Video of the shooting of Daniel Shaver: graphical content

[baldo]

This comment is amazes me. How bout we kill you next time you are stupid. That should fix the problem.   Can you not see that the comps had many opportunities to cuff him but chose to make her crawl with his legs crossed?  These cops should be hung. I hate dirty cops more than anyone. Then they wonder why they don't get the respect they think they should. When he was face down with his hands on his head is when they should have cuffed him. One officer in front with a bead on him and another from behind to cuff him. No one would have been killed. For anyone to say he was stupid and he got what he deserved is very ignorant. I'm sorry Ron, I like you and everything but i'm kinda put off from this comment.  

On this, you and I agree....

[Gavin_Sons]

This comment is amazes me. How bout we kill you next time you are stupid. That should fix the problem.   Can you not see that the comps had many opportunities to cuff him but chose to make her crawl with his legs crossed?  These cops should be hung. I hate dirty cops more than anyone. Then they wonder why they don't get the respect they think they should. When he was face down with his hands on his head is when they should have cuffed him. One officer in front with a bead on him and another from behind to cuff him. No one would have been killed. For anyone to say he was stupid and he got what he deserved is very ignorant. I'm sorry Ron, I like you and everything but i'm kinda put off from this comment.  

On this, you and I agree....

I have watched this time and time again. And nothing i have seen is anywhere close to protocol for police here in Indiana. I am disgusted with these police and every one of them involved  should be charged with murder.

[Willow]

I watched the video more than once.  I appears to me that the vocal policeman and maybe the other were looking for an excuse to shoot.  The instructions were contradictory and unnecessarily aggressive with commands to, "Shut up," and "Did I tell you to move!"  They served to confuse and frighten the "suspect".  Honestly, the girl and boy probably didn't even know why they were being accosted.  Probably especially after he told the target to crawl and when he dropped to his hands to do so the officer screamed , "I said crawl!"  I think I counted five times that the screaming officer told the target that he was going to be shot.

...
I know that a FF who is afraid to fight fire is as useless as tits on a boar hog, so is a police officer that is too afraid to their job.

Let me say that I believe the vast majority of LEOs became such for honorable purpose and an intent to serve.  I appreciate what they do.  Now and then there are some who become police officers for the purpose of being legal bullies.  The shooter and probably both the officers in the video have no business being policemen and should have been convicted of murder.  If the jury had seen the video the shooter would have been found guilty.  If I had been related to the victim and saw the video I would likely be charged with the murder of an ex-police officer.

I don't buy the argument that a suspect can get a weapon from behind his back and fire accurately before one or more officers with guns already aimed at him could simply squeeze a trigger.

Someone excused the killing of the frightened youngster in the his reach with his hand was interpreted as a threat.  More accurately it was misinterpreted.  The label on the gun would have sealed my decision.  I'm guessing the case had a less than enthusiastic prosecutor.

[3fan4life]

I've watched both several times.

It appears that the one doing the talking may not have been the one that shot him.

The one doing the talking is in a serious power trip and should not be in law enforcement in any capacity.

He does not have the mentality or temperment for it.

I still see NO reason why this guy needed to be shot and killed.

There were multiple opportunities to cuff him and they weren't taken advantage of.

One big thing is why did the cop make his instructions so complicated?

He didn't do that to the female.

Could he not have given the same instructions to the male that he gave to her?


To me it's a combination of a Cop on a power trip and some very poor training.

[Serk]

The video was NOT allowed to be shown to the jury.

I was curious about this aspect so did some googling, looks like the jury DID see the video (But did NOT see his firearm and it's custom dust cover)

"Jurors who watched the full video showing Daniel Shaver's death agreed Thursday to acquit former Mesa officer Philip Mitchell Brailsford of murder, ending an emotional six-week trial."

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/daniel-shaver-shooting-ex-arizona-police-officer-not-guilty-murder-n827641

"The video was shown in court during the trial, but it was released to the public after jurors acquitted Brailsford on Thursday."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/08/graphic-video-shows-daniel-shaver-sobbing-and-begging-officer-for-his-life-before-2016-shooting/?utm_term=.474088bac5e3

[Moonshot_1]

This is a 30 second clip, presented with no other context. Given just the 30 second clip, this does present itself pretty much as an execution. But we don't get the benefit of witnessing what was happening prior to this moment. Could have made a difference. Could have not made a difference. Don't know.

The jury saw the evidence. The jury spoke.
I'm good with that.

