I can't imagine anyone is going to ask for Ono to resign with any power or large voice. Ono was ready to release the video, but when the County Prosecutor tells you not to, you don't do it. It's that simple.

 

As long as the video gets released in a somewhat timely manner, I'm not worried about when it gets released.

I've seen enough controversy throw down at OSU to feel that since Ono didn't do it himself that he'll probably be OK.

When people have enemies it's times like this when they strike.  And it doesn't really matter what Ono's public image is, there's no telling what the guy is actually like. 

 

What I'm really worried about is that Cranley will use this potentially huge national story to carry out a bunch of nonsense in the city while nobody's paying attention. 

The family of the deceased has hired George Zimmerman's defense attorney...

http://www.omaralawgroup.com

 

So the stage is set for a huge CNN/Fox News saga stretching well into 2016. 

Most recent article from WCPO is really good. It has more information than I've seen thus far.

 

http://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/colleges/uc-news/ray-tensing-sam-dubose-attorney-for-uc-police-officer-talks-exclusively-to-wcpo-about-shooting?adfg

 

The attorney for the University of Cincinnati police officer who shot and killed a black motorist says he expects the grand jury to indict him.

 

Mathews said Officer Ray Tensing is "upset and depressed" about shooting 43-year-old Sam DuBose at a traffic stop and revealed some details about the body cam video.

 

...

 

Mathews gave only a limited description of what he saw on the tape, saying the motorist, Sam DuBose, didn't like being told to step out of the vehicle by Tensing. The video shows DuBose start to pull away and Tensing being thrown to the ground, Mathews said.

I don't see much controversy unless there no indictment and if the video looks bad. Seems like and indictment is forthcoming.

UC will have to get out the checkbook.

Unless there is evidence that the UC officers were not trained properly, the officer was not punished for past mistakes, or that they failed to do a background check that would have resulted in him not being hired AND that led to his improper use of force, no one should have to shell out money except the person who did it.

 

Basically, if UC Police failed in some regard that ultimately led to the officer using excessive force, they should be responsible for damages. Otherwise, it was an individual's actions that UC Police (the organization) had no way of preventing.

Unless there is evidence that the UC officers were not trained properly, the officer was not punished for past mistakes, or that they failed to do a background check that would have resulted in him not being hired AND that led to his improper use of force, no one should have to shell out money except the person who did it.

 

Basically, if UC Police failed in some regard that ultimately led to the officer using excessive force, they should be responsible for damages. Otherwise, it was an individual's actions that UC Police (the organization) had no way of preventing.

 

I am no expert, but UC shelled out 2 Million in that taser death a few years ago, and there was no criminal conduct by the UC cop.......so

if this case is about criminal conduct by a UC Cop, gotta think get the checkbook out.

^Yeah, it's just unfortunate that UC could be responsible for damages when they aren't at fault themselves. Unless something comes out saying that he was not properly trained or vetted, then UC did nothing wrong themselves.

^Yeah, it's just unfortunate that UC could be responsible for damages when they aren't at fault themselves. Unless something comes out saying that he was not properly trained or vetted, then UC did nothing wrong themselves.

 

I agree with you R.

It seems like a very tense situation is developing…  Let's all hope for the least bad outcome.

 

If I was in charge of Hamilton County for a day, here's what I would do in regards to law enforcement:

 

1. Roll up the UC police department into the Cincinnati Police Department.  Create some kind of Cincinnati Police special overlay district for the University with additional manpower dedicated to serve the needs of the University.  If Cincinnati Police could provide the same kind of service and response time the UC Police are currently providing, there is absolutely no upside for anyone to maintaining the UC Police as a separate entity.  The University doesn’t need to be spending tuition dollars on a non-core function that puts their reputation at risk when an incident like this happens.  The City of Cincinnati doesn’t need an additional separate law enforcement entity (besides the county) operating in their jurisdiction where they aren't in complete control of policies and procedures of said entity.  Right now it's true we don't have all the details of what happened, but we are seeing what a worse-case scenario could look like. 

