• cordlesslamp@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    8 months ago

    After reading the article, apparently her actions was deemed “reasonable”? What?

    Shooting an unarmed, handcuffed man because you can’t differentiate between a gun shot and an acorn, and have zero directional hearing is “REASONABLE”?

    • jpeps@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      8 months ago

      From what I read, they didn’t shoot at the unarmed suspect but at their own cop car. Stable geniuses. I can understand why the sergeant’s actions were deemed reasonable though, as she was trusting that her partner was in a life and death situation and not hesitating to back him, the truest of idiots, up.

      • logos@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        They were shooting at their own car because the unarmed, handcuffed man that they thought had just shot one of them was locked in the back seat.

        • jpeps@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          Ah sorry, you’re right. I misread the article thinking they were all at or in the SUV.