Chicago Police Release Video of Officer Shooting Subway Rider in the Back

Chicago subway shooting

Courtesy Chicago Police Department

[ED: In February, two Chicago police officers attempted to subdue a man they observed “jumping from train to train” in a Chicago Transit Authority station. Bystander video showed the man wriggle free and the officers shooting him as he attempted to run. See our original report with videos here. See all of the videos just released by the CPD here.]

By Michael Tarm, AP

Extended security and body-cam video released Tuesday shows Chicago police shooting an unarmed short-order cook at the foot of a subway escalator and then again with his back turned to officers after they tried to stop him for violating a city ordinance by walking from one train car to another.

The Chicago Transit Authority and police body-cam videos for the first time provide a detailed look at how the incident unfolded from the time Ariel Roman used a subway’s gangway doors to when he was shot for the second time after scrambling away from officers up the escalator. Roman, 33, survived but was severely injured.

In the most striking video segment from a CTA camera, Roman is seen running up to the top of the escalator in the busy red line station holding a coat in his right hand. With the pursuing officers about 10 feet behind him, and with his back still turned to them, a female officer shoots him and he immediately slams face first onto the floor. The officer reholsters her gun and appears to handcuff him.

The Feb. 28 shooting raised questions about whether the Chicago Police Department is complying with a court-monitored reform plan that, among other things, seeks to remedy decades of excessive force by the 13,000-officer force through training that stresses conflict de-escalation.

Mayor Lori Lightfoot characterized the shooting at the time as “extremely disturbing” based on a short bystander video. She also said she wanted a full picture of what happened.

Log # 2020-0988 3rd Party 1 from COPA Chicago on Vimeo.

One of Roman’s Chicago lawyers, Andrew M. Stroth, said Tuesday the shooting and disturbing video posed a test for Lightfoot and new Police Superintendent David Brown, who comes from Dallas with a reputation as a reformer.

“While managing the COVID pandemic is the top priority, Mayor Lightfoot must address another crisis in Chicago and that is the use of excessive and lethal force by Chicago police officers,” he said.

Log # 2020-0988 3rd Party 2 from COPA Chicago on Vimeo. [Suspect appears at top of escalator at 6:50.]

The new videos were released by the Civilian Office of Police Accountability, the city agency that investigates alleged misconduct by police.

The accountability agency said their release was consistent with a transparency policy, one implemented in the wake of 2015 protests after the city delayed release of video for over a year that showed a white officer shooting black teenager Laquan McDonald 16 times as he walked away from police with a folded knife.

The officers in Roman’s case have been stripped of their police powers pending the outcome of an investigation. They could face criminal charges if the shooting is deemed unjustified.

Minutes before the shooting, video shows a seemingly relaxed Roman walking from one subway car to another, while listening to earphones. One officer follows him into the other car and approaches him as he pulls off his earphones to listen. Seconds later, he steps off the train at the Grand station stop.

Off the train, officers speak to Roman briefly before he seems to bolt for the escalator, with the officers on his heels. The bystander video released earlier shows officers tackling Roman, pepper spraying and Tasering him as he tries to wriggle from their grasp. In the bystander video, Roman can be heard saying, “I did nothing to you.” A male officer on his back keeps yelling, “Stop resisting!”

Moments later, as Roman stands, he is shot in the stomach and he then scurries up the stairs. He is shot a second time in the lower back when he gets to the top.

Lawyers for Roman say he clearly wasn’t armed when the female officer shot him the first time, nor when the injured Roman scrambled up the escalator with his back turned. The first bullet damaged his small intestine and bladder, and the second one entered his buttocks and lodged near a sciatic nerve, his lawyers say.

Two days after Roman was shot, Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx’s office dropped resisting arrest and criminal narcotics charges against Roman at the request of then-interim Police Superintendent Charlie Beck. Roman in March sued the city and the two officers for unspecified damages.

comments

  1. avatar pwrserge says:

    Here’s an idea… If you’re not a drug dealing lowlife, your chances of getting shot by cops drop exponentially. Pro Tip: Don’t be a drug dealing lowlife.

    1. avatar Evangelion sucks says:

      Link us to your ar15.com account, bootlicker

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Who TF are you and why should I care? You will pardon me if I don’t give a shit about a cops shooting a random drug dealer in the ass.

        1. avatar Evangelion Sucks says:

          Statist bootlicker confirmed. What’s that leather taste like, sycophant? Absolutely pathetic.

        2. avatar California Richard says:

          Shithead or not, the issue here is that the cops lost their minds on a nothing incident and used deadly force without justification. The lowlife wasn’t fighting or attacking the cops (There is a difference between resisting and assaulting). He didnt have a weapon and didn’t make any movements indicative of weapons possession. He didnt make any threats and demonstrated nothing to present a deadly force threat. Those cops should never have been allowed to become cops because these personality/moral deficiencies should have come up in training and testing. Whatever process allowed them to be cops is fundamentally flawed, if this is the end result.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          You do realize that being called a “statist” is not an insult who realizes that the development of the nation-state over the past 9000 years or so has been, on the balance, a good thing? Right?

          But hey, any time you want to go out and squat in the wilderness away from “the state”, you’re welcome to do so. There’s plenty of unexplored tundra and rain forest to go around.