 

2.  Proactively consolidate and combine suburban departments as much as possible.  Many of our suburban communities are very similar to Ferguson.  We can't have small town (in mentality and procedure) police departments patrolling what are essentially urban neighborhoods or trouble may strike in the future.  Each department needs to be large enough to have dedicated personnel keeping them up to date on all nationwide best practices.  And no police department in our region should be in the business of issuing citations for minor offenses in order stay afloat. 

 

3. Bring suburban departments and the county into the some form of the Collaborative agreement. I understand the collaborative isn't magic in preventing bad situations, but from the outside it seems like it was helpful as far as organizational culture is concerned.

 

Unless there is evidence that the UC officers were not trained properly, the officer was not punished for past mistakes, or that they failed to do a background check that would have resulted in him not being hired AND that led to his improper use of force, no one should have to shell out money except the person who did it.

 

Basically, if UC Police failed in some regard that ultimately led to the officer using excessive force, they should be responsible for damages. Otherwise, it was an individual's actions that UC Police (the organization) had no way of preventing.

 

I am no expert, but UC shelled out 2 Million in that taser death a few years ago, and there was no criminal conduct by the UC cop.......so

if this case is about criminal conduct by a UC Cop, gotta think get the checkbook out.

The University President has been backtracking on UC police policy for the last week. He has asked to be part of the collaborative, to have their officers jointly trained with Cincinnati Police, and pulled them back on campus. And Cranley has said openly that "reform" is needed.

 

If the video shows that Mr. Dubose did not have to die, then reform is the right thing to do, and it would give the family some measure of peace while helping the community. And, in that case, a just compensation of Mr. Dubose's family is also right, and shouldn't be thought of in any negative way, in my opinion.

^ Building on that point, my car was broken into this morning near UC's campus, as were 2 others on my street, that I saw. I don't care, because they didn't break the window and there's literally nothing in my car - not even a few spare pennies - so all I had ot do was shut the glove box and put the ash tray back in. However, this leads me to believe that having the UC police force restrained to riding Segways around campus is already having a noticeable effect similar to the "work slowdown" that occurred after the 2001 riots. To test my theory, I made a right turn without signaling earlier today, and the 2 cops on Segways behind me were helpless to stop me.

Unless there is evidence that the UC officers were not trained properly, the officer was not punished for past mistakes, or that they failed to do a background check that would have resulted in him not being hired AND that led to his improper use of force, no one should have to shell out money except the person who did it.

 

Basically, if UC Police failed in some regard that ultimately led to the officer using excessive force, they should be responsible for damages. Otherwise, it was an individual's actions that UC Police (the organization) had no way of preventing.

 

I am no expert, but UC shelled out 2 Million in that taser death a few years ago, and there was no criminal conduct by the UC cop.......so

if this case is about criminal conduct by a UC Cop, gotta think get the checkbook out.

The University President has been backtracking on UC police policy for the last week. He has asked to be part of the collaborative, to have their officers jointly trained with Cincinnati Police, and pulled them back on campus. And Cranley has said openly that "reform" is needed.

 

If the video shows that Mr. Dubose did not have to die, then reform is the right thing to do, and it would give the family some measure of peace while helping the community. And, in that case, a just compensation of Mr. Dubose's family is also right, and shouldn't be thought of in any negative way, in my opinion.

 

The issue I have is that there is a certain human element to the job that cannot be removed. No matter how great of training or people you hired, people make mistakes, and occasionally those mistakes are something as terrible as this. If there really was nothing UC Police could have done to stop that incident from happening, they shouldn't be responsible for financial compensation. That's essentially finding someone guilty without any evidence. Of course if they settle out of court (which is how this would likely end), that's their option and isn't an official admission of guilt. None of this is to say that systemic problems in the department could have contributed, but it should have to be shown. Also, that doesn't leave the individual officers with immunity.

Deters is expected to speak at 1pm about the incident

I don't see much controversy unless there no indictment and if the video looks bad. Seems like and indictment is forthcoming.

UC will have to get out the checkbook.

 

The police chief gave an interview yesterday and was asked this specifically.  He said it was bad.

UC is closing campus at 11 am today. Perhaps expecting a backlash after the release of the video?

