Philando Castile: A Cop’s Take

Untitled-1

Since the news broke of licensed permit holder Philando Castile’s death, I’ve questioned the event. Not because a cop shot a citizen, because the victim was licensed to carry a gun. I focused squarely on the effect this could have on civilian gun rights.

To help me think clearly about the incident, I called police Sergeant JJ Rouanzoin. JJ owns Colorado Gunfighter training. I attended his CCW class with my father. He’s been a good friend for 12 years.

“It’s a tragedy for both sides when a human is killed,” JJ told me, straight off the bat. Discussing the case, he didn’t take the cop’s side and he didn’t take Castile’s. As a cop, he wants to know the facts before forming an opinion. JJ hoped for the eventual release of body cam video, knowing that the case could boil down to he-said, she-said.

(Courtesy of Colorado Gun Fighter)

JJ also said those who question police shootings of other civilians aren’t responsible for the murders of police officers. The man who pulled the trigger in Dallas is responsible for the dead cops. “Let’s not be like the left and blame the NRA every time a mass shooting happens. We shouldn’t automatically blame the police whenever they shoot someone.”

JJ affirmed the advice given by this site and many of its commentators. When a cop pulls you over keep your hands on the steering wheel. Don’t make ANY sudden movements. Regardless of local duty-to-inform laws, disclose the fact that you have a permit and are armed and tell the cop where the gun is.

According to JJ, 99.99% of the time, cops are happy to see a gun permit. It tells them two things. 1. You are clean, with no record and 2. You want to do what is needed to keep your gun rights in tact. So you aren’t a threat.

Maybe Castile freaked out the cop. Maybe the cop was jumpy and over-reacted. Who knows? Unless we see bodycam footage, we may never know. But clear communication is key when you’re pulled over. And giving the impression that you’re trying to work with the police, rather than against them.

comments

  1. avatar pwrserge says:

    What’s interesting is what came out of the officer’s mouth on the cellphone video… It definitely doesn’t sound like a rageaholic going off on a random person.

    1. avatar Anon in CT says:

      Honestly, it sounds like someone who fucked up and knows it.

      1. avatar Andrew says:

        Or someone who was forced to do something he didn’t want to do.

        Why was the gun in the lap of the driver? Why did the girlfriend start filming only after the shooting?

        Many unanswered questions.

        1. avatar Steve O says:

          Do you really see a gun there? I see something black, and thats about it. All I heard was “a gun was recovered from the scene”, but nothing about where it was when it was recovered.

        2. avatar JasonM says:

          Unless he had a gun wallet, there was no gun in his lap. And gun wallets are AOWs, I believe, so somebody would have mentioned that by now.

        3. avatar Binder says:

          JasonM,
          My wallet holster I use for my 380 looks exactly like a wallet from one side. I could put it down on the passenger seat and you could not tell it was a gun unless you flipped it over. It is set up that way so it doesn’t print. Hell, it was show on TAG as a every day carry.

        4. avatar Matt in TX says:

          This is my rear pocket holster. Looks like a wallet. http://www.mecopocketholsters.com/RearThumbPushOff.htm

        5. avatar DaveR says:

          Why are you perpetuating this misinformation? There’s zero evidence (made public) to support any claim such as this.

      2. avatar WI Patriot says:

        That’s the way I heard it too…

    2. Subjective. He sounded pretty worried about doing the wrong thing. Kinda tail between the legs tone if you ask me. But that’s my opinion. We need the body cam. The jurors will have it.

  2. avatar 16V says:

    Unless something was misreported earlier, no bodycam footage will be forthcoming as there was no bodycam to source it from.

  3. avatar Caitlyn in Malibu says:

    Yep, have to wait, the Mike Brown shot execution style meme took awhile to go away.

    1. No it hasn’t. Neither has the Trayvon Martin story. Both are being lumped in to agitate more protesters.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        Since the Dallas cop murders I’ve had to correct at least one commentor here on ttag that had listed Trayvon as one of the victims of a police killing.

        1. I’d like to correct Rev. Jackson who keeps calling it a murder.

        2. avatar jwm says:

          People commenting here on TTAG have called both cops involved in the recent killings murderers. No trial, no charges as yet.

          Seems the whole due process thing is not just being ignored for the no fly, no buy list.

  4. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

    And we still have no definitive proof Philando Castile had any CCL. Just the girlfriend’s video claim. No I see no bodycam either. As we see poverty pimps like Sharpton accuse the NRA of not supporting black gun rights…

      1. avatar Mike in Texas says:

        Mk10108 – Geez Louise, Man! You do not KNOW he had a license to carry. You have a REPORT from a media outlet that he has one. Worse than this is that you have an ANONYMOUS source as reported by the media. Do you really trust the media?

        Hey, I am reporting to you that I have an anonymous source in the police department that said he did NOT have a license to carry.

        Who you gonna believe? Me? David Chanen?

        Who is David Chanen you ask? Why, he is the reporter at the Star Tribune who wrote the article with the anonymous source. Who is the editor of the Star Tribune who approved this story? The editor?

        Would you believe John Ohl about whether Castile had a license to carry? I would take it with a grain of salt until I had independent verification.

        I don’t mean to attack you, per se. I mean to attack this American phenomenon where we believe whatever we are told by anybody we are told it by. Wait for PROOF. Generally, PROOF is what is acceptable in a court of law. Hearing something from an anonymous source is not proof – it’s called heresay.

        You know what we know about the Castile case right now. He is dead and was shot by an officer. Some other lesser instructive details like: He was the driver of the car. He is black. He is 32. He had a job in a school cafeteria. Other than that, not a hell of a lot.