        4. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

          The state has nothing to do with civilization or technological progress. In fact it retards it everywhere and all the time. We would be a lot further ahead of where are now if we didn’t have nation/states. The state only exists to enrich and empower unproductive people at the expense of the productive.

          Cop or not, shooting someone who isn’t a threat is both wrong and illegal and I hope they fry the pigs.

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          … and now we see why libertardians are so obsessed with protecting drug dealers. They are all stoned out of their gourds. I mean, seriously, nobody with any understanding of human history would write that sentence.

        6. avatar burley says:

          Being called a statist most certainly is an insult. Why do you hate liberty? Drug dealers only exist as a group becuase statists like yourself seem to be willing to allow cops to execute others who do differently than you. IF LIBERTY were the rule, drug dealers would just be shopkeepers and they wouldn’t need to surround themselves with thugs to keep their business. NOR would they need to fear DRT executions from your friendly local popo. Under no circumstances can someone with an understading of history say the sort of things YOU just said and convince anyone that liberty matters to them. If you aren’t instulted when we point out that you are obviously a statist, then you are the one with a lack of understanding.

        7. avatar Chiguy31 says:

          pwrserge:

          The Constitution and its protections are written for everybody – even people you consider lowlifes.

          First, who are you to judge the victim? Shows an undeserved arrogance on your part.

          Second, people like you are all for the cops until you get a speeding ticket, and then you claim victim status.

          Fortunately, our Constitution protects everybody.

        8. avatar Pwrserge says:

          Sorry I couldn’t reply more quickly I was sucking off ten cops. Funny how you actually bought I was a boot licker….

        9. avatar Kirk Lazarus says:

          “The state has nothing to do with civilization… ”

          You just went full retard, man. Everybody knows you never go full retard.

        10. avatar Donttreadonme says:

          Its a shame that you put so much trust in the gov that you dont think they culd use the same (poor) judgement to shoot anyone that they SUSPECT is up to no good. Be careful what you wish for or it may be someone close to you that gets shot by the cops for no good reason.

        11. avatar Aaron says:

          to “crimson pirate”, who said, “ The state has nothing to do with civilization or technological progress. In fact it retards it everywhere and all the time. We would be a lot further ahead of where are now if we didn’t have nation/states. ”

          that’s total bullshit. look at what happened in the places that don’t/didn’t have nation states, like the tribal regions of pakistan: a never-ending war of all-against-all by illiterate muslim cave-men with AK-47s.

        12. avatar You are a moron says:

          They shot an unarmed person in the back. If you think that’s okay, you are as retarded as you think the libs are. That’s not freedom, it’s a police state. But I wouldn’t expect a state cock sucker like you to understand. You have to be civilized to understand how civilization should work. I can’t wait until the boot moves from your tongue to your throat and you will act surprised.

      2. avatar In for a penny, In for a pound says:

        Evan-per is from a conquerors people, who only exists because a large governemt stepped in and stopped another large government from justifiably removing pwr’s cowardly family members. Then, We had to lower our culture by letting the cowards family come here.

        1. avatar In for a penny, In for a pound says:

          Edit. The coward pwr, instead of per, and conquered people, is what makes pwr, a boot licker, who our guns are meant to keep away from infringing on our rights.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Hey, if you want to get stoned out of your gourd and fuck your sister-cousin, feel free. Not my problem. When I have to pay taxes to support your degeneracy, and take care of your inbred children, then it becomes my problem. Get the idea yet? Because I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain it further.

          Now roll on back to your trailer and tell your mother-wife that some big mean cossack on the internet was making fun of your inbred stupidity.

      3. avatar Pablo says:

        Wow you’re an a$$hole…

    2. avatar Dan W says:

      *consults npc code*

      That’s racist.

      1. avatar Randy Jones says:

        Sorry, Dan, its only considered racist when a white cop shoots a black guy. This was a black cop shooting a white guy. They didn’t know about the drugs until after they shot him. Of course, odds are, if he would have just quietly take the ticket and paid the fine, they never would have known.

    3. avatar GuyInWI says:

      Shooting someone over a citation is stupidity. Would expect nothing less from a guy like you. One can clearly see by your comments why the other side does not want us to have guns. Are you even on the side of gun rights? BTW Prohibition worked so well its good to see we are continuing it with drugs. Nothing but another power grab.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Yes… because there are clearly no differences between alcohol and crack cocaine. #fullretard

        1. avatar George Washington says:

          Actually, there really is no difference….. to you….. SO STAY THERE FK OUTTA MY BUSINESS…..FKN BUSY BODY

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          See below, so long as you’re allowed to just die in a ditch when you fry your brains and your family is left to fend for themselves, sure, no problem. Unfortunately, the consequences of your OD will be paid for by ME and MY taxes.

        3. avatar Paul says:

          Actually – there isn’t a whole lot of difference. Fact is, there are more mean drunks than there are mean crack heads. Drugs are drugs, and yes, alcohol is a drug. Me? I like my caffeine and nicotine. I would get real mean, real quick, if someone were to deprive me of my drugs of choice. If you prefer heroine, or crack, or whatever, I’m not going to stop you.

        4. avatar burley says:

          How is the impact of a cop executing someone on the street over drugs any better than someone dying by their own addiction? You have a twisted sense of value.

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          Simple, the former costs the taxpayers far less than the latter.