UC is closing campus at 11 am today. Perhaps expecting a backlash after the release of the video?

[/quob

UC is closing campus at 11 am today. Perhaps expecting a backlash after the release of the video?

te]

 

Yep

 

Video has to be really

Deter's office now announcing the video will be released today.

 

The University President has been backtracking on UC police policy for the last week. He has asked to be part of the collaborative, to have their officers jointly trained with Cincinnati Police, and pulled them back on campus. And Cranley has said openly that "reform" is needed.

 

If the video shows that Mr. Dubose did not have to die, then reform is the right thing to do, and it would give the family some measure of peace while helping the community. And, in that case, a just compensation of Mr. Dubose's family is also right, and shouldn't be thought of in any negative way, in my opinion.

 

The issue I have is that there is a certain human element to the job that cannot be removed. No matter how great of training or people you hired, people make mistakes, and occasionally those mistakes are something as terrible as this. If there really was nothing UC Police could have done to stop that incident from happening, they shouldn't be responsible for financial compensation. That's essentially finding someone guilty without any evidence. Of course if they settle out of court (which is how this would likely end), that's their option and isn't an official admission of guilt. None of this is to say that systemic problems in the department could have contributed, but it should have to be shown. Also, that doesn't leave the individual officers with immunity.

 

I feel badly for the officer in this case also. I haven't seen the video of course, but it seems unlikely that he behaved anything like that prick in Texas who just shot the dude running from him in the back, several times. I'm guessing it was a very unfortunate combination of adrenaline and poor judgement.

 

But training is important, and I'm sure that it varies considerably. We've seen first hand in Cincinnati what the effects of monumental shifts in policy and training can and do have on police operations, acceptance in the community, through the efforts of the collaborative agreement. If you didn't live here for a significant period of time prior to, say, 2005, then you wouldn't appreciate it. But the changes in policy about use of force and engagement were fundamental. We can't assume just because UC is in Cincinnati that their police training is anything like the CPD, even though it obviously passes for approved training.

 

You seemed to be arguing above that the officer should accept blame if he is at fault, uniquely, and the institution should be held relatively unaccountable. But then refer to the vagaries and inherent difficulties of the job, which I agree with, that should let you lean the other way away from making the officer solely responsible.

 

It's really untenable as a policy, I think, but I'd prefer that in these cases it be the institution that is somehow held up to blame first, unless the officer is just behaving wildly outside of the bounds of acceptable practice. Because I don't think it's fair to lump all the blame on that person, in general, because of the inherent risks of the job. I prefer that because it's how policy changes will be made most rapidly, and policy is what is most important

I think we generally agree. Sometimes that is the only way to force change on something like a police department. We saw it with the CPD Collaborative Agreement. For many cases though, it isn't bad training or faulty hiring practices, or lack of discipline in the officers, it can just be a fluke incident where someone makes a huge mistake. In those cases, I see no reason for them to pay money as damages as an institution.

 

We'll see eventually, though. Hopefully everyone stays peaceful throughout this trying time.

Indicted.

 

Joe Deters: "“This office has probably reviewed upwards of hundreds of police shootings, and this is the first time that we’ve thought this is without question a murder."

Sounds like they are throwing the book at him. Good.

 

This is a really sad story, but at least the camera caught the act. Hopefully we are seen as a model for how to investigate police shootings. Unfortunately, if the video was any less clear or not on, it wouldn't be so cut and dry and we would have a completely different situation.

That did not have to happen. I bet the officer thought he was using a taser. Of course that does not explain all the wrongs he wrote on his report that he was dragged. Other officers maybe in trouble too.

UCPD don't have tasers.

Correct, UC does not have tasers because somebody they tased died two years ago.

 

The video is shocking not because it's gory (because it's not) but because the officer not only drew his weapon but fired it when basically nothing was going on.  The driver was not being unusually disrespectful and certainly did not draw a weapon of his own.  He wasn't even driving away -- it appears that the car moved only because the driver's weight fell on the gas pedal or at least off of the brake pedal. 

Hopefully the jury can rule on a lesser charge if they can''t agree on murder. People like this should not be able to get away from homicides(Eg Florida) like this.