        We don’t know the chick in the car was his girlfriend (only her say-so). We don’t know he even had a gun (legal, illegal, concealed, or not concealed). Was he a gangbanger as reported … we don’t know. Did he rob a store 4 blocks away 4 days prior … we don’t know. Did he look similar to the robber … personal opinion – I suck at ID’ing people on video.

        We don’t know. We need to quit assuming and quit making things up.

        Final notes: (1) Of course, you may be entirely correct Castilo had a license to carry. Time will tell. (2) In case you didn’t know, Ohl is the Police Chief of the officer who ALLEGEDLY shot Castilo. I take his word with a grain of salt cause he has an interest in this case.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Well, hey, do we really know all that? I hear repeatedly that he was the driver, but that video sure did not look like it. It looked like he was in the front passenger’s seat being filmed from the driver’s seat. Unless the car was right-hand drive. And shot from the passenger side window.

        2. avatar Mike in Texas says:

          Larry, lots of stuff written on this subject. I think I saw an article on BA that explained the video was shot “in mirror mode”. While I understand what things look like in a mirror, I am not really too much of a videographer so I take them at their word. Also, the police radio indicated Castilo was the driver. I also think I remember seeing a quick glance of the steering wheel in front of him during the video.

          All of this to further another post I made about being careful about what we think we know. Even a “mirror” recording can warp our view of a whole situation. When I first saw it, I was a bit predisposed against the cop thinking why was he even engaging with a “peaceful license holder” in the passenger seat.

        3. avatar Mk10108 says:

          I agree with every word you say. Recall how wrong the yapping heads were saying their were multiple shooters in Dallas.

          The names of CCW carriers are not public in MN. It’s not inconsistent that reporters have sources in departments with this information.

          https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/07/10/falcon-heights-philando-castile-shooting-update-radio-dispatch-and-dash-cams/#more-118570

          Although the names of gun permit holders are not public under state law, a source confirmed Castile was issued the permit when he lived in Robbinsdale. The article states: “when he lived in Robbinsdale” and that is past tense.

          The bottom line is CCW has nothing to do with him being killed. He was shot for having a gun easily accessible, in view of the officer, and failed to comply with a command from the officer.

        4. avatar Mike in Texas says:

          Mk – Arggghhhhh!!! You are killing me. Your post starts with you agree with every word I said (all of which is that we know nothing at all of any relevance of the specifics of Castilo’s death). And then at the end of the post you list assumptions as known facts:

          “The bottom line is CCW has nothing to do with him being killed.” – No, we do not know this. If he had a CCW and thought he was safe to retrieve his documentation because he was permitted, he COULD have moved too quickly and contrary to the officer’s commands. How many people at TTAG are all “tacti-doodle” because they have a license to carry?

          “He was shot for having a gun easily accessible,” – No, as I presently understand it, all we have to prove he had a gun at all is his supposed girlfriend’s word on it. Also, for what it is worth, why carry a gun at all if it is not easily accessible. Yikes, I hope if I am ever shot by a cop there is a better reason than because my gun was easily accessible!

          “in view of the officer” – Sir, we don’t know this. I agree this is the current speculation but speculation is not knowing. Also, I ‘suspect’ that the cop is saying one thing and the girlfriend is saying another. He said/She said is not knowing.

          “and failed to comply with a command from the officer.” I think this is likely true but again, isnt this disputed by the girlfriend? Isn’s she saying Castilo was 100% complying with the officer. Either way, I submit, we just do not know anything YET.

        5. avatar jwtaylor says:

          “and failed to comply with a command from the officer.” I missed that on the tape. Where is it?

        6. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Tape began after the shooting, command (whatever it was) was not recorded.

        7. avatar jwtaylor says:

          Larry, exactly. He may have been following commands. There might have been no commands. He may have not been following commands.

      2. avatar Steve says:

        An unnamed source reporting someone has a permit in a state were such information is not made available? Yeah, that doesn’t prove anything.

      3. avatar Chip Bennett says:

        “…a source confirmed…”

        Yeah, that’s definitive proof… :/

        I remain skeptical that he was ever issued a MN Permit To Carry.

        And even if he was issued a permit, it was voided by his unlawful marijuana use, as per MN statute.

        1. avatar DaveR says:

          “And even if he was issued a permit, it was voided by his unlawful marijuana use, as per MN statute.”

          You keep bringing this up.

          First of all, do you really believe that’s a valid reason to imply it’s then OK for a person to just be be shot by a cop? Like he deserved to be shot because he lied on a form?

          Second, let’s say you’re right and lying on paperwork is probable cause to be killed, is there any evidence that the cop KNEW he used marijuana?

          Finally, let’s assume that I’m putting words in your mouth and that you in fact DON’T think that smoking G is an execution-worthy offence…then so what? He didn’t have a valid permit is what you’re saying? Did the cop know that?–if not then that’s not a reason to justify the shoot either.

          Seriously man, I don’t know why you’re down on the guy for this…

        2. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          First of all, do you really believe that’s a valid reason to imply it’s then OK for a person to just be be shot by a cop? Like he deserved to be shot because he lied on a form?

          Straw man much?

          Where did I ever argue such nonsense?

    1. avatar DaveR says:

      I love how all the deniers here keep regurgitating this.

      Fact is, it would be in the best interest of the officer to report that Castile was carrying illegally. So unless the cops are morons (not inconceivable), the reports that he had the appropriate credentials to carry the gun are likely correct.

      Stop spouting that conservative tree house speculative babble.

      1. avatar Mike in Texas says:

        To the best of my knowledge (in this fast, er, slow moving case development) no one in any official capacity has said he had the appropriate credentials. So far we have his so called “girlfriend” and “anonymous source(s)” who may or may not have access to some records about the deceased.

        Neither the cops or DA or anyone similarly situated has said anything * about a license. Nor has anyone produced any physical evidence (a copy of the license). Nor has anyone provided contemporaneous testimony with personal knowledge (ie. My name is John Doe and I actually taught the class Castilo attended.).