        6. avatar Someone says:

          There is a difference. Alcohol kills many times more people than crack.
          And before you accuse me of being drugged out of my gourd, I don’t do any drugs or liquor. Not even cigarettes or wine.

      2. avatar napresto says:

        Serge is a lefty troll, sent here by his commie puppet masters to make it look like gun owners approve of fascism and murder. It’s best to just ignore him.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Yes… because, it’s not like I’ve been here for a decade or anything… Oh… wait…

          Let me make some things simple for you…

          Hating Communism != Fascism (nor is most authoritarianism Fascism)
          Murder is the killing of a person and commies aren’t people => it is impossible to “murder” a commie

          Go read a book kiddo. That is, assuming you’ve ever read anything more complicated than Green Eggs and Ham.

        2. avatar Eric Swalwell says:

          I never thought I would ever say this, but: I have to agree with Serg…. on a fundamental basis at least. Serg is right in that some people aren’t actually real people and they aren’t deserving of life. I think its important that we all recognize the need for a central authority that is capable of determining what life is worthy of living and also has the power to find final solutions to the …. uh…. other’ish question. I mean come on, right? Why give the government nuclear weapons, if I, the government, can’t use them against you, my fellow citizens. At best, I can only threaten you with them….. for now.

          Remember to vote in November!!

          Eric Swalwell 2020

        3. avatar napresto says:

          President Swalwell, you are a national treasure!

        4. avatar Sarcastic Cynic says:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXqLt-Avbnw

          Yep, can’t say we didn’t see you coming, President Swalwell.

      3. avatar Fun Gunner says:

        You can drink alcohol in moderation every day and never become an alcoholic or suffer severe health and mental problems as a result. The same is NOT true with cocaine, meth, heroine. They are extremely addictive, in some case almost immediately so, and extremely destructive both to individuals and society.

        The stupidity of alcohol Prohibition is in no way comparable to the prohibition of the above mentioned drugs.

    4. avatar Dan says:

      He might have had some drugs on him but I haven’t seen any evidence that he was a drug dealer. The article says he had a job as a cook. If he’s a working man he deserves to get high or drunk if that’s what he wants.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Yeah, so long as he’s allowed to die in a ditch when he fries his brain and doesn’t expect my tax dollars to support him. But since I have to pay taxes to keep him out of said ditch, I can also argue that I have a right to decide what he is and is not allowed to shoot into his arm.

        1. avatar Dan says:

          No, you don’t have that right. You don’t have the right to tell people what they can put in their own body. Especially a working man. If he’s supporting his own habits and not hurting anyone else you shouldn’t say shit in the land of the free.

        2. avatar George Washington says:

          You got problems, you douche…

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Except that would only be true if he IS supporting himself and will be allowed to die rather than become a burden on the taxpayer when he ODs. When his stupidity affects MY bottom line, it’s not just his business anymore.

        4. avatar Dan says:

          What evidence do you have that he’s not supporting himself and his habits? They reported that he had a job. They didn’t report on his welfare status or if he has government provided healthcare. I understand if you don’t approve of drug users and its your right to feel that way but that man has rights too.

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          Countering one half of an argument is not the same as countering an argument. Let me know when we stop paying massive amounts of taxpayer money to take care of druggies and the families they abandon.

        6. avatar Dan says:

          There’s no need for me to argue for all drug users in society. I’m only talking about this one unarmed man who got shot in the back and gut by cops. You assume he’s a drug dealer just because he had some drugs on him or that he’s an addict just because he’s a user. There’s plenty of people who are responsible drug users and there’s plenty of people who don’t use drugs that are more of a burden on society.

        7. avatar Hans says:

          pwrserge, give these leftest Hell!

          Now is the consequences of sending a woman to
          do a man’s job.

          This scumbag a got shot because of discrimination,
          diversity and feminism.

        8. avatar Gus says:

          What happens when your “nation state” decides YOU are too dangerous a threat to be allowed to exist there pwrserge, they send someone around to get rid of the “troublesome” person to everyone else?

      2. avatar 2020Sight says:

        Maybe he was a bad cook.

    5. avatar Randy Jones says:

      I don’t think you can play the dumb a$$ drug dealer song here. He was shot before they knew he had drugs. If he would have been cool about the whole thing and just taken the ticket, paid his fine, they would not have found the drugs in his bag.

      As my Dear ol’ Dad told me when we lived up by Chicago, if you give the lip the cops gonna beat your a$$, if you run from them they gonna beat your a$$ twice. Pretty bad when two cops can’t get handcuffs on a suspect that’s already pinned to the floor.

      1. avatar Tennessee Thomas says:

        Those rookie cops never had control of the situation and that’s why the suspect was able to get away and make his way up the escalator. That female cop was clearly out of shape and the male cop obviously did not know about pain compliance and how to control the suspect and cuff him while on top. What poor policing will cause the next unarmed person to be shot?

    6. avatar Paul says:

      I’m not a drug dealing lowlife. And, I have refused to comply with police commands a number of times in my life. Should I be shot?

      I don’t live in a police state. I refuse to live in a police state. I’d rather be dead than live in a police state. Cops exceed their authority often enough, they need to be brought to heel. They work for me, I don’t serve them.

      Get with the program, and learn this phrase: I WILL NOT COMPLY.