Based on the video, here are my opinions:

 

1) DuBose was generally being uncooperative (not answering clearly about whether he has a license, whose car it was, etc), but nice and not confrontational.

2) Tensing clearly should not have stuck his arm into the car. I'm sure that is against everything you learn when undergoing training.

3) DuBose does start the car back up. At that point Tensing should have backed up and verbally told him to turn the car off. If he doesn't comply you radio in his description and vehicle and follow him in your car.

4) It appears that the officer's hand is not in the steering wheel as he claims it was. He is holding onto DuBose's seat belt when he fires the shot.

5) The officer was not justified to shoot DuBose.

 

The most unclear thing is whether DuBose started moving his vehicle to get away. If I had to guess, when there was a struggle at the door (that Tensing initiated), DuBose took his foot off the brake because of the confusion/scuffle. If the vehicle was moving, it was likely crawling forward. It's tough to tell, but Tensing doesn't appear to have moved very far between pulling him over and getting up after the shot. Perhaps the other officer's body camera/dash cam would provide more details about when and how much the car accelerated. Regardless of whether it did, Tensing did not follow best practices, which led to the shooting, which IMO at least guarantees he is guilty of reckless homicide.

 

Reckless Homicide

A "reckless" act occurs when a person consciously disregards his own conduct that could produce a substantial and unjustifiable risk

Under Ohio Law:

(A) No person shall recklessly cause the death of another or the unlawful termination of another's pregnancy.

 

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of reckless homicide, a felony of the third degree.

 

Since this was done with a firearm, there is a minimum sentence of 3 years. He could get 9 months to 5 years on top of that depending on how the judge sentences him.

 

He was not charged with Reckless Homicide, though. He has been charged with two crimes: murder, and voluntary manslaughter (both more serious than Reckless Homicide).

 

Murder

 

(A) No person shall purposely cause the death of another or the unlawful termination of another's pregnancy.

 

Legally, I think murder might be hard to prove. They need to convince a jury that he simply wanted to kill DuBose. Which I highly doubt is the case.

 

Murder could bring about anywhere from 15 years to life in prison. Deters is seeking life in prison.

 

Voluntary Manslaughter

 

(A) No person, while under the influence of sudden passion or in a sudden fit of rage, either of which is brought on by serious provocation occasioned by the victim that is reasonably sufficient to incite the person into using deadly force, shall knowingly cause the death of another or the unlawful termination of another's pregnancy.

 

Voluntary Manslaughter brings 3-11 years

 

I think this is a realistic goal for the prosecution.

There is now speculation that the other officer who responded to the scene and backed up Tensing's account of being dragged might be indicted. 

 

The big lesson here?  Police really do escalate situations for no reason and then lie about them all the time.  And they coordinate with other police to lie about situations.  This is an extreme case that was caught on tape.  Perhaps all of the people out there in the land of make-believe who think that the police will act rationally if you simply do what they say will see that this is absolutely not the case. 

 

 

 

I think it's pretty obvious that Tensing had no business firing his weapon. At all. But why on earth don't people just obey police officers commands? He does that he is alive today. I keep reading about black people fearing for their lives and if they truly do then they should be listening to everything the office tells them to do. I mean to start your car while the officer is right there talking to you?

 

I also highly doubt Tensing was looking to kill someone. Deters comments are mostly overboard. I also feel for how difficult and stressful it has to be to be a police officer in the inner city. That said, there still isn't any excuse for what happened. He needs to be charged, but there is a part of me that feels bad for any cops that make bad decisions in the heat of the moment.

 

I should add that I feel terrible for Duboses family. Regardless of anything, he didn't deserve to get shot.

I guess the video has to be viewed in slow motion to be able to discern exactly what happened in that fateful moment.  I couldn't tell, but in any case it was clear enough that the cop's account of what transpired was false.  Why oh why didn't he just shoot out a tire if he was [justifiably] worried that a drunk driver without a license was getting away?  That he didn't leads me to suspect he was aggrieved that the man disobeyed him.