        * “Would this have happened if those passengers would have been white? I don’t think it would have,” Gov. Mark Dayton said. Ok, I will stipulate that the Gov here seems to be speaking with inside knowledge about the motives of the cop or the innocense of Mr. Castile. Of course, as a Democrat he could just be speaking out his ass which is typical of Democrat politicians. Wonderful to be a cop in MN knowing the Gov is waiting for the facts and has your back against a potentially riotous populace.

  5. Can someone please verify that Castile was a CPL holder. “Unnamed source” doesn’t cut it for me.
    I assume all this will come out in the investigation but this sure is taking a long time considering all the outrage.

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      As far as I know, that info isn’t available yet. Here’s some discussion:

      http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/philando-castile-gun-permit-to-carry-gun-racial-profiling-have-a-valid-concealed-carry-permit-carry-gun-license-police-minnesota-ramsey-county-armed-robbery-robbery-robbery-suspect-gas-station-photos/

      The Sheriff in the County where Castile most recently lived stated that he had not issued a permit (had never received an application). However, Castile may have had a permit from another County (previous residence). If so, no official has publicly acknowledged such (confidentiality rules might apply here).

  6. Where I live, if you are a cop and you don’t already assume every one you pull over is packing, you are a moron.

    If you are pulled over and you don’t already have your wallet out before the cop gets to your vehicle, you are a moron.

    1. avatar TTACer says:

      I always thought it was better to have your wallet ready before they came up to the window so you aren’t reaching for anything with them there, but I have read that if a cop sees you fiddling in the car before they get there then they will assume you are trying to hide something. Damned if you do…

      As far as Philando, the one thing the cell video establishes clearly is that the cop does not know how to approach a car. Why doesn’t he stay behind the driver?

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        Depending on the cop’s mindset at the time of the stop he/she may assume you are hiding something or assume you are retrieving your documents. What they see when they arrive at your window should answer that question for them.

        Even if the cop assumes that you are hiding something that suspicion does not constitute probable or even reasonable cause to initiate a search of your vehicle. Unless they can plainly see from outside the vehicle what they perceive to be contraband or other evidence of a crime in progress no search is warranted. Smoking marijuana where it is not legal to do so means all bets are off.

        Best case, have your documents ready for the officer, even if you have to squirm around a little to get them. It may put him on alert as he approaches, wondering what you are up to, but is better than rummaging around while he is standing next to you with a gun. Also, as previously discussed at length, if you have a State permission slip to carry a concealed weapon, present it with your driver’s license, without additional comment until the officer asks for more information. Never say “I have a gun.” Especially before you present the permit!

        Further advice, just an observation, lose the dreadlocks. Funky hairdos and sagging pants are not your friend in the presence of law enforcement officers.

        1. avatar MarkPA says:

          Even if the cop sees you squirming about for your wallet, there seems to be no question that this is the only reasonable course of action. The cop should be bright enough to realize that the most likely explanation is that you are getting your driver’s license. That will be supported by your handing the cop your papers as the first interaction when he is by your window.
          Second issue is registration and insurance. I have a “wallet” that I keep in a visor pouch so that I don’t have to go into my glove compartment for these papers. I should be able to reach both my DL and CCP in my pocket wallet and my Reg & Ins in the visor wallet before the cop is at my window.
          Holding the papers in one hand and the other hand clearly in view, I should freeze. No other movement whatsoever.
          Only question in my mind is what to do if the cop wants me to disarm. No way I want to move my hand anywhere near my gun even under his orders. Any cops have a suggestion of how to deal with a cop who wants me to disarm?

      2. ” I have read that if a cop sees you fiddling in the car before they get there then they will assume you are trying to hide something.”

        Where did you read that? The internet?

        1. avatar Doesky2 says:

          Yeah read it repeatedly many places and it makes sense. If the cops want a universal set of rules that applies everywhere they can have Obama run through them during the state of the union address.

          I’ll take the attitude that the cop can cool his heels at my window side if he’s chosen to inconvenience me. I’m not givng Fido whacker the opportunity to say i was trying to hide something.

        2. avatar Matt in TX says:

          I have read this on several sites including TTAG.

    2. avatar Klaus says:

      This. So this. Your DL, POI, and registration in your hand when he gets to the window. None of this ‘fumbling around”, digging through the glovebox BS, just have it ready.

      1. avatar Chadwick says:

        It hasn’t done me wrong to have all my info in hand when the officer comes to my window. If the officer asks what you were doing you can just reply with “producing my information sir(or ma’m)”. I would be very weary of telling a cop “I have a gun”. To me that is a trigger word like when police are dealing with a perp and one sees a gun and yells “gun!”. I would be inclined to give the officer my permit and leave it at that. If the leo wants to know where or what it is that’s on them (at least in states that you don’t have to inform).

        1. avatar Andrew Lias says:

          I will wait my hands on the wheel till the officer asks me to produce papers. My buddy had a green officer panic and ND because he reached into his glove box.

        2. avatar Swilson says:

          Whenever I drive, I tend to have my wallet in the cupholder of the center console. Mostly it’s because that wallet makes my butt fall asleep when in the vehicle for more than 10 mins. My truck is such that anyone looking through the window can see the bill fold right there. So I do the hands on the wheel deal, and when the officer asks for my info I tell him my wallet is in the cup holder of the console and I will produce it for him. No digging around making the cop nervous while he’s standing there, no fumbling around making him suspicious as he approaches the vehicle.

