You must log in or register to comment.

N8CCRG t1_iuj42y1 wrote

Thank you CNN for calling him a "then-officer" instead of an "ex-officer." It's about damn time.


mces97 t1_iujd3nv wrote

Can you explain what the difference is? Serious question.


N8CCRG t1_iujf4ov wrote

"Ex-officer" is ambiguous. Were they a former officer, who then committed a crime, or did they commit the crime as an officer, and afterwards get fired.

In addition to being ambiguous, news standards did not use the "ex-" modifier regularly. They used it for certain groups like (ex-)officers and (ex-)military who committed an act while in that role, and were later fired, but not for other groups like, say, truckdrivers. In other words, even if a truckdriver was later fired, the headlines would still refer to them as "truck driver who did X" and not "ex-truck driver."


mces97 t1_iujf9fb wrote

Thank you for the clarification. 🙏


tom90640 t1_iujepep wrote

He was an officer "then", he is an "ex-officer" now.


frodosdream t1_iuj2ilo wrote

Isn't this the same shooting that had the suspect/victim struggling with the cop over a taser as seen in video? (Hard to believe that this happened less than a year ago.)

Watched this video several times; did not ever see the suspect holding the taser as some claim. It always looked like the cop finally grew tired from wrestling, then pulled his weapon and shot the victim in the back of the head, while still on top of him.


mces97 t1_iujdavo wrote

Either way, he shot him point blank in the back of the head when he was no longer struggling with the suspect. He had the upper hand at the moment.


Vircxzs t1_iujffxd wrote

Yup. Tough to defend the ex-cop on this one. If you can press your gun right up against the back of someone's head, you can just as easily shift it 8" diagonally and shoot them in the very arm that is allegedly gripping your taser.


alose t1_iuj3jb7 wrote

Good, let's hold all police accountable for their actions.