 

I thought Deters was very good in his presser and deserves our thanks for diffusing a very tense situation.  BUT he seemed to have an ax to grind against UC and didn't miss an opportunity to criticize it.  He practically laid the groundwork for a civil suit against the university on behalf of the victim's family.  In light of some of the crime that's occurred near the campus I can't blame the university for wanting to take extra measures to ensure the safety of students.  I seem to recall a fairly recent event where some young people were held up on a sidewalk while a CPD cruiser went right by -- does anyone know what I'm thinking of?

 

Cops have a tough job, there's absolutely no doubt about it.  Please correct me if I'm wrong but it's my understanding that the police unions generally resist means whereby cops can be held accountable.  At the very least they should encourage periodic psychological testing since it's the type of profession that can easily attract bullies, people with control issues, etc., and even if recruits don't start out that way, it's understandable that over time some of them could become ill-suited for the job.  The cop in S. Carolina who looked like he was taking target practice on that man who was running away from him is a perfect example of someone who obviously shouldn't have a position in law enforcement.

 

 

I am a dyed in the wool law and order guy. No legit reason to shoot.

Deters' comments about disbanding the UCPD seemed odd and perhaps politically-motivated. Of course the UCPD has some lessons to learn. But dissolving the UCPD and having the CPD take over doesn't make much sense. There's nothing that makes the Cincinnati Police an inherently "better" police force than the UC Police.  If he thinks Cincinnati Police are better qualified because they're a bigger force, then what about all the Green Township PD, Springfield Township PD, or other small departments--should they be dissolved too?

Deters' comments about disbanding the UCPD seemed odd and perhaps politically-motivated. Of course the UCPD has some lessons to learn. But dissolving the UCPD and having the CPD take over doesn't make much sense. There's nothing that makes the Cincinnati Police an inherently "better" police force than the UC Police.  If he thinks Cincinnati Police are better qualified because they're a bigger force, then what about all the Green Township PD, Springfield Township PD, or other small departments--should they be dissolved too?

 

If they can be functionally replaced by the CPD what's the benefit for UC to keep them? They are a cost center, a non-core function of the University, and a financial and reputation liability in the case of a situation like has just occurred. Sounds like the CPD is a better force due to training, the Collaborative Agreement etc. The CPD could always hire in the good officers from the UCPD. And we should be concerned about what may or may not be going on with suburban departments as well.

I am shocked by the disconnect between the officers statement and the reality of the events of the video.  Before today I believed at least some of the officer's story must have occurred. I will never look at cases like this in quite the same way again.  I actually think the lack of ambiguity in this case is actually helping keep things calm in addition to the efforts of our citizens and leaders.

 

It is difficult to imagine that a life can be taken so quickly.  Thoughts and prayers to the Dubose family who are handling this with extraordinary grace.

The human brain is not as perfect when it comes to forming memories as we think it is. It's entirely possible the officer legitimately thought the events happened the way he said they did. It's possible he just lied as well, but memory has a way of shifting, especially when under stress and in a high-adrenaline situation.

 

I'm glad that now that the video is out and it's clear that Dubose did nothing even close to warranting this level of aggression that the indictment came swiftly and the situation publicly was kept calm and discussions are occurring instead of unpeaceful protest. This will bring change and will be an example for the rest of the country on how to go about that properly when moving forward in solving a very real problem our culture has when it comes to race relations in law enforcement.

You have to watch the video not just slowly, but frame by frame because everything happens so quickly. If you look at some of the stationary objects, you can tell that the car travelled some distance between the time the cop was talking to Dubose and the time he stands up after having been knocked down. When the shot is fired, the trees and an object (I think it’s a truck in a driveway) are clearly no longer stationary in relation to the passenger window of the car. When the cop gets up, he’s about 20 feet closer to a silver parked car that is down the road then he was seconds prior. You can also hear the engine rev immediately prior to the shot. It seems to me that he was indeed dragged to some extent. In my mind,that fits the ORC definition of voluntary manslaughter, but not murder. I think the murder charge is bread and circuses.