    3. avatar Mark_PAV says:

      “…If you are pulled over and you don’t already have your wallet out before the cop gets to your vehicle, you are a moron. …”

      Ummm I must be a moron as I’ve been told (by several LEO friends) that doing anything that looks like “fumbling” (i.e. shuffling to get your wallet out of your pocket is the same motion that’s done to get a weapon or hind something you don’t want the LEO to know about)

      Keep your hands on the wheel in sight until he asks for ID, and even then, let him know where you’re reaching…..back pocket, glove compartment etc. He has a family to go home to, the better and up front communication between the two of you makes sure you both get home to your families. Is it courtesy that some of you may not want to indulge to a LEO? Easy choice for me to make.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Friends, hell. I was pulled over for being a bad boy, dug out all my paperwork and got my hands on the wheel again before he got to my door. At the end of the stop, he politely advised me that police would prefer that I not do that, just wait for him to ask.

        1. I bet other cops have other opinions.
          If it were me, I’d rather you not be moving when I am just outside your car. If you have to gather your documents while I am a safe distance away, so be it. Put yourself in the other guy’s shoes is the mindset I live by.
          Just because you wait for a command before doing anything does not mean you are following that command. An assumption by the officer that a bad guy is following a command is a dangerous one.
          And where are all the 4th Amendment guys on this? “He might think you are hiding something”. Tough shit! It is my car and if I want to hide something in there then it is none of his business. If he makes it his business, isn’t there a procedure to search vehicles that doesn’t involve shooting the driver first?

      2. avatar JT says:

        I was given the same advice by my CCW instructor, who was a LEO.

      3. avatar Klaus says:

        There’s no fumbling, fiddling, or wiggling for me. It’s in a little plastic case that’s clipped to the visor directly in front of my face. It takes a second to go from the steering wheel to the visor and back. Maybe a second.

      4. avatar donny77 says:

        Isn’t this the problem? We all want to Monday Morning QB the victim for how he interacted with the cop, but there is no standard. We can’t even agree on the protocol. Even if everyone in society was “trained” to deal with the cops in their area, what if I travel and that police force isn’t expecting the same behavior. This on top of the fact that training everyone on how to interact with police is impractical. Unfortunately, this leaves the burden on officers to professionally interact with the public regardless of how the public responds.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Boy, our schools don’t seem to do much anymore, seems a 1-hour course in how to deal with a LEO, given in the year when kids reach driving age, would be kinda obvious.

        2. avatar donny77 says:

          Not everyone in this country went through our schools. Its better than nothing, sure, but we shouldn’t be relying on the unpaid individual knowing how to properly interact with the paid “highly-trained” individual. If that is our system, it is set up for failure. That and police interactions often run contrary to the law. I know a lot of people disagree with failing to ID unless charged with a crime, but regardless that is the law. I’ve watched plenty of LEO interactions online where officers overstep what they are legally allowed to do versus what they are trained to do. Often they lie saying you are legally obligated to comply when you are not. The Supreme Court has even ruled it is legal for an officer to lie to you about the law. So what are we training the public on? The law or department policy?

    4. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Said it before and I’ll keep repeating it:

      If the cop really stopped him for an armed robbery BOLO, he should not have been going TO the driver’s door for any reason.

      That’s just now how felony stops are done.

      Thus him having his wallet out SHOULD have been moot in this case…if the BOLO based stop is accurate, of course.

      1. avatar FedUp says:

        And when making a “felony stop” based on a BOLO, you lie to the suspect and tell him you just pulled him over for a taillamp bulb?

        Now we’ve got a ‘suspect’ who doesn’t realize he is one, and is treating it as a relatively casual and friendly encounter, with a man who, unknown to him, has his mindset solidly in the ‘kill or be killed’ mode.

        1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          My point is that on a felony stop for an ARMED ROBBERY suspect, he should not have been up there to tell him that lie or the truth.

          THAT’S the linchpin that made this whole thing happen…it started with bad tactics.

          Was it a ‘good shot’ with respect to the actual moment of firing? Don’t know.

          But, I can say that cop created the situation that put him there to have to make that situation, and this poor tactic flies in the face of at least five decades of known police training and tactical doctrine.

          Maybe the cop wanted to be a hero and catch him and armed robber. Maybe he just made a mistake. Or maybe sound tactical training has gone down the toilet and cops are not taught “felony stops” anymore.

          If the latter…look for this kind of crap to increase…more dead citizens, cop and non-cop alike.

        2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          But, yeah, I do see what you are saying, too. Good point.

        3. avatar The Next 8 Years says:

          You have no idea how this stop went down. All you have is a post-shooting video narrated by a woman who may or may not be telling the truth.

        4. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          “You have no idea how this stop went down. All you have is a post-shooting video narrated by a woman who may or may not be telling the truth.”

          What an idiotic comment. Nothing in anything said in this comment thread depends on the woman’s video for being a valid point.

          Thus proving you are as clueless as I thought from some of your previous posts the past week or so.

          Go ahead. Read what was written one more time.

          Now. Do tell how the cop could have been at the driver’s window, talking with the driver and shot the driver if he was not standing right there.

          There has been some confirmation (I believe from the Chief of his agency) that the stop was in reference to the BOLO. And, corroborating that the “broken tail light” premise was false, there are pictures available of the car showing both tail lights functioning properly.

          So…at this point, the evidence seems to suggest the stop was for a felony BOLO, and this cop failed to use proper Felony Stop tactics.

          So, take your weak non-argument attempt at sounding smart somewhere where the children you usually try to impress are pretend to be impressed.

    5. avatar Dutch says:

      Former LE chiming in here. In a traffic stop the absolute LAST thing I wanted to see was someone digging around in their car as I walked up to them. Sure they could be getting paperwork, but they could also be hiding something or retrieving a weapon.

      So NO, DO NOT go digging around. Sit still with your hands in plain sight with the radio off/muted until the officer gives you instructions, and the same goes for your passengers.

      1. Isn’t reaching to mute the radio a movement that can be construed as “fumbling” or hiding something. This is all personal opinion and fantasy scenarios.