[Valker]

I very well may have been misinformed about the jury seeing the video, it appears to be that they did. I think there will be a HUGE wrongful death suit brought.

[3fan4life]

This is a 30 second clip, presented with no other context. Given just the 30 second clip, this does present itself pretty much as an execution. But we don't get the benefit of witnessing what was happening prior to this moment. Could have made a difference. Could have not made a difference. Don't know.

The jury saw the evidence. The jury spoke.
I'm good with that.

These are longer.

The second one is 19 mins long.

Here is what seems to be the full tape from the time when the man and woman walk out of the room, all the instructions, the shooting and up to the time when the cops try opening the door to the room.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBUUx0jUKxc

another video, from when the cops were locating the room and trying to get the man and woman out, it's 19min long from a different body camera. some of the audio between the officers is low.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEOxyr1AQyY

Say what you want.

But, I'm betting that if the dead guy was one of your loved ones you wouldn't be, "Good with it". 

[3fan4life]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/daniel-shaver-shooting-ex-arizona-police-officer-not-guilty-murder-n827641

From the article:

The detective investigating the shooting agreed Shaver's movement was similar to reaching for a pistol, but has said it also looked as though Shaver was pulling up his loose-fitting basketball shorts that had fallen down as he was ordered to crawl.

The investigator noted he did not see anything that would have prevented officers from simply handcuffing Shaver as he was on the floor.

This is my point entirely!

[Bigwolf]

Wow!

I seldom read such posts/threads because of the accusations, misinformation, and rancor.  Wishing I had not opened this one. ... but I did.  It disturbs me to see that so many of you are so quick to believe you have all the correct facts and all the correct (perfect) answers.  Unless you were physically there and in a position to see and hear everything, you don't.

I hate that a seemingly innocent man lost his life.  That is very sad for sure.  However, I would have to see and hear a lot more than these "media" videos before I would even hazard a rough guess as to where the blame, if any, needs to go.

These things I know with absolute certainty because I have personally witnessed them:
1)  The news media cuts, pastes, and splices video to achieve maximum sensationalism. What they show the public is very rarely the actual and complete video as they lead you to believe.
2)  You will not slow an intent person down with soft gentle words.  To slow a determined person (and anyone else) down and take control of them without touching them, a loud demanding violent sounding voice is the only thing known to be effective.

I have seen in actual dash/body cam videos untouched by news media; law officers die because they tried a commanding but not threatening voice, die because they assumed the individual in front of them was not the threat, die because they failed to shoot soon enough, die because they followed inadequate training, and die because they misjudged the threat of their mission.

Has anyone here making accusations ever trained in a shoot house or trained with simunitions inside an office building or even spent some time in an interactive shooting video set?

Unless you are actually walking in their shoes, I am saying you have no right and certainly no credibility to be judging them.

Bigwolf

[3fan4life]

Wow!

I seldom read such posts/threads because of the accusations, misinformation, and rancor.  Wishing I had not opened this one. ... but I did.  It disturbs me to see that so many of you are so quick to believe you have all the correct facts and all the correct (perfect) answers.  Unless you were physically there and in a position to see and hear everything, you don't.

I hate that a seemingly innocent man lost his life.  That is very sad for sure.  However, I would have to see and hear a lot more than these "media" videos before I would even hazard a rough guess as to where the blame, if any, needs to go.

These things I know with absolute certainty because I have personally witnessed them:
1)  The news media cuts, pastes, and splices video to achieve maximum sensationalism. What they show the public is very rarely the actual and complete video as they lead you to believe.
2)  You will not slow an intent person down with soft gentle words.  To slow a determined person (and anyone else) down and take control of them without touching them, a loud demanding violent sounding voice is the only thing known to be effective.

I have seen in actual dash/body cam videos untouched by news media; law officers die because they tried a commanding but not threatening voice, die because they assumed the individual in front of them was not the threat, die because they failed to shoot soon enough, die because they followed inadequate training, and die because they misjudged the threat of their mission.

Has anyone here making accusations ever trained in a shoot house or trained with simunitions inside an office building or even spent some time in an interactive shooting video set?

Unless you are actually walking in their shoes, I am saying you have no right and certainly no credibility to be judging them.

Bigwolf

It's seems that you are OK with the Police shooting anyone for any reason.

I guess that you don't mind the idea of living in a police state.

Some of us do.

BTW: A person begging the police NOT to kill him is not a "determined person".

They had handcuffs, had they been willing to use them instead of their weapons a young father would not be dead.