      1. avatar Hans says:

        Paul, when the cuffs come out, the debate
        is over no matter what the facts are.

        And I have been on the wong side of police
        arrests.

    7. avatar GS650G says:

      He was a cook that happened to walk between cars. where is the low life drug dealing?

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Did you miss the part about drug charges? If he was a cook who was walking between cars, he should have just taken his ticket.

        1. avatar Brodirt says:

          The only comment about narcotic charges is that they were dropped.
          This means that they could have been false, made up by the cops on scene to justify their action, or he could have had a small amount on him for personal consumption or that CPD is trying to make a political move.
          However, nothing in the article suggests by any means that he was a drug dealer.

        2. avatar Southern Cross says:

          Cops will throw drugs charges as an extra and also for character assassination of the alleged perpetrator/victim. A common statement is there were traces of cocaine. A treasury investigation showed that more than 80% of cash is circulation showed traces of cocaine.

          And changing carriages on a train is an odd offense. Maybe if he was jumping between parked or moving trains, but changing carriages is common to get away from annoying douches on public transport. But in my part of the world it is not an offense to move between carriages. Only an offense to travel in the space between carriages.

    8. avatar burley says:

      Being called a statist most certainly is an insult. Why do you hate liberty? Drug dealers only exist as a group becuase statists like yourself seem to be willing to allow cops to execute others who do differently than you. IF LIBERTY were the rule, drug dealers would just be shopkeepers and they wouldn’t need to surround themselves with thugs to keep their business. NOR would they need to fear DRT executions from your friendly local popo. Under no circumstances can someone with an understading of history say the sort of things YOU just said and convince anyone that liberty matters to them. If you aren’t instulted when we point out that you are obviously a statist, then you are the one with a lack of understanding.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        You baking your brain to the point where I have to pay for your and your family’s upkeep is not “liberty”… Like most libertardians you seem to be incapable of understanding that your decisions affect people besides you.

        1. avatar AllHailPwrSergeTheKiddo'er says:

          Don’t worry everyone Serge is the perfect citizen. He’s always acting in the interest of our tax dollars and spend, and has never made a decision that isn’t in all of our best interest. He knows best you guys, don’t try to argue with him. He’s god-bae, kiddos.

        2. avatar otherwise... says:

          @PWRSERGE

          Kudos to you; you’re pretty good at this. I can’t tell whether you are truly a lunatic, or you’re just playing a role.

        3. avatar burley says:

          In a Libertarian society, there’d be no taxation to pay for others disease. We should try it, you might like it. No cops executing druggies, nor cops executing non-druggies for not paying their taxes to help the druggies that didn’t get executed. Everybody just takes care of their own shit. If you want to help others, start a mission. If you want to donate to missions that already help others, do that to. Or, sit at home and pretend like you’re superior to all.

    9. avatar Hannibal says:

      Am I in bizzaro world where I’m the one arguing with people about how unjustified a shoot was?

      Where does any of this have to do with drugs? The guy committed a municipal infraction (equal to jaywalking). He refused to cooperate and the police attempted to arrest him. This is all fine.

      They then shot him while he was standing there and again when he ran away. This is not fine. This has been plainly unconstitutional for decades (TN v. Garner). You don’t get to shoot someone because you’re too fat to catch up with them unless they’re about to murder someone.

      1. avatar Hans says:

        Hannibal, when you resist arrest you have
        alarmed the LEOs. When you fight the cops
        you have elevated the problem considerably.

        You have never placed yourself in their shoes
        and have no clue what stress this causes, especially
        when are with a 1/2 cop.

        Leave the classroom and walk the beat.

        1. avatar Hannibal says:

          I have walked a beat, you complete buffoon. I have, on multiple occasions, had to make the decision of whether or not to shoot a suspect. I don’t need a lecture from you on being ‘alarmed.’

          Maybe you need a lecture on caselaw because being ‘alarmed’ is not justification for deadly force.

        2. avatar burley says:

          submitting to force because it’s force is not the same as doing right. IF we don’t start resisting, the force will simply keep rolling until there’s nothing left to fight for. This was a murder, plain and simple. If cops aren’t capable of not getting their way without drawing down, they should not be cops.

    10. avatar jwm says:

      Where are you getting the info that he was a drug dealer?

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        Someone here has a hard on for the guy and called him a dealer. Maybe there is a personal issue there.

    11. avatar Justice for All says:

      Guilty until proven innocent is your motto eh? Two white cops shooting an unarmed, black alleged drug dealer. Oh wait, this was two black cops shooting an unarmed, non-aggressive white man for walking in the subway and again when he was trying to save his own life by getting away from these trigger happy murderous cops.

    12. avatar MDC says:

      Video demonstrates nothing.

      1. avatar Doug says:

        The video illustrates to me a total lack of gun handling safety. There is no way that cop could see if anyone was walking around at the top of the escalator. Bullet could have hit anyone. Also to the Serge”, I’m afraid that stupid cop will hurt your bottom line a lot more than that suspect ever would have. That victim will get millions of your taxpayer money when he sues the shit out of the city. All because of a trigger happy cop.

    13. avatar Aaron says:

      if they can shoot an unarmed toll jumper in the back, they can do the same to you.

      i won’t call you names like “evangelion sucks” does, but you should recognize that unstable, crooked, or incompetent cops can be very, very dangerous even to innocent people. Incompetent or crooked cops can often get away with murder.