        I can play that game too:
        Driver remains still with hands on wheel.
        Cop approaches vehicle after 7 minutes of finishing his coffee and running your plates.
        “ID and proof of insurance please sir?”
        “ID is in my wallet and the insurance card is in the glove box. I have to unbuckle my seatbelt to retrieve them.”

        How does the cop know you are going for the insurance card?
        He doesn’t.
        Why would he think you hid something because you were “fumbling” around?
        He wouldn’t and if he did, and has cause, can’t he search?
        Neither one makes you or the cop safer or even feel safer. To try to have a uniform approach to every traffic stop is futile as well as a waste of time because the goal, safety and comfort, is not achieved either way.

        No matter what, don’t be a dickhead to the cop and those cops that are dickheads, just let them vent. Most asshole cops only give me a warning anyway. I would rather have my ass chewed than pay another $300 fine.

        1. avatar Matt in TX says:

          Ya know that’s a point I never noticed before. Ever cop stop I got, where the cop was a jackass to me, only ended with a warning. TX, NM and OK.

  7. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin says:

    Unless that source is from the issuing county’s Sheriff’s office or the actual permit itself it still remains unconfirmed. Given the inflammatory nature of the event the officials need to confirm this.

  8. avatar Anonymous says:

    But clear communication is key when you’re pulled over.

    What if a person has problems communicating?

    Do these people just get blown away or what?

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Cops used to be specifically trained for that contingency.

      Don’t know about now. The professionalism of police training and police work in general seems to have seriously declined in the last 10-15 years.

  9. avatar Gabe says:

    The sheriff’s dept. confirmed that he never applied for a PTC so he does not have one for that county. If he has one in another county, then it was not transferred when he moved. The Star Trib is about as bad as it gets for credible media so until we get more than an unnamed source reported by a hack newspaper…we don’t know.

  10. avatar Mark_PAV says:

    From my perspective, whether he had a CCW or not is not the high bar in this situation (needed info but not the most important as this point in the stop). They were pulled over because he fit the description of an armed robber a day or two earlier (Not because of a broken taillight as the girlfriend claimed in the video). So in this case the officer was going by that possibility. He (the LEO) would make no distinction between an armed robber suspect matching his departments description or an armed robber suspect matching his description that had a CCW.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “They were pulled over because he fit the description of an armed robber”

      Then the cop eff’d up:

      (1) Should have never left cover of his own tactically placed vehicle
      (2) Should have waited for back-up to arrive to initiate contact with the suspect(s).
      (3) Should have had all occupants show empty hands
      (4) Should have had occupants exit vehicle one at a time and move to the cops, not the other way around (one cop moving into a kill zone at the driver’s door).
      (5) Once secure, verify id’s, etc.

      At least that’s how it used to be done in such cases, and yes, I can say that from direct experience not from watching Adam 12.

      1. avatar The Next 8 Years says:

        You have no idea what happened in this stop. So, just stop.

        1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          Geez you are an idiot.

          I was commenting on the assertion that it was a stop on a felony BOLO. If that’s the case, the cop should have NEVER been at the driver’s door to shoot him.

          So, what exactly should I stop? Offending your weak sensibilities that the adults in the room can have a serious discussion of a serious event based on actual, real-world experience?

          *IF* he was doing a proper Felony Stop, the cop would have been no where near the driver’s door to shoot the driver in the seat.

          That’s a factual statement.

        2. avatar The Next 8 Years says:

          How do you know the driver didn’t open the door and point the firearm at the officer? See. You don’t know shit about this stop.

        3. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          “How do you know the driver didn’t open the door and point the firearm at the officer? See. You don’t know shit about this stop.”

          Again…a moron you are.

          I never said he DID do anything or DID NOT do anything. One more time, more for those playing at home that DO have functioning neurons than for you:

          (1) Assertion is made that stop was for armed robbery BOLO.
          (2) Assertion has been made that cop was at the door talking to driver…telling him it was for broken tail light, asked for ID, Castile said he had a gun, etc…it doesn’t matter.

          My point is that *IF* those two assertions are true, the cop screwed up.

          That’s it.

          I’m not saying what DID happen or not…I’m trying to get people to understand that *IF* the various assertions passing around are true, there is something else to consider…if both those things ARE true, then the cop screwed up and created the situation that ultimately led to the incident.

          So, once again, toss off. Your “look how smart I am” nonsense is pointless in this case.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      As mentioned in several previous comments by others, if this officer thought Castile resembled a suspect in an armed robbery then his entire approach to the vehicle was an example of shoddy police work. In addition, if it is true that Castile has been pulled over 52 times previously then his name and vehicle license plate should have been well known to the local police. They would also then know that it was highly unlikely he had been involved in an armed robbery since other than traffic offenses he does not appear to have had any other negative interactions with the legal system. (Hence the CPL, if it can be confirmed.)

      Waiting on a detailed report, but it will take a bit to convince me this was not really bad police work and a shooting that did not need to happen. What cop approaches a suspected felony subject that is still sitting in his car?

      1. avatar jwm says:

        Just a thought. If this guy was well known as a traffic scofflaw to the local pd is it a real leap, in the mind of the cop, to think that since he matches the description of a robbery suspect he just took his law breaking to a higher level?

        1. avatar andyNC says:

          Then why would the cop leave his alert level at ‘minor traffic scofflaw’ instead of upping it to ‘potential armed robber’? It still doesn’t excuse his careless approach of the vehicle.

        2. avatar The Next 8 Years says:

          You have no idea how he approached the vehicle.

        3. avatar jwm says:

          8 years or rabbit ears or whatever name you’re using this moment. I said nothing about him approaching the vehicle. Put down the crack pipe and pay attention.

        4. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          “You have no idea how he approached the vehicle.”

          The issue is not “how” he approached the vehicle.