Deters' comments about disbanding the UCPD seemed odd and perhaps politically-motivated. Of course the UCPD has some lessons to learn. But dissolving the UCPD and having the CPD take over doesn't make much sense. There's nothing that makes the Cincinnati Police an inherently "better" police force than the UC Police.  If he thinks Cincinnati Police are better qualified because they're a bigger force, then what about all the Green Township PD, Springfield Township PD, or other small departments--should they be dissolved too?

 

If they can be functionally replaced by the CPD what's the benefit for UC to keep them? They are a cost center, a non-core function of the University, and a financial and reputation liability in the case of a situation like has just occurred. Sounds like the CPD is a better force due to training, the Collaborative Agreement etc. The CPD could always hire in the good officers from the UCPD. And we should be concerned about what may or may not be going on with suburban departments as well.

 

It is not a matter of If what you propose can be done but a matter of what UC wants to do about it. Yes, CPD could handle the policing work, but UC created a police department for various reasons beneficial to UC. No one can force UC to give up their police force, they have to come to that conclusion on their own. At the end of the day, they are responsible for the student's safety. By having a police force, it helps them underwrite the costs better than if it were just a campus security organization. There are also plenty of other reasons why UC has a separate police force.

You have to watch the video not just slowly, but frame by frame because everything happens so quickly. If you look at some of the stationary objects, you can tell that the car travelled some distance between the time the cop was talking to Dubose and the time he stands up after having been knocked down. When the shot is fired, the trees and an object (I think it’s a truck in a driveway) are clearly no longer stationary in relation to the passenger window of the car. When the cop gets up, he’s about 20 feet closer to a silver parked car that is down the road then he was seconds prior. You can also hear the engine rev immediately prior to the shot. It seems to me that he was indeed dragged to some extent. In my mind,that fits the ORC definition of voluntary manslaughter, but not murder. I think the murder charge is bread and circuses.

 

I saw it slightly differently when I reviewed it frame-by-frame. I see Tensing reach into the car and Dubose, reacting to that, either put his foot on the gas or simply took his foot off the brake, moving the car forward slowly, which is when Tensing instantly reached for his gun and shot him. From there, a dead Dubose had his limp foot on the gas pedal and the car drove drown the street and slammed into the corner. You can tell by the video with the engine revving in a stopped car the Dubose's foot was on the gas pedal while slumped over the steering wheel.

You have to watch the video not just slowly, but frame by frame because everything happens so quickly. If you look at some of the stationary objects, you can tell that the car travelled some distance between the time the cop was talking to Dubose and the time he stands up after having been knocked down. When the shot is fired, the trees and an object (I think it’s a truck in a driveway) are clearly no longer stationary in relation to the passenger window of the car. When the cop gets up, he’s about 20 feet closer to a silver parked car that is down the road then he was seconds prior. You can also hear the engine rev immediately prior to the shot. It seems to me that he was indeed dragged to some extent. In my mind,that fits the ORC definition of voluntary manslaughter, but not murder. I think the murder charge is bread and circuses.

I saw it slightly differently when I reviewed it frame-by-frame. I see Tensing reach into the car and Dubose, reacting to that, either put his foot on the gas or simply took his foot off the brake, moving the car forward slowly, which is when Tensing instantly reached for his gun and shot him. From there, a dead Dubose had his limp foot on the gas pedal and the car drove drown the street and slammed into the corner. You can tell by the video with the engine revving in a stopped car the Dubose's foot was on the gas pedal while slumped over the steering wheel.

Yes I completely agree, he wasn't dragged.

 

I guess you see what you want to see even when it's frame-by-frame video. I was surprised at how it affected me to view it. It generated a gut level anger toward Tensing. And really sadness about this guy, Dubose, who was maybe a little drunk or maybe a little high, but driving slowly and just a couple blocks from home, and completely passive. And he gets shot in the head. It's murder in my book, and I hope Tensing spends his life in prison.

 

It's also one of the only times I can recall my feelings being so in sync with Joe Deters.