You can take the moral high ground all you want that doesn't change the FACT that the officers had other options they failed to use them and a man is dead because of their bad decisions.

The jury may have determined that it didn't rise to the level of murder, but I'll guarantee the the jury in the wrongful death suit won't side with the Former officers.
 

[Jersey mike]

Wow!

I seldom read such posts/threads because of the accusations, misinformation, and rancor.  Wishing I had not opened this one. ... but I did.  It disturbs me to see that so many of you are so quick to believe you have all the correct facts and all the correct (perfect) answers.  Unless you were physically there and in a position to see and hear everything, you don't.

I hate that a seemingly innocent man lost his life.  That is very sad for sure.  However, I would have to see and hear a lot more than these "media" videos before I would even hazard a rough guess as to where the blame, if any, needs to go.

These things I know with absolute certainty because I have personally witnessed them:
1)  The news media cuts, pastes, and splices video to achieve maximum sensationalism. What they show the public is very rarely the actual and complete video as they lead you to believe.
2)  You will not slow an intent person down with soft gentle words.  To slow a determined person (and anyone else) down and take control of them without touching them, a loud demanding violent sounding voice is the only thing known to be effective.

I have seen in actual dash/body cam videos untouched by news media; law officers die because they tried a commanding but not threatening voice, die because they assumed the individual in front of them was not the threat, die because they failed to shoot soon enough, die because they followed inadequate training, and die because they misjudged the threat of their mission.

Has anyone here making accusations ever trained in a shoot house or trained with simunitions inside an office building or even spent some time in an interactive shooting video set?

Unless you are actually walking in their shoes, I am saying you have no right and certainly no credibility to be judging them.

Bigwolf

I don't know your background and I don't know what experiences you've had so I won't say you're wrong you are entitled to your opinion.

I will however "argue" the point regarding being able to judge what police officers do and how they do it especially these days with body cams and video open for the public to see.

There seems to be a large number of officers across the county who do questionable things "in the course of duty" and people are being injured or dying because "an officer feared for his life". That phrase is becoming such a used and abused line it's difficult to determine what is a real and viable threat and what isn't.

In May I was arrested for obstruction because one of our work trucks was involved in an accident. The driver avoided a car that cut him off and our driver swerved to miss him. The call we got was our driver hit a tele/pole. We got there and not only did he hit the pole but drove through it and a section was lying on top of the van. Lucky the glass racks and the roof cross members stopped the pole from crushing the driver. Since the accident was about 1/4 mile from our shop when we got there only local LEO's were on scene and people were milling about and standing behind the van while the wires were still attached but draped, no wires were on the ground or broken. So anyway I was looking for the driver while my brother (the owner) was taking pictures. I was 15' off the road, walking parallel to the road approaching the accident from the front because I spotted people standing directly behind the van under the wires. Well, on cop went ballistic and began yelling like it was a SWAT/hostage situation and approached me with his hand on his weapon because I shouted back to him it was our truck and I was looking for the driver. One thing led to another and I ended up arrested and the case was dismissed in court because the prosecutor understood the situation. My brother-in-law is a corrections officer and when I gave him the cops name he laughed and said "he's an ass, nobody likes him, he arrests everyone and has no business being a cop".

Now, after that short story, My above opinion is not related to what transpired at the accident, it comes from the premise that cops are the good guys all the time and if they make a mistake it's ok because THEY still go home to their family.

I want the bad guys off the streets, no issue there and I can appreciate the job cops have but nobody jammed that vocation down their throats. If cops want respect then respect is earned and it's a two way street. This guy that was executed in that hallway did not deserve to die because he pulled up his pants. He may have been stupid but that's not a reason to be shot to death in a hallway while almost crying.

[Jess from VA]

I agree with Serk's assessment:  I know personally if I'm ever in that situation I'll get on the ground, face down, and flat out refuse to budge a muscle.


I only have the video to go on, but the officers (mainly the speaker) were ramped up very aggressively  about something; coffee, steriods, fear, psychiatric power-trip adrenaline, I don't know.

The whole tape reminds me of watching a cat play with and torment a field mouse, before killing it (maybe hours later).  If this is training, it is poor training.  They had all the time in the world to walk up and cuff him.  Did they think he was Batman or the the Man of Steel or Houdini?  He was down flat and trying to follow all commands under the guns of multiple officers.  