          The issue is THAT he approached the vehicle. That’s not how Felony Stops on armed robbery suspects are done.

          Let me try to walk you through the discussion that is flying completely over your head.

          The official story being spread is that the cop stopped the car because of the BOLO. If that is indeed true, the cop screwed up tactically, or he would have never been WHERE HE WAS to shoot the driver WHERE HE WAS WHEN HE GOT SHOT.

          The cop was in the wrong place completely for a Felony Stop. That’s going to be an issue if the official story continues to be that the BOLO was the basis for the stop (which seems plausible since the tail lights were functional, as shown in released photos).

          I’m not sure what sh1t you are trying to stir here, but you’ve been at it for a week or so.

        5. Concerning the tail light issue, it is quite possible that the lights work but break lights do not. If the cop is behind the vehicle and notices one or both break lights not operating when the vehicle stops, this is generally called “busted tail light”. It was daylight when the shooting occurred so the dimmer lights that are on when the headlights are on would not have been.

        6. avatar The Next 8 Years says:

          How do you know where he was shot? He might have left the vehicle. You have no idea what happened.

        7. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          “How do you know where he was shot? He might have left the vehicle. You have no idea what happened.”

          Then got back in the car AND closed the door?

          Is there any evidence or any statement from any party that even suggests that?

          Seems like all the statements so far (including from the cops), and the video evidence after the shooting, support a reasonable assumption that we was shot sitting in the driver’s seat and that cop interacted with him at the window.

          We shall see.

    3. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I am still waiting for the exact “description” that he “matched”. Especially while seated in a car. What could that description have contained? “A black man”? Much of this alleged story smells like old fish, to me.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        The stills from the robbery video have been released and it’s a little more than just that he was a “black man.”

        Dreads, facial hair, general build.

        Was it enough to justify the stop? I’ll leave that for another discussion.

        But, the images from the robbery are out there (in Internet land) and one can compare those to pictures of Castile and ponder it yourself.

        1. avatar the ruester says:

          Those ears. It’s him.

  11. avatar dragos111 says:

    Seems like more info is coming out. The police have not found any CCL registration information, so it is likely he did not have a permit. Also, his weapon was in his lap, not concealed. The cop told him to hold still and he went digging for, presumably, his ID’s. With his hands down around his unconcealed weapon, the cop fired.

    If it turns out that this is, in fact, what happened, it will be a “clean” shoot.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      What is it with all this need to confirm records of Castile’s CPL? He’s DEAD. Every single thing that he had in his possession at the time of his death is in the hands of the police department, including his wallet. If he had a CPL and that is what he was reaching for all the PD has to do is produce the card and show it to the press. If he had a pistol at the time then it should also be produced and presented to the press.

      This is not some scavenger hunt. If the document and the pistol exist and are not being displayed then the PD is suppressing the information and fueling speculation by everyone with an ax to grind.

      1. avatar Marcus (Aurelius) Payne says:

        They may be doing so because silence is a less potent fuel than releasing the information would be. Then again they may just have departmental policies that don’t jibe well with the current situation. Who knows.

    2. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin says:

      I wouldn’t describe it as a clean shoot but it does change the context. He is no longer an innocent victim of a racist police officer. He is a felon. If Castile did not have a permit to carry it may just be that he is the armed robber and it was a good stop even if it was poor tactical police work.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Having a gun without a CPL is a felony, somehow? On what planet?

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          There are lots of places where carrying a firearm without a license is a felony. In MN, the first time it’s a “gross misdemeanor.” After that, it’s a felony.

      2. avatar donny77 says:

        No information coming out now can change the mindset of the officer at the time of the shooting. This changes nothing. We can’t excuse officers behavior based on information they did not have.

    3. avatar The Next 8 Years says:

      You have no idea if his weapon was in his lap. None

      1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

        You can see the firearm in the video, partially concealed by Castile’s shirt. The rear (3-dot?) sight and a loaded chamber indicator of an all-black pistol (Ruger SR series, perhaps?) are discernible in the video stills.

        1. avatar The Next 8 Years says:

          Could be a smart phone for all I can see.

  12. avatar Mike says:

    There may not be bodycam video, but I saw an official statement that there’s dashcam video. Hopefully they release it soon. It would help verify or discredit the woman’s claims.

    1. avatar Anon in CT says:

      I would think it useless. It might show what the cop did (shoot the driver), but that’s not in dispute. It won’t show what the driver did because of the rear of the car and his seat/headrest.

    2. She was on “The View” this morning. Her story is etched in stone at this point. Never going to change the minds of the willful ignorant no matter what the evidence says.

  13. avatar 1919a6 says:

    So I’m a moron.
    I have a truck that sits pretty high so approaching from the rear it is difficult to tell what is going on in the cab.
    My state is mandatory seat belt so to get my wallet requires undoing belt than getting wallet all while the officer is approaching blindly at 0 dark thirty. Not having any idea if I’m a good guy or bad.
    Seems to me better advice is to turn dome light and wait for officer to get to me where we can agree on what I’m going to do next.

    1. Been pulled over too many times to remember. Never seen the cop put the cruiser in park and immediately get out and approach me. If that ever happens, I might be inclined to keep hands on the wheel and wait. I’ll still have to lower the window and turn off the radio so what the hell is one more pull on my wallet going to matter?
      Stop
      Put in park
      Click seatbelt release
      Lean forward to power off radio
      Pull wallet
      Push window button
      Place wallet on dash or hold in hand
      Be polite

      Last time I was pulled over, my left arm was in a sling from rotator cuff surgery. Couldn’t put that hand up. Also, made it difficult to do all the other things.
      When I got the cliché question “You know why I stopped you?” I said “Didn’t use blinker when I changed lanes?”
      He said “That and you did it going 74 in a 55 in a construction zone.” (All of Atlanta is a perpetual construction zone)
      When I explained the difficulty using the turn signal with a bad wing, he sympathized and we had a nice conversation about his shoulder surgery after laying his bike down.
      He returned with three copies of the citation and gave me two and apologized for having to give one in Spanish. He said I could line my birdcage with it for all he cared.
      BTW, my Glock 19 was appendix position the whole time and nobody gave a shit.