  2. avatar cgray says:

    Democrat Party foot soldiers. What else would you expect?

    1. avatar S.Crock says:

      I really don’t expect much else from Chicago cops who are the dem foot soldiers.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        Diversity hires?

  3. avatar Bad CPD(-) says:

    Mericloutorious hacks. Should never have been in this assignment, less the police.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      this guy CPDs

  4. avatar enuf says:

    The bad choices here cut both ways. Shooting an unarmed, non-violent suspect for wriggling loose and running away is excessive and deserves criminal prosecution. Being a damned fool resisting police builds a case for you deserve what happens to you.

    All that has to be set aside though in deciding right or wrong, guilt or innocence in a shooting. What did the shooter(s) know and when did they know it? Police or common citizen (peasant?), the question is the same. These video recordings paint a picture of criminal stupiidty by the police officers that vastly exceeds the suspects known offense at the time of the shooting.

    Will be interested to see where this story goes in the end.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Times really have changed. When I was a kid, I swear everybody understood that when a cop told you to halt, the alternative was to get shot, or at least shot at. That began to change when a few deaf folk got shot. But why law enforcement became a literal foot race I don’t understand. Possibly because there are now so many “laws” which are stupid and useless, the enforcement of which are not worth a life. Maybe we need to get rid of the stupid laws and go back to having police actually enforce them. Laws like which door you have to use or whatever this was about, what chemicals you can put inside your own body, whether you have to wear a mask, or have to NOT wear a mask, just really stupid shit.

      1. avatar Paul says:

        When I was a kid, 60’s and 70’s, western Pennsylvania, the cops in my hometown weren’t known as “law enforcement officers”. They were known as “peace officers”. The phrase “to serve and protect” meant something then. They didn’t shoot some punkass kid for lifting a candy bar at the five and dime, they didn’t shoot him for stealing hub caps, they didn’t even shoot him for resisting arrest. They would [email protected] sure shoot him for pulling a weapon, but otherwise, they weren’t shooting some kid for something stupid. Their intent was to ensure that the kid got home to his parents at night. Big city people may remember things differently, but in small town America, cops were people who deserved respect.

        1. avatar Hans says:

          Paul, put down your Harry Potter books
          and walk the streets of Chirack and then
          your comments will seem rather arcane and silly.

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        In the old days- perhaps not in your neck of the woods- running from the police meant that if they caught you, you’d end up hurt. Not shot (unless it was something serious).

        Now that’s not a thing. There was an example of a horse rustler who got caught after fleeing and was given a few licks; it was all over the news. Thing is, a beatdown is pretty much the only danger criminals face in most places because they never get prosecuted for fleeing apprehension. Crooks run because they know they can.

        As much as I hate “no chase” policies they kind of make sense from a cop point of view. Why risk hurting yourself chasing after someone when, if anything goes wrong, you’re going to be made out to be the bad guy and the crook has no reason to stop?

        1. avatar Hans says:

          Good post, Hannibal ! It all change when the
          leftist took over.

          A few hits from a truncheon and then a ride
          home to daddy, for a few more.

          The matter was resolved without the costly intrusion
          of a costly and ineffective state.

        2. avatar Miner49er says:

          “A few hits from a truncheon and then a ride
          home to daddy, for a few more.”

          Yep, a subdural hematoma or a fractured skull will ensure they will be a good citizen from here on out.

          “truncheon”? Y’all ain’t from around here, are you?

          The idea that you would want to shoot someone just because they run away from the cops is interesting.

          In my opinion, people like you shouldn’t really have access to lethal weapons, your sense of proportional response is too twisted for you to be a safe member of society.

  5. avatar David says:

    If the guy was black and the cops were white, this would be prime time on the lame stream media.
    Don’t resist arrest is probably a good call. Don’t be a low life is a good call. Cops should be held to a higher standard than the general public. If you can’t shoot a home intruder in the back without getting sued, then the cops shouldn’t be able to either.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      +1
      If I shot a guy in the back 10 feet from my house I’d lose more than just a job or “cop privileges”

      And I wouldn’t do that. Any perp leaving my area is a problem for cops, not me.

  6. avatar Fred says:

    No unarmed person should be shot in the back while walking away from an altercation.

    Sorry, but in this case, it looks like the Police were overly aggressive. This all started because he was walking from car to car on the subway while in motion; it is unsafe, but unless there is other information we don’t know, like maybe he was threatening people on the subway or trying to peddle drugs, I can’t understand why they tried to arrest him, which led to the shooting.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      So… you want the cops to just yell “stop” louder?

      1. avatar Dan says:

        Can’t they chase him down?

        1. avatar Evangelion Sucks says:

          That would imply police officers are held the standards that most normies think they are. I wonder if there is any data regarding police shootings involing women vs. male officers.

        2. avatar Randy Jones says:

          Sorry, Dan, did you see the size of those two cops. I have a bad knee, bad hip, and fifty pounds over weight and probably about the age of both of them combined. I might be able to out run those two. Don’t make it right. Just saying, I’d put a Grant on a foot race with those two. Still wouldn’t want their job, though.

        3. avatar Dan says:

          Then call for backup who’s more fit. The guy already had one bullet in his gut. He’s not going to get very far, very fast.

