Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had the intellectual capacity of a teenager. This whole thing is terrible but the officer must have felt threatened to fire his weapon with his own child right there.

There are some major missing details.

Which no one can know because the police department is refusing to make details of the incident or even the officer’s name public. He wasn’t even on duty at the time, but he still gets his identity protected. What other private adult citizen gets that privilege when they shoot three people?

The officer's name doesn't need to be made public. Not sure why you would want it to. Maybe so the internet can attack him and destroy his life before all the facts are known? You disgust me.

Not that pp, but the off duty officer shot 2 elderly people and their intellectually challenged son while they all shopped at Costco. That is unnerving.

I tend to believe that something significant prompted the shooting but I can certainly understand why people would like to have more details now.

You want to believe something significant prompted the murder because then you can tell yourself “it won’t happens to me.”

Human Maurer.

But I can’t imagine what you think would justify opening fire in a crowded store.

The officer apparently was carrying his own young child when he was assaulted by the nonverbal man. Something prompted the officer to draw his weapon and fire it. I would imagine the young man's parents were trying to protect him and that's how they got shot. But really we don't know what happened.

The whole thing sounds horrific to me and, yes, I am also having a very difficult time understanding how those elderly parents, in particular, posed any threat to that armed and trained police officer. I realize that having a young child in his arms may have made him feel more vulnerable and protective towards his child. But still...to shoot all 3 of them? That seems very drastic.

I guess the details of what happened will come out once they've been sorted out a bit more.

I'd like to see some security footage.

I have a nonverbal, autistic relative who can get extremely violent. It's rare that he does, but when it happens, it is scary because he doesn't know his strength. He's broken several fingers and limbs of family members and severely injured their pet cat (the cat was treated and taken in by another family member).

The police were called once when this happened in public about 7 or 8 years ago. That made the situation even worse because they were screaming instructions at him and the his parents were screaming at the police that he was nonverbal and autistic. Had an officer who had a relative like this not showed up when he did, it could have ended in a shooting. But he was able to communicate to his fellow officers what to do and calm the situation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had the intellectual capacity of a teenager. This whole thing is terrible but the officer must have felt threatened to fire his weapon with his own child right there.

There are some major missing details.

Which no one can know because the police department is refusing to make details of the incident or even the officer’s name public. He wasn’t even on duty at the time, but he still gets his identity protected. What other private adult citizen gets that privilege when they shoot three people?

The officer's name doesn't need to be made public. Not sure why you would want it to. Maybe so the internet can attack him and destroy his life before all the facts are known? You disgust me.

Fellow Leo are you? ^^^

The cop’s name should be published. He’s a POS

Why was he carrying his gun into Costco if he’s off duty and just shopping with his child?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had the intellectual capacity of a teenager. This whole thing is terrible but the officer must have felt threatened to fire his weapon with his own child right there.

There are some major missing details.

Which no one can know because the police department is refusing to make details of the incident or even the officer’s name public. He wasn’t even on duty at the time, but he still gets his identity protected. What other private adult citizen gets that privilege when they shoot three people?

The officer's name doesn't need to be made public. Not sure why you would want it to. Maybe so the internet can attack him and destroy his life before all the facts are known? You disgust me.

Not that pp, but the off duty officer shot 2 elderly people and their intellectually challenged son while they all shopped at Costco. That is unnerving.

I tend to believe that something significant prompted the shooting but I can certainly understand why people would like to have more details now.

You want to believe something significant prompted the murder because then you can tell yourself “it won’t happens to me.”

Human Maurer.

But I can’t imagine what you think would justify opening fire in a crowded store.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure he had his reasons to shoot.

Only someone who is incredibly stupid would believe this.

NP. I believe only someone who is incredibly stupid would rush to judgement on case like this when all the facts are not known.

What is in dispute? That an unarmed person was shot?

Dp- unless you were there and witnessed this event, I think it’s better to STFU and wait until the facts come out. Be rational, not emotional.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure he had his reasons to shoot.

Only someone who is incredibly stupid would believe this.

NP. I believe only someone who is incredibly stupid would rush to judgement on case like this when all the facts are not known.

What is in dispute? That an unarmed person was shot?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure he had his reasons to shoot.

Only someone who is incredibly stupid would believe this.

NP. I believe only someone who is incredibly stupid would rush to judgement on case like this when all the facts are not known.

Anonymous wrote:I am sure he had his reasons to shoot.

Only someone who is incredibly stupid would believe this.

Cops aren't releasing the name because they are taking time to get his story straight.

I guarantee that this cop likely has multiple use-of-force complaints against him. LA County taxpayers will be paying for this fool's trigger-happy demeanor and likely ignoring past complaints. I would love to see these payouts come out of the police pension fund; it's the only way they will change their actions.

If there’s a crazy person in my neighborhood who shoots people with whom he gets into arguments, I’d want to know so I can steer clear of him. Especially if I know he won’t suffer and consequences and thus has no incentive to get his temper under control. Believe me, I’m not going to harass him or trash him online, if for no other reason than fear he’d come shoot me next.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had the intellectual capacity of a teenager. This whole thing is terrible but the officer must have felt threatened to fire his weapon with his own child right there.

There are some major missing details.

Which no one can know because the police department is refusing to make details of the incident or even the officer’s name public. He wasn’t even on duty at the time, but he still gets his identity protected. What other private adult citizen gets that privilege when they shoot three people?

The officer's name doesn't need to be made public. Not sure why you would want it to. Maybe so the internet can attack him and destroy his life before all the facts are known? You disgust me.

A man who killed three unarmed discount shoppers doesn't disgust you, but the person who wants cops to be held accountable when they go on shooting sprees does. This is amerikkka.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had the intellectual capacity of a teenager. This whole thing is terrible but the officer must have felt threatened to fire his weapon with his own child right there.

There are some major missing details.

Which no one can know because the police department is refusing to make details of the incident or even the officer’s name public. He wasn’t even on duty at the time, but he still gets his identity protected. What other private adult citizen gets that privilege when they shoot three people?

The officer's name doesn't need to be made public. Not sure why you would want it to. Maybe so the internet can attack him and destroy his life before all the facts are known? You disgust me.

Not that pp, but the off duty officer shot 2 elderly people and their intellectually challenged son while they all shopped at Costco. That is unnerving.

I tend to believe that something significant prompted the shooting but I can certainly understand why people would like to have more details now.

Anonymous wrote:Even if the son had done something to provoke the cop, it doesn’t justify shooting three unarmed people. That cop is psychotic, as is the department protecting him.

+1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He had the intellectual capacity of a teenager. This whole thing is terrible but the officer must have felt threatened to fire his weapon with his own child right there.

There are some major missing details.

Which no one can know because the police department is refusing to make details of the incident or even the officer’s name public. He wasn’t even on duty at the time, but he still gets his identity protected. What other private adult citizen gets that privilege when they shoot three people?

The officer's name doesn't need to be made public. Not sure why you would want it to. Maybe so the internet can attack him and destroy his life before all the facts are known? You disgust me.

If he weren’t an officer, his name would absolutely be made public by now. They always are. This guy is only getting special treatment because he’s a cop. If there’s no public value in releasing the names of suspects, then they should never be disclosed, even when the suspect isn’t a cop.