  14. avatar NorincoJay says:

    I can’t even remember the last time I was pulled over, but I think it was about 10 years ago. When I was younger I got pulled over a few times and got in the habit of having everything ready to hand to the police by the time they got to the window. My registration and license in one hand and my insurance information in the other. There is no reason not to be ready. It takes them some time to do what they need to before they approach the vehicle.

    When I took the CCW class in Florida the officer that taught the class told us we do not need to tell the officer we have a firearm or permit unless they ask. I haven’t been pulled over since then, but debate if that is truly the best coarse of action even if it is technically legal.

    I had a friend get pulled over and right off the bat told the officer he had a handgun and gave the officer his CCW. The officer still got all buggy and put his hand on his gun. Told my friend not to mover and told him just to say where the gun was and the officer would get it. So it maybe a damed if you do damed if you don’t kind of thing. And my friend is about as white as they come. I’m not, so I do worry.

  15. avatar H says:

    The Martin & Brown cases are not good examples of anything. All we have is our belief of how we think it went based on our own experiences and biases. We have no footage. When we do, we know that footage doesn’t show everything.

    Just as there are so many incidents unreported by the media where legally armed people defend themselves, we have it seems a great difficulty presenting that our rights are real. Why can’t I be open to the fact that the black community is experiencing a different treatment than whites? Let’s say that ultimately it’s a lie. Did I really open up to see if it was true? Do guns shoot themselves? Well don’t we want the antis to look at the facts? In 10% of the police shootings of minorities the citizen had a gun. 10%.

    Stop blaming BLM, NRA, guns, Obama, gun industry, ISIS, the police, etc.
    If we don’t have those talking points what is or are the causes? Want to find out? Want a fix?

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “Stop blaming BLM”

      How about if we just blame BLM for things they are actually doing, like blocking interstates and suchlike.

      That okay with you?

  16. avatar Rick K says:

    It wouldn’t be above this administration, DoJ and our supposedly “straight shooting” FBI to conceal or manipulate facts that contradict the narrative that they want to convey to the public.

  17. avatar TXGungal says:

    “An attorney for the cop insisted Saturday, for the first time, that Yanez only fired after Castile, a beloved school cook, showed the gun as the cop stood by the driver’s side window.
    Yanez “was reacting to the actions of the driver,” said lawyer Thomas Kelly. “This had nothing to do with race. This had everything to do with the presence of a gun . . . and the display of that gun.” http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/philando-castile-stopped-cops-52-times-14-years-article-1.2705348
    When this first hit, there was a link to local news web site. It showed a pistol on Castile’s thigh out in the open, can’t find the link anymore. Put yourself in cop’s shoes, you roll up on a guy who has a handgun out it the open, tell the guy not to move, and he moves. I believe his girlfriend was recording from the time Yanez had lights flashing, and edited the film before posting it on Facebook. There is something hinkie about his “girlfriend”
    Just as an aside, what is so hard about getting a wallet out as soon as you know you are being pulled over? You have to know you are not being pulled over for no reason. I’ve been stopped more times than I can count in the 42 yrs. been driving. I pull my wallet out while cop is running my back plate. Roll down window, have DL & LTC out and hands on steering wheel.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      “I believe his girlfriend was recording from the time Yanez had lights flashing”

      Story was she was live streaming, no opportunity to edit.

      1. avatar NorincoJay says:

        He wasn’t the one driving his girlfriend was. So why would he need to have his wallet out?

        1. avatar Mike in Texas says:

          Castile was the driver. Don’t believe your lyin eyes.

        2. avatar The Next 8 Years says:

          See how this shit works, Jay?

          Have we learned nothing from the Zimmerman and Big Mike Brown cases? I will wait till the facts are in.

        3. avatar Anon in CT says:

          Facebook streaming vids look “reversed”, so that’s why he seems to be on the passenger side, but was in reality the driver.

  18. avatar Demo Man says:

    “Regardless of local duty-to-inform laws, disclose the fact that you have a permit and are armed and tell the cop where the gun is.” Oh thanks, we’ll be taking legal advice from a cop on how citizens should properly behave themselves according to the unwritten rules about how cops, who we pay, expect that we act, or they reserve the ability to kill us on the spot-right! How about the right to remain silent and the right to be treated as innocent until proven guilty?

    Duty to Inform with criminal penalties is put in state carry laws so cops can execute whoever they want with legal cover. When NRA state lobbyist Todd Vandermyde put DTI in Illinois’ 2013 concealed carry bill, it was because the anti-gun IL Chiefs of Police wanted it, so Vandermyde gave it to them. IL Chiefs opposed any form of citizen carry for 40 years, but now they are the friends of gun owners?

    Cops who are off-duty and out of their jurisdiction do not have to tell on-duty cops who they interact with that they are armed, much less that they are cops. Retired cops carrying under LEOSA do not have to tell on-duty cops they are armed, so the idea that Duty to Inform promotes “officer safety” is a lie the NRA sells to the rubes so they can continue to employ lobbyists like Todd Vandermyde to work for the police unions, not their membership.

    1. avatar Mitch says:

      “Oh thanks, we’ll be taking legal advice from a cop on how citizens should properly behave themselves according to the unwritten rules about how cops, who we pay, expect that we act, or they reserve the ability to kill us on the spot-right!”

      But don’t call it a police state!