        4. avatar Hans says:

          Girl cops can not catch men, unless they transgender.

      2. avatar GS650G says:

        Maybe jumping between cars in violation of a city ordinance isn’t the capital offense it’s made out to be.
        I bet they wish they just let him go. Call in the radio, pick him up on the street.

        or go to the cameras that seem to be everywhere for this sort of stuff.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          So… if it’s not a serious offense, why is he fighting the cops? Maybe its something that makes him more dangerous than he appears?

        2. avatar GS650G says:

          Hard to say from videos at a distance on the platform without sound. But the cops escalated it to an arrest with cuffs rather quickly. I’m sure he thought “this is BS” when the Little One pulled out the bracelets. It’s a fallacy to assume there are bigger crimes at play because someone doesn’t want to get arrested, especially for changing cars on a train. Maybe they pissed him off. It’s pretty clear she didn’t engage in the kind of back and forth cops should be better at, she just used her authority to pull him off the train and tell him he’s under arrest. Good cops know you have to talk to people more, and better, if you want respect for the law and the badge. Bad cops pull out a gun like she did and shoot at people up escalators.

          You seem to be convinced he’s a drug king pin selling meth to kindergartners and his life isn’t worth anything. Unless you’ve got a lot more to go on and share with us I suggest letting that line go. It makes you look worse than Mr. Roman.
          Feel free to bash me, I’m ok with it.

        3. avatar Hans says:

          GS, one disorder turns into another until
          you have complete disorder. This is already
          happening in large parts of Chirack.

        4. avatar GS650G says:

          I get the broken window policing deal, but she was arresting him on the spot for walking between cars. That’s over reach.

        5. avatar Miner49er says:

          “Maybe its something that makes him more dangerous than he appears?”

          I totally baseless assertion, he wasn’t charged with anything so there was no deeper, more serious crime.

          You are just reaching to justify your blood thirst.

          Folks like you should not have access to lethal weapons, your sense of proportional response is seriously compromised, perhaps too compromise for you to be a safe member of our society.

        6. avatar pwrserge says:

          Proportional response is for weaklings. You give me cause, and I will END you.

      3. avatar Hannibal says:

        They should chase his ass down and arrest him.

        If they can’t, they should be better cops.

        Oh no, what will the world do without bringing justice to some guy who (checks notes) walked between cars on a subway.

      4. avatar Aaron says:

        pwrserge, the cops should have done their JOB. Cops shooting unarmed people in the back is incompetence and/or evil.

        There is no giving the cops a pass on this just because you feel morally superior to the guy who got shot. Plenty of innocent motorists and homeowners have been killed by bad cops. If they can do it to a toll jumper they can do it to you; you aren’t special.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      An ordinary citizen such as myself should not shoot anyone in the back unless he has taken my property, but the same is not true for a cop. If he recognizes someone as a mass murderer, he needs to stop that man, and if he refuses to stop he needs to shoot him! Not so clear, but not so tough.

      1. avatar Paul says:

        The standard for shooting someone used to be “to prevent the commission of a felony”. An escaping convict was committing a felony by the very act of escaping. A non-convict, not so much. It is not a felony to disobey a cop’s commands.

      2. avatar GS650G says:

        Maybe in your state you can kill someone fleeing with your property. That’s not true everywhere nor is my “stuff” worth killing over. I don’t need the bad karma.

        1. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

          For the most part I agree with you GS but I think it’s situational. Clearly deadly force was not justified in this case but whether I would shoot someone in the back or otherwise for taking my “stuff” depends on what was taken and the circumstances – think survival.

        2. avatar Hans says:

          GS, you will not even not shoot someone
          but you would more than likely suggest he
          get no jail time.

        3. avatar GS650G says:

          Boy Hans, you assume quite a bit.
          Let’s try again.
          I’m not shooting someone running away from my house, with or without my property, because my life isn’t in danger. I’m calling the police and let them deal with it. Learn the rules of engagement if you want to stay out of jail yourself. You do understand firearms are a responsibility.

          When he’s caught I’ll take state prison for 200 for him.

          We good? Hope so.

      3. avatar Aaron says:

        Even in Texas you probably should not shoot someone in the back for taking your property. You’d probably spend more in lawyers fees than the property was worth.

    3. avatar Sian says:

      if either of them had a lick of sense or empty hand skills, they would have had him under control well before getting to the point of anyone getting shot.

      1. avatar Hans says:

        sian, it was only a single male officer
        and a social worker enforcer.

  7. avatar John Boch says:

    Dan missed the story where the female half had been arrested for an incident at McDonalds prior to CPD hiring her.

    Ah, yes.

    https://www.loopnorth.com/news/officer0306b.htm

    6-Mar-20 – The Chicago police officer who shot an unarmed man at the Grand Red Line station on February 28 was charged with assaulting a McDonald’s restaurant worker in 2015, less than two years before the city hired her.

    Melvina Bogard

    Police arrested Melvina Bogard (left) at the fast food restaurant, 1951 East 95th Street, at 2:27 a.m. on December 28, 2015. A 19-year-old McDonald’s worker told police that Bogard got out of her car in the drive-thru lane, pounded on the drive-thru window with her fist, and “shouted threats of bodily harm” toward the employee.