Not only would I get face down and not move a muscle, but I would start talking to the officer's body cam (for the record):  I am not resisting, I will not resist, I give up, I am not armed (or, I am armed and my pistol is on my hip, but I am not touching it and I will not touch it, come and take it).  You keep telling me you are going to shoot me.  I am not resisting, I give up, please don't shoot me, please don't murder me.  I am  not going to move at all anymore, I think you will use anything I do as an excuse to shoot me.  Please take your finger off the trigger, please calm yourself down, I am not resisting, I will not resist, I give up, come take me into custody, go ahead and handcuff me.  Please don't shoot me, please don't murder me. Quit yelling at me.  You win. I give up.

I am not very inclined to beg for my life (in general, like to criminals), but in this case, it seems like a good idea.

Of course, this would not really be begging for your life, but making it as hard as possible for them to execute you.

[3fan4life]

I agree with Serk's assessment:  I know personally if I'm ever in that situation I'll get on the ground, face down, and flat out refuse to budge a muscle.


I only have the video to go on, but the officers (mainly the speaker) were ramped up very aggressively  about something; coffee, steriods, fear, psychiatric power-trip adrenaline, I don't know.

The whole tape reminds me of watching a cat play with and torment a field mouse, before killing it (maybe hours later).  If this is training, it is poor training.  They had all the time in the world to walk up and cuff him.  Did they think he was Batman or the the Man of Steel or Houdini?  He was down flat and trying to follow all commands under the guns of multiple officers.  

Not only would I get face down and not move a muscle, but I would start talking to the officer's body cam (for the record):  I am not resisting, I will not resist, I give up, I am not armed (or, I am armed and my pistol is on my hip, but I am not touching it and I will not touch it, come and take it).  You keep telling me you are going to shoot me.  I am not resisting, I give up, please don't shoot me, please don't murder me.  I am  not going to move at all anymore, I think you will use anything I do as an excuse to shoot me.  Please take your finger off the trigger, I am not resisting, I will not resist, I give up, come take me into custody, go ahead and handcuff me.  Please don't shoot me, please don't murder me. Quit yelling at me.  You win. I give up.

I am not very inclined to beg for my life (in general, like to criminals), but in this case, it seems like a good idea.

I think that your assessment of the situation is spot on.

[3fan4life]

I want the bad guys off the streets, no issue there and I can appreciate the job cops have but nobody jammed that vocation down their throats. If cops want respect then respect is earned and it's a two way street. This guy that was executed in that hallway did not deserve to die because he pulled up his pants. He may have been stupid but that's not a reason to be shot to death in a hallway while almost crying.

Cops do have a tough and thankless job.

And the "Bad Apples" amongst their ranks don't make it any easier for them.

Can you imagine the public outrage and backlash that would be happening had Daniel Shaver been an African American?

[Willow]

..
Unless you are actually walking in their shoes, I am saying you have no right and certainly no credibility to be judging them.
...

Bullshit.  Every day juries of people who have "not walked in the shoes" of the accused are tasked with judging them.  Each one of us is expected to know what is right and what is wrong.   I consider myself quite credible but I question whether you are.

There were at least five heavily armed police officers in that hallway and two unarmed victims.  The man killed was drunk and behaved stupidly.  I don't drink anymore but when I did I was known to behave stupidly.  At no time did he present any threat to the armed officers.  If they are that scared they need to take off the badge and find a more comfortable occupation.

[Gavin_Sons]

..
Unless you are actually walking in their shoes, I am saying you have no right and certainly no credibility to be judging them.
...

Bullshit.  Every day juries of people who have "not walked in the shoes" of the accused are tasked with judging them.  Each one of us is expected to know what is right and what is wrong.   I consider myself quite credible but I question whether you are.

There were at least five heavily armed police officers in that hallway and two unarmed victims.  The man killed was drunk and behaved stupidly.  I don't drink anymore but when I did I was known to behave stupidly.  At no time did he present any threat to the armed officers.  If they are that scared they need to take off the badge and find a more comfortable occupation.

   Just shows what a gun and a badge creates. I know many people i went to school with that were not very popular in school. They became police officers and now are on a power trip. They work for us, something everyone seems to forget.

[DirtyDan]

“At no time did he present a threat ?”

Seems like the jury though otherwise

Dan

[Jess from VA]

“At no time did he present a threat ?”

Seems like the jury though otherwise

Dan

How much you want to bet the jury was confused..... and very reluctant to convict a police officer (which is a good default position, generally speaking). 

I'll bet they didn't think him innocent...... only not proven guilty beyond ANY reasonable doubt.

