns around

  • Stan Obama

    Total and complete moron. He knew he was a felon but he was carrying a gun. He did not obey the police even after they tazed him. He continued to try to reach his weapon even after they had him on the ground. Yes, he absolutely caused this shooting. Not one single person can commit these actions and expect anything less. Explain to me why these is any where you should not be held accountable for your own stupid actions.

  • IceTrey

    Complete speculation as to Sterlings intention. The mere fact that the cops had to pull the gun from his pocket proves their lives were not in immediate danger.

    • Outtahereasap

      The mere fact that he had been waiving it around in the air and people felt threatened enough to call 911 proves someone could be in danger…especially innocent bystanders if he freed the gun from his pocket while under the vehicle where they couldn’t reach his arm to stop him from waiving it around a second time.
      You can’t be that stupid.

      • IceTrey

        Way to make sh!t up. There was no waving. Stupid.

        “Sterling was selling CDs early Tuesday outside the Triple S Food Mart in Baton Rouge, the source said, when the homeless man approached him and asked for money. The man was persistent, and Sterling showed him his gun, the source said.
        “I told you to leave me alone,” Sterling told the man, according to the source.
        The homeless man then used his cell phone to call 911.”

        • CD Ard

          Someone threatens me with a gun I call 911 and tell them they waved a gun at me. That is what dispatch tells the officers. Showing or waiving carries the same message of a threat. All that CD peddling stuff isn’t necessarily relayed to dispatch on the call….so your story time is irrelevant. What is relevant is a 911 call that someone is threatened with a gun. The gun was illegal, he was a felon. Thought he was a tough guy. If he didn’t want to give out money he could walk away. That is what normal people do.

          • IceTrey

            He was set up selling his CDs and the homeless guy was harrassing him. Showing a it when being harrased is the purpose of a gun. The cops didn’t know he was a felon so that’s irrelevent. All that matters is was it reasonable for the cops to fear and imminent bodily harm or death.

    • CD Ard

      Wrong, the mere fact he had a gun and someone was worried enough to call 911 about it being brandished indicates lives were in immediate danger. If he is reaching for it during a struggle…the officers’ lives were in immediate danger.

      • IceTrey

        I’ve never heard of a gun firing when someone was reaching for it.

  • Des De

    It was a cell phone that was removed from his pocket! This site is a hoax!

  • dtwenty7

    Officers went into complete CYA mode.. Yelling at him to ‘Get on the ground!’ At least 3 times after he’s been on the ground for a LONG time.. Murderers.. Period..

  • dtwenty7

    Wow.. Just straight murdered him for absolutely no reason.. 🙁

  • The_Real_Trigga ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    Wow I did know Cops were infallible. Aren’t they people too?? That’s the image you paint of them in the news. There good people and bad people…. just like there are good cops and bad cops …… Bad people go to jail and Bad police usually get acquitted. That’s were the outrage comes from.. they volunteer to do a job that some of them have no business doing

  • Matt G

    Why is not holding the right hand if he knows that is where the gun is? Better yet shot him in the right shoulder if you are worried he is going for a gun with his right hand

  • steven

    I refuse to argue about the past record of this man, the racism or not of tbese cops, or whether they were truly left with no choice in their minds but to shoot him when tbey did. These are not questions answerable by the evidence presented, nor are they relevent to the real questions we should all, as citizens in a free nation, should be asking when anyone is killed by government agents :
    1. Did these agents follow the law.
    2. Did they follow proper procedure, adhere to standards, and manage risk maximally (risk to themselves, the citizen under arrest, AND bystanders.)
    3. Was the death preventable, and was tbere risk that could have been mitigated, and how?

    In this video, #1 is uncertain, but it would seem so. #2 is I hop not, because their actions were knuckleheaded and incompetent. They had no idea what they were doing, they were bumblers, and they put themselves and bystanders in unnecessary risk, and #3. they did not need to kill this man, it was preventable at any time including the final moments.

    You officers here that have been trained properky know damn well that when your objective is the restrant and arrest of a man who is resisting by trying to get away, as opposed to someone taking an offensive posture, you do not grapple with him unless you are certain of your ability to immobilize him. These guys tackled a big man who tbey knew was armed but who was not attempting to exchange gunfire. Tbey did not draw tbeir weapons until tbe struggle was already on the ground, initiated by the officers. So they were not afraid of him shooting until after tbey physically engaged him.
    Proper tactic would be to flank him, try to corner him with one officer between him and innocents, the other flanking on dominant side of subject.
    You do not grapple a big armed man. You stay at 3-4 yards, you draw weapins, and order him to stand down. if he refuses but does not go on offense, you wait for backup. If he is a threat and bolts, you put a slug in his ass or thigh. If he seems ready to become aggressive, flanking officer puts a slug in his ass and front officer puts one in his dominant shoulder. In custody, no one at risk. Citizen has choice to avoud physical assault compmetely by surrendering.

    Read that last sentence and watch that video. The arrestee in a free society should always be offered the choice, whether in a friendly way or, if he is potentially dangerous, under threat of force, to surrender without physical violence. To initiate an arrest in a situation likee this, where escape seemed unlikely and the perp had no weapon at the ready, by tackling a very large man, was foolish. They obviously had no hand to hand combat training and no skills at grappling. They physically engaged him assuming he would go limp, which was a bad read. They put him in a pisition that if he did try to shoot them, the bullets would be fired at random and put innocents at risk as well as themselves. And since the officer’s gun was drawn several seconds before it was fired, there was the opportunity, given proper training, to put those three rounds in his right shoulder and not his chest.

    These officers are poorly trained knuckleheads who put themselves in unnecessary risk, initiated a physical struggle they were not trained to control, chose to impose this physical control even though coersing control with the threat of weapons fire from a distance just beyond that of physical reach was not just the more civilized approach, it was also the more powerful tactical position.
    These officers should not be prosecuted. But they should lise theur jobs, due to incompetence and the potential that their poir decision making skills put them and tbe community at risk – a risk that needs to be mitigated for other officers through better training, support, and professional standards. And better pay and better RandR opportunities.
    Any officer who doesn’t agree I ask to pmease expkain how this video shows proper tactical and risk management choices, and tell me that you would do the same as them. And sign your real name, and endorse the arrest procedure on this video as proper and optimum.

    I will eat crow if someone will do that.

    • CD Ard

      If they were poorly trained, whose fault? I’m not sure they should lose their jobs.
      If they didn’t follow training and procedure I am sure you are correct that they will lose their jobs. I have to agree that to end up on the ground where you cannot control because the man is halfway under a vehicle is not good for anyone. Hopefully there is enough footage that they can learn their mistakes to improve training. The dead guy was clearly a liability to himself just based upon his own actions.

      • steven

        yes, but the officers were also clearly a threat to themselves. That is my principle concern. They are a liability to themselves. So let me clarify…they should be benched until properly retrained and counseled. Keep in mind, uf these are good nen, they just made a bonehead tactical decision that led to shooting a nan point blank and watching him die. That is a f-ed up thing we are ignoring and accepting as ok and par for the coyrse . that is BS and good men deserve better.