    Prosecutors charged Bogard with misdemeanor assault, but the charge was dropped on January 15, 2016, when the victim failed to appear at the initial court date, according to court records.

    1. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

      “Anger issues”…

    2. avatar GS650G says:

      Fortunately she wasn’t armed with a taser and Glock

    3. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      melvina is one of the three streets in chicago that rhyme with vagina.
      the other two are paulina and lunt.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        According to google there is a W hunt avenue in chicago. Haven’t looked for punt street.

    4. avatar Hans says:

      Nice digging, Mr Boch.

    5. avatar GS650G says:

      “Bogard, who was 27 years old at the time, is listed as a “student” on the arrest report”

      Hope she was able to make it to the 10th grade after that.

    6. avatar Miner49er says:

      “Prosecutors charged Bogard with misdemeanor assault”

      Sergei would’ve had her shot for the assault charge.

    7. avatar Aaron says:

      affirmative action at work.

      i’m sure there are lots of good “diverse” cops, but with affirmative action you will never know if any given “diverse” person is actually qualified.

  8. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

    I’m making no statements about the officer or the one shot.

    But… For all those people that walk passed the officers like it’s no big deal. I have never been to downtown Chicago or used public transport in Chicago, but isn’t there a different set of stairs or an elevator or somewhere else to go? Why place yourself that close to a dangerous situation. People in general don’t have any situational awareness, as proven by this video.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Yeah, noticed that, too. My immediate thought was that they’re (1) accustomed to scenes like this and (2) just grateful they’re not the ones being dogpiled.

  9. avatar TommyGNR says:

    Its a bad shoot. They will lose their jobs. The first shot almost looks like a negligent discharge.

    1. avatar John Boch says:

      I concur.

      And the very cop-hating State’s Attorney will crucify both of them. Even though they are black.

    2. avatar GS650G says:

      The second shot is to get even.

    3. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Perhaps an ND, yes. But regardless of why the gun went off, you’re always responsible for the bullet once it exits the barrel, if the gun was in your hand.

  10. avatar NORDNEG says:

    & then there’s that Kim Fox the states attorney general in the news again,,, she makes such really really good choices when it comes to perps. again…
    But then again it’s Chicago, what a great place to live…

  11. avatar former water walker says:

    No one noticed the morbid obesity of the Chiraq po-leece?!? “Shoot him”! They shot the dude for the “crime” of walking between train cars. That was common when I lived in The CITY.No drug dealing mentioned or obvious. No need to defend the fat azzes…

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      I’d care if the person shot was actually worth caring about.

      1. avatar Evangelion sucks says:

        You’re a disgusting person. I’ll pray for you

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          God doesn’t take prayers from heretics.

        2. avatar George Washington says:

          This “serge” mfer is one of these people who have to constantly belittle everyone around them because he thinks it makes him look better…. but deep inside he knows nobody likes him so this is how he rebels…
          It’s really actually very sad…. but funny at the same time… we can all sit around talking$hit about what a worthless piece of $h!t he/ she/it is! 😉

      2. avatar Aaron says:

        pwrserge, if they can do it to him, they can do it to you. you aren’t special in any way whatsoever.

    2. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      we always used to cross between cars. it was very common.
      heading down to see p.floyd at soldier field i boarded the el at howard and stood between two cars with one foot on each platform all the way to roosevelt. that ride was louder than the concert.
      i didn’t realize that it had become prohibited to do so.

    3. avatar Someone says:

      Walking between cars was what started it. But his crime and the reason why he got shot (twice) is known as “disrespecting muh authority”.

  12. avatar just saying says:

    Must have missed the protests and riots for this one……

    1. avatar Someone says:

      You got the colors mixed up. There is no “White lives matter!” movement. That would be raceees!

  13. avatar Buff cousin Elroy says:

    Incompetent police.You dont get to shoot someone because you get frustrated, trigger puller needs some time behind bars.

    1. avatar George Washington says:

      This isn’t about the cop being angry, and not controlling herself…. it’s about intelligence…. females aren’t intelligent enough and they don’t have the mental makeup for police work….js;)

  14. avatar Chris Mallory says:

    Two cops who should die in prison and yet more evidence that cops should be disarmed.

    1. avatar David deplorable says:

      Disarm the police. That puts you right there with certifiable looneys.

      1. avatar Texican says:

        If disarming police disturbs you let me add to your distress. I think all police should be disbanded. The only law enforcement should be Sheriff’s and they would be unarmed. Communities should form their own Constitutional Militias and police themselves. If a Sheriff needs someone with armament he can call on the Militia. People would once again be responsible for themselves. There would be growing pains to go back to this system but it would work better and there would be less corruption. Have a nice day!

        1. avatar jwm says:

          I doubt there would be less corruption. That goes against human nature. Who ever in the local community has the most money or status will be the one in charge of such a system. Citizens militias are only as good as their leaders allow them to be.

        2. avatar Aaron says:

          Texican

          you made an assertion but didn’t provide any evidence.

          maybe you could provide examples where communities formed “constitutional militias” (whatever that means) to perform the functions of police.

          because that sounds a lot like tribal areas in pakistan, or somali, or rwanda where communities have no real rule of law as we know it and violence is endemic.

    2. avatar Hans says:

      Mallory, you are likely to the first vic.