IMHO, the reach for reasonable doubt was a big one in this case.

[Willow]

“At no time did he present a threat ?”

Seems like the jury though otherwise

Dan

I can't speak for what the jury though or what evidence was presented to them.  I can with confidence tell you what I thought after seeing the evidence with which I was presented.

As I said earlier I can only believe that the jury coming to the conclusion at which they arrived must have been faced by a less than enthusiastic prosecutor.  I would guess that the entire trial did not concentrate on whether an innocent drunk was unnecessarily murdered but only on whether the officers followed the protocols dictated to them.  To that end I think your wild assumption that the jury thought the victim presented a threat is completely without merit.

Just as an aside, it is possible for a person at the scene to believe a threat is presented whether or not it actually is.  Afterwards, if the victim is found to have no weapon, you may say that someone believed that a threat was presented but you cannot factually say that a threat was presented.

On the subject of threats, the verbal policeman repeatedly threatened the victim who had committed no crime.  Whether that inspired the other officer to shoot will be decided by another jury, no doubt.

The Mesa police department, it appears, agreed with my assessment.  They used the excuse of what he had inscribed on his weapon but they did fire him.  Someone obviously decided he was not a good subject to be carrying a badge and a gun.

May he somehow suffer a proper consequence for his murdering an innocent 26 year old man with two daughters and a wife.

As another aside, juries don't determine whether the accused is innocent.  They only decide whether or not there is sufficient evidence to declare the accused as guilty.        

[Serk]

When the collective "we" refuse to condemn a bad shoot, it makes it far more difficult to defend controversial good shoots.

Give the cops the benefit of the doubt, by all means, but don't elevate all who wear the badge to automatic sainthood and absolve them of all wrongs.

[Jess from VA]

When the collective "we" refuse to condemn a bad shoot, it makes it far more difficult to defend controversial good shoots.

Give the cops the benefit of the doubt, by all means, but don't elevate all who wear the badge to automatic sainthood and absolve them of all wrongs.

This is of course true.  Just as it is true for private citizen shoots.

I can say this with all sincerity.  I don't want to be on any jury, and I especially don't want to be on a officer involved shooting jury.  Not that I cannot do my duty.  I just don't want to.

I have never been called for jury service in my lifetime.  And I'm pretty sure if I was, and answered all voir dire questions truthfully, I would be kicked off by one side or the other. 

Do you promise to disregard all your schooling, training and experience as an attorney for 35 years?  Absolutely not.

[G-Man]

The two cops murdered a crying, confused kid.  They made him cry by threatening to KILL him at gunpoint and screaming commands that were off the wall.  Keep your hands up, now crawl to me? ? ? ?  

They murdered that kid.  I have no idea how that trigger happy cop sleeps at night.  

MURDER!

[Gavin_Sons]

The two cops murdered a crying, confused kid.  They made him cry by threatening to KILL him at gunpoint and screaming commands that were off the wall.  Keep your hands up, now crawl to me? ? ? ? 

They murdered to kid.  I have no idea how that trigger happy cop sleeps at night. 

MURDER!

 

[Mobile Mayor]

Personally. Over the period of 22 years as a cop, I have been in several, at least, situations where I faced  circumstances that could have resulted in a justifiable shoot. I have been to the point where I have been facing an armed person, and was in the position of just the final ounce of pressure would have disconnected the sear. I see a gross lacking in personal training, discipline, and understanding of the gravity of the use of deadly force.  The use of deadly force carries more gravity when one considers that the person who is in question is one of those whom you swore to protect and serve, and that you as an officer, are sitting on the razors edge.  Do you make the decision  that that person is dedicated  to killing you because of who you are,  or are they a dumb-ass acting out their frustration with a particular situation, on drugs or whatever.  Not going to get in any farther, but will say that I am PROUD that I am still alive, and nobody needed to be shot.  Having said thus, and based of what I was able to determine from the video,  I would say that this would seem to be the result of training that gave absolute answers as to how to handle a situation .  A person who takes an action that could be interpreted as hostile intent, is at the mercy of the other person who has to understand what may come next.  Not knowing the experience of the police officer in question, I can only go with the idea that one hell of a civil suit is in the cards.

[Rams]

As another aside, juries don't determine whether the accused is innocent.  They only decide whether or not there is sufficient evidence to declare the accused as guilty.        

While we view the video and presented evidence differently, I do agree with this statement.   None of us were on the jury and saw/heard what they heard.   I accept the jury verdict as it stands.