News   Jul 19, 2024
We're Swimming In Water
 276     0 
News   Jul 18, 2024
Cladding, First Glazing Installed as the Foster-Designed 50 Scollard Rises
 1.1K     2 
News   Jul 18, 2024
Affordable Rental Housing for Low-Income Seniors Planned on The Queensway
 1K     0 

Sammy Yatim Shooting

nfitz said:
I'm not sure it's relevant. The guy in question was shot with a single 9 mm bullet. What do the police use - I'm no weaponry expert, but my gut feel is this would be very unlikely with what the police use.

More to the point though ... the soccer player kept standing. Yatim was down after 3 bullets.
Click to expand...

TPS use a Glock .40

9 mm and .40 are relatively equal bullet types from what I could gather in a quick google search. .40 cal bullets are a bit heavier providing a bit more force upon impact (given impact at the same bullet speed). And the article stated that he felt pain in his neck/head and CONTINUED playing soccer not just stood around biting his nails.

The boston bombing suspect also had a serious head injury caused by a bullet IIRC yet still was able to lead police on a manhunt and climb into a boat.

Point being a single bullet isn't enough to stop a suspect let alone kill them. The fact that Sammy was down only proves that he was down, in no way does it prove he was incapacitated or already dead.
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
Point being a single bullet isn't enough to stop a suspect let alone kill them. The fact that Sammy was down only proves that he was down, in no way does it prove he was incapacitated or already dead.
Click to expand...
He got hit by at least 2 of the first 3 bullets. He was down, and didn't appear to try and get back up. Perhaps not incapacitated ... but how was he such a threat that he required another 5 or 6 bullets being put in him, and then tasered?

If after the first volley, he then stood back up, and headed towards the stairs to leave the streetcar, then perhaps there would be a justfication.
 
Damn, 8 of 9 bullets. I guess we still don't know how many hit a vital organ vs an extremity, but Forcillo is a good shot.

As mentioned before - the first 3 could somehow be explained or justified, but it's the additional 6 that could bury him.
 
As mentioned before - the first 3 could somehow be explained or justified, but it's the additional 6 that could bury him.
Click to expand...

6 seconds is not a lot of time. And I don't think there is an official amount of time before one shooting becomes two shootings. I think a lot of it will have to do with Forcillo's state of mind and interpretation of what was going on. I think it is his testimony that may bury him.
 
freshcutgrass said:
6 seconds is not a lot of time. And I don't think there is an official amount of time before one shooting becomes two shootings. I think a lot of it will have to do with Forcillo's state of mind and interpretation of what was going on. I think it is his testimony that may bury him.
Click to expand...
I was talking about the 6 extra shots, not 6 seconds between. I don't think it makes a lick of difference if it is determined to be one shooting event or two. 9 total bullets are not necessary to disable someone with a knife when the first 3 already put them on the ground.

3 shots + taser = explainable. 9 shots with 6 of them into an already downed suspect = cop lost his shit.
 
freshcutgrass said:
According to the video, even after all shots are fired, officers are still ordering him to drop the knife. The tasering officer (the supervisor I assume as they are the ones that carry the tasers), approaches with caution and as he's being tasered, we hear drop the knife (not sure who's saying it).

If the supervising officer feels it is necessary to taser Sammy to apprehend him, then it's reasonable to assume the supervising officer felt that Sammy was still a threat.
Click to expand...

Marko said:
I was talking about the 6 extra shots, not 6 seconds between. I don't think it makes a lick of difference if it is determined to be one shooting event or two. 9 total bullets are not necessary to disable someone with a knife when the first 3 already put them on the ground.

3 shots + taser = explainable. 9 shots with 6 of them into an already downed suspect = cop lost his shit.
Click to expand...

The taserring actually helps the officers case. If someone else felt that Sammy was still a threat after 9 bullets, then of course Forcillo would see him as a threat after 3 bullets.

I am also not sure if it is relevant how many bullets hit Sammy. For all Forcillo could have known, he may have only grazed him or missed entirely and Sammy fell out of shock. What matters was whether Sammy was a threat on the ground - whether he was shot or not. From my vantage point he did not look like a threat at that time, but is appears that more than one offficer felt that he was.
 
I was talking about the 6 extra shots, not 6 seconds between.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know you were

I don't think it makes a lick of difference if it is determined to be one shooting event or two.
Click to expand...

If the deployment of lethal force has to be justified, I think it will matter a lot. If the last six shots are considered a second use of lethal force, it could be argued that one of the elements required (delivery system) is in question.


9 total bullets are not necessary to disable someone with a knife when the first 3 already put them on the ground.
Click to expand...

I think it's more of a case of are you justified to use lethal force or not. Once you are justified in the use of lethal force and commit to it, I don't think there are any "rules" governing the number of times you discharge your weapon in the process.

In fact, I believe it is common police training that once they have decided to use deadly force, you use it to maximum effect...no warning shots...no disabling shots, and when you open fire, fire several times.
 
freshcutgrass said:
I think it's more of a case of are you justified to use lethal force or not. Once you are justified in the use of lethal force and commit to it, I don't think there are any "rules" governing the number of times you discharge your weapon in the process.

In fact, I believe it is common police training that once they have decided to use deadly force, you use it to maximum effect...no warning shots...no disabling shots, and when you open fire, fire several times.
Click to expand...
Is it normal practice for other officers on the scene, who had pointed guns, to be holstering them while the first officer is still shooting?
 
freshcutgrass said:
This rhetorical question has a point?
Click to expand...
The question isn't rhetorical. In the videos, you can see officers who had their guns pointed, lowering and holstering them after the first 3 shots, and before the second round of shots.

Is it normal practice for other officers on the scene, who had pointed guns, to be holstering them when there is such a huge threat to an officer that he is having to discharge his weapon.
 
TOperson said:
I really can't see why the Toronto police couldn't have at least TRIED this sort of thing with Yatim. The Georgia situation was much more volatile and this woman has zero training (an amazingly level head though) and she saved the day. Shouldn't ALL cops have some idea how to do this?
Click to expand...

I think we need to separate the individual cop from the entire police force.

Just like we are supposed to separate the individual extremists from one religion, the individual thugs from one race, we should not carte blanche pass judgment across the force.

One trigger happy cop went to far, it's pretty black and white.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top