  15. avatar pwrserge says:

    Well, the libertardian meth-head convention is back in town…

    1. avatar The Truth About Serge says:

      Did we push you crack smoking commies out of the convention center?

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Sorry kiddo, my personal vice is cigars worth more than your hourly wage.

        1. avatar Someone says:

          So some drugs are okay, even if they stink to high heaven?

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Yup, because they have no impact on my health that causes a long term detriment to myself or society. Just like moderate use of alcohol.

          Oh, and before you go there, no cigars are not cigarettes. They have no link to any serious health issues and nicotine itself is completely harmless in normal dosages.

        3. avatar Miner49er says:

          “they have no impact on my health that causes a long term detriment to myself or society.”

          An amazing assertion, I’m sure we would be interested in whatever facts you have to back up your claim.

  16. avatar Gregolas says:

    In 1985, SCOTUS held in Tenneesee vs. Garner that cops could only shoot a fleeing felon IF the felon, b/c he was armed and threatening officers with deadly force, or was an immediate danger to the public in his flight.
    It overturned all “shoot fleeing felon” laws not in compliance with Garner.
    This suspect was not a felon. He committed 2 misdemeanors, jumping trains and resisting arrest. Even had the cops known about the drugs, he was not a felon who posed a danger to them or the public. He was unarmed and running away, not taking hostages, etc.
    Shootings him is a clear violation of Ganer, which is taught in every police academy and part of every departments shooting policy. This lady cop violated the law and the man’s civil rights. Chicago will pay a huge settlement, and she should go to jail. Her partner did nothing wrong.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      “Her partner did nothing wrong.”

      Even asking her to shoot him? That could be called solicitation of murder.

      1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

        possibly referencing taser/ spray request.

        1. avatar Anymouse says:

          He would’ve used words like “Taze him” or “Spray him” if that’s what he meant. “Shoot him” means something very different. Calling for pepper spray would be bad for the officer since he was in close proximity and moving around. A baton to a major muscle group would be an appropriate response, but I didn’t notice them carrying them. Probably because too many cops inappropriately used it for batting practice against skulls.

        2. avatar GS650G says:

          He asked her to shoot him and (queue western movie music) she stepped back, steadied her substantial frame and let the Glock fire a bullet into him. Black Male Cop is lucky she didn’t hit him instead.

          That cell phone video of the incident is gold. That’s what is going to be his payday. Doesn’t matter that he was resisting, there were two of them with tasers each who couldn’t subdue him. They are supposed to be trained how to use tasers and other devices. Sure he fought with them, they were assaulting him too. The BMC was losing the fight and decided to have the BFC shoot him.

          If she didn’t fire up that escalator it might have been considered justified. That shot up the escalator did her in. A jury will see it as a revenge shot completely unwarranted.

        3. avatar Hannibal says:

          If he wanted her to use a taser or pepper spray his was a very poor choice of words.

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        Cops are called “officers” because they are supposed to use their own brains and not follow plainly illegal orders or demands.

        Now, we all know that’s not true of every cop at every time. But it’s most important when someone is telling you to do something you can’t take back.

        The male cop should be out of a job because he sucks at it. The shooting officer needs to face a judge and jury.

      3. avatar Gregolas says:

        Please excuse me if I didn’t hear a request/order from the other cop to shoot. I am nearly deaf and have complications hearing things from electronic sources, like my iPad.

  17. avatar Wally1 says:

    it’s Chicago, Why would anyone with any type of life plan live there? Same goes for NY city, Baltimore and New Orleans, There is no hope for any change in these Dem run metro areas. Wake up and move to a place where people respect each other. It’s really that simple.

    1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      could possibly reflect an intent to enjoy a very high standard of living, thousands of gorgeous women, world class museums, symphony orchestra, opera, architecture (notice i didn’t mention sports teams, although that has been improving) and amassing a nest egg allowing one move to god’s country and come back to visit in the summer. right before the whole thing stops circling the drain and takes the plunge.
      it could happen…

  18. avatar Ralph says:

    Why are people dumping on the Chicago po-po over this? All they did was shoot an unarmed person in the back, which is not uncommon.

    As a great Chicagoan said many years ago: “The police are not here to create disorder. The police are here to preserve disorder.” And they have never swerved from that mission.

    So the next time you see Officer Friendly, give him a wave and an “attaboy.” Just don’t turn your back on him. Or your front.

    1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      wait, they shot him in the front butt too?

  19. avatar Roger J says:

    As long as the shooter was the black female there will not be a problem. The City will just write a big check and there will be no local prosecution. If it was the white guy the City will make sure he will wish he was never born.

  20. avatar Sian says:

    Both officers were completely useless and entirely lacking in empty hand skills and have no business wearing a badge.

  21. avatar strych9 says:

    Watching that video back when it first made the rounds, and again now, those two were incompetent at best.

    Yeah, he resisted being arrested and probably shouldn’t have. However their inability to subdue a guy that size in a 2v1 wrestling match where they’ve got top position and each one probably outweighs the guy, combined with the fact that the dude obviously isn’t a serious ground fighter himself, means that they should both have been canned before we even get to the shooting bit.

    These are the kind of cops we’ve often had come into the gym running their mouth and get twisted into a pretzel or choked the fuck out immediately by a 16 year old girl. Best one last about 2:40, most don’t make it a minute. The smart ones realize their error in assuming that a few days of