He downplayed the suspicious circumstances and is pretending that it’s merely a tragic accident. It obviously wasn’t and is another example of cops getting special treatment.
It’s this kind of thinking that I find disturbing. Accusing the cop in the video of “pretending” and saying that it “obviously wasn’t” a tragic accident are firm statements about a man’s thoughts that you can’t possibly know and a situation where you weren’t present. I tend to think the accused is lying, but I don’t know and I don’t think it’s obvious at all. Thinking she’s lying is my gut; it’s not evidence.
I have evidence. I have witness testimony. Evidence of the layout of the apartments such as the doors automatically closing and his apartment not even being on the same floor as hers, plus the obvious fact that people with functioning brains don’t enter wrong homes and not realize it until after they’ve killed the person living there and called the authorities to say they’ve killed someone in self defense (as she claims happened). That’s compelling evidence pointing towards her lying. The most favorable explanation for her is that she’s so belligerent and unfit to care for herself that she’s a threat to everyone in her midst. Even if that’s the case, it still is an indictment on the police force who found her to be fit for duty and fit to be armed. Mike the Cop, as always, embraced the police’s side of the story with no attempt to examine the context or the evidence.
How many innocent black men have spent decades in prison because their accuser was certain and the prosecutor thought their guilt was obvious, only to be exonerated through DNA or recanted testimony?
That’s totally different. They didn’t admit to committing the crime. They were framed and often convicted based on shaky, questionable evidence. That is not even remotely comparable to this woman’s situation where she broke into another person’s home and shot him immediately and then proceeded to give what may be one of the flimsiest and unconvincing excuses I’ve ever heard.