    2. avatar jwm says:

      Been a while, demo. See your still on a one man crusade against the NRA and ol’ Tod.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        Yeah — it’s tiresome to me, too.

        1. avatar formerwaterwalker says:

          Me three. Equally tiresome is we don’t know if dead Philando had legal CCL. Which the is ONLY reason we’re hashing this out. ‘Cause if he’s just a thug with an illegal gun then he’s the same as the dead dude in Baton Rouge…

      2. avatar The Next 8 Years says:

        Good to see TTAG security show up so quick. Must have been all that prison guard training.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          See how bad crack is for you, 8. Now you’re putting me in jobs I never had. Rehab. Before it’s too late.

  19. avatar bryan1980 says:

    If there’s no bodycam footage, let’s hope that there is at least some audio of what happened before the shot was fired. As of right now, we don’t know what sort of instructions he was given after the officer approached the car. One thing that seems really odd to me is that the female friend of Castile only starts recording after he was shot. If they were really worried about how this traffic stop was going to go down, wouldn’t you think she would start recording right at the moment the officer approached the vehicle?

  20. avatar Chris Morton says:

    Castile may have been:

    * shot for disobeying the cop’s commands.
    * shot for obeying the cop’s commands, as was the guy in the gas station in South Carolina.

    I’m no more inclined to trust the word of the cop (never mind the typical “anonymous sources”) without proof than I am to similarly trust the word of the girlfriend.

    IF the girlfriend is telling the truth, it seems a WHOLE lot like that SC shooting.

    When I’m carrying, I’m recording, PERIOD.

    1. avatar The Next 8 Years says:

      Why are you trying to figure out who fucked up at this point? Is waiting for the facts going to take too long?

      1. avatar Chris Morton says:

        I suppose you only need to if you care.

        I care whether this is another citizen “ripping yarn” like Michael Brown, or another cop “ripping yarn” like Kathryn Johnston.

        Of course we were told the “real story” on the Danziger Bridge case… until YEARS later, it turned out NOT to be so “real”…

  21. avatar strych9 says:

    I hate to go all Mr. Blonde about this but…

    The cop either fucked up or he didn’t. We’ll either find out what happened or we won’t.

    1. avatar Chris Morton says:

      And it could take YEARS, as in the Danziger Bridge and [Chicago] SOS examples.

  22. avatar Ken Scott says:

    I whole heartedly believe any judgement one way or the other should wait for all the facts to come in. Situations may look one way to begin with, but then slowly morph into something else. I do believe that these kinds of interactions occur because of miscommunication on the part of the cop or on the part of the citizen. The one thing I do find troubling, though I understand why it is recommended, is the advice to keep your hands on the wheel and make no sudden movements. It’s pretty sad commentary on our society, not necessarily law enforcement, when a citizen has to abide by a particular behavior in order to not get shot by an officer.

  23. avatar Mark Kelly's Diapered Drooling Ventriloquist's Dummy says:

    “Maybe Castile freaked out the cop. Maybe the cop was jumpy and over-reacted”?

    More like the chronic pot smoker, Philando Castile, a suspect in an ARMED ROBBERY whose boo, Lavish “Diamond” Reynolds, admitted they were “riding dirty” (carrying weed in the car in the unedited version of her self-serving video) just didn’t want to go to jail and decided to shoot it out with the cops. Everything the phemale (sic) passenger has to say is “suspect” especially after seeing her online “Section 8” videos portraying the “thug life” she and her boyfriend du’ jour enjoyed.

    I still believe this bitch,Lavish “Diamond” Reynolds, who today made the rounds on ABC’s shows including Good Morning (Liberal America) and sat down with the cackling hens at The View (just like Trayvon Martin’s & Mike Brown’s mammys) refusing to answer pertinent questions, was the getaway drive in the Armed Robbery committed just a few days before her boo was “made good”.

    Oh and what was stolen in the convenience store Armed Robbery? Cartons of Newport 100’s of course and just what did Lavish “Diamond” Reynolds have in her hands at an early news conference? A pack of Newport 100’s! I hope the cops are searching HER crib and checking codes on HER packs of smokes AND searching Castile’s home for clothes matching the ones the armed robbers wore during the heist.

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/falcon-heights-shooting/

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/07/11/lavish-diamond-reynolds-abc-interview-transparent-provable-falsehoods/#more-118590

  24. avatar Sambo82 says:

    “Why did the girlfriend start filming only after the shooting?”

    Why does this keep getting brought up? Have you ever tried to film a car wreck while it’s happening? Maybe she started filming after her boyfriend was shot… because they weren’t expecting him to get shot? Geez.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      My loved one just got shot. Do I give aid or turn on the camera and film it?

  25. avatar Mark Kelly's Diapered Drooling Ventriloquist's Dummy says:

    In the Danziger Bridge (New Orleans) case though initially convicted by an emotionally inflamed and ignorant jury and railroaded by corrupt, grandstanding prosecutors looking to curry favor with an equally illiterate populace the officers convictions were “overturned” on appeal as they should have been.

  26. avatar adverse4 says:

    No facts or figures to back this up, but seems the farther north you go the less cops know about firearms.

  27. avatar JQP says:

    JJ also said those who question police shootings of other civilians aren’t responsible for the murders of police officers. The man who pulled the trigger in Dallas is responsible for the dead cops. “Let’s not be like the left and blame the NRA every time a mass shooting happens. We shouldn’t automatically blame the police whenever they shoot someone.”

    It’s been a long time since I had any use for this kind of thinking. Nice guys finish last. Fight fire with fire. Obviously, we should be intellectually rigorous, when it gets us an advantage. But I find “don’t be like them” talk useless. They’re winning. They’ve been winning for generations. Obviously they’re doing something right (I know, it’s mostly just having the oligarchs on their side).

    IOW, we should do what we need to do to win. Not display our piety and lose.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email