You have to watch the video not just slowly, but frame by frame because everything happens so quickly. If you look at some of the stationary objects, you can tell that the car travelled some distance between the time the cop was talking to Dubose and the time he stands up after having been knocked down. When the shot is fired, the trees and an object (I think its a truck in a driveway) are clearly no longer stationary in relation to the passenger window of the car. When the cop gets up, hes about 20 feet closer to a silver parked car that is down the road then he was seconds prior. You can also hear the engine rev immediately prior to the shot. It seems to me that he was indeed dragged to some extent. In my mind,that fits the ORC definition of voluntary manslaughter, but not murder. I think the murder charge is bread and circuses.

 

I didn't watch the video online after seeing aired on TV, and I'm at work now so I can't waste time looking at the video, but you might be right.  There should be a dash cam from that car and it might help show what happened since the dash cam will be stationary.  All of the motion on the body cam is a big problem and stabilization software might invalidate its use in court.  In fact, all of the delay in getting the video out could raise suspicion that it was sent off to be manipulated.  My brother edits TV shows professionally and they spend a lot of time manipulating footage (taking power lines out, etc., just like on photoshop but they have to do it frame-by-frame).  The process of manipulating low-res footage like this is a lot faster than hi-res broadcast quality. 

 

And of course manipulating the audio is way easier than the video.  Very easy to simply slide the audio of a revving car 1/2 second ahead of when it actually occurred. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Let's not get into mindless conspiracy theories. Any time you edit a photo or a video the file shows that. You can manipulate it all you want but it'll be obvious to anyone who raises that question and analyses it.

It looks shopped...I can tell by the pixels and...

Let's not get into mindless conspiracy theories. Any time you edit a photo or a video the file shows that. You can manipulate it all you want but it'll be obvious to anyone who raises that question and analyses it.

 

A proprietary file must be converted into something viewable on an ordinary computer and web browser.  When that conversion happens, all history of any manipulation of the original file is lost.  And I think people are quite naïve to allow one video or even a multitude of videos from different cameras and camera types to establish the context surrounding an event in their minds.  And if they were actually there and witnessed an event with their own eyes, photographs or video taken by another will come to overtake their own memories. 

 

People will see in a video what they are suggested to see.  The various 9/11 conspiracy videos on youtube are a perfect example.  Even though dozens of camera angles show something occurring one way, they fixate on the one or two videos that look suspicious.  In their minds they discount all of those videos in favor of the one or two suspicious camera angles.  Same with the Zapruder Film -- people really want to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't act alone, and so will keep looking and looking and looking in that video for evidence. 

 

And those videos you see on youtube, just like the video Deters showed yesterday at the press conference, and just like the one being passed around online, are not the original files out of the body camera.  No doubt that camera creates a proprietary file.  Until those cameras are able to instantly transmit safely encrypted propriety files at the time the footage is captured to various agencies with no relation to one another so that various versions can be cross-checked, I'm not sure these should be thought of with the certainly that people are allowing themselves to give. 

 

 

Also, a very critical technical detail is the frame rate of the body cam versus the frame rate of quicktime or whatever format the various websites use.  The only valid frame-by-frame analysis that can be made would be with the original file in a video editing program that can show those original frames as still images.  Going "frame-by-frame" on a web video just plain isn't the same thing and the audio could very well be out-of-sync by a fraction of a second. 

Deters made The Onion

 

http://www.theonion.com/article/horrifying-police-body-camera-footage-clearly-show-50966

Deters made The Onion

 

http://www.theonion.com/article/horrifying-police-body-camera-footage-clearly-show-50966

 

Well, Cincinnati has finally hit the big time.  No longer a backwater are we!

Tensing, May 2014, at at traffic stop. Seems like he pulled over a car due to a dinged up front bumper.

He gets owned by the driver, passenger. He also gets caught in a lie.

 

Deters actual statements are more over the top than the Onion version.

Maybe, but I actually think they were incredibly important in keeping the peace. His outrage (real or perceived) is being viewed as showing he sides with the minority community and wants change in their favor. It's the opposite approach other places have taken and the results show. Some of it may be sincere outrage that this happened regardless of how over the top some of what he said was. Regardless though, I think it's good because he's in a position of power and can hopefully lead to the necessary changes being made to reduce the likelihood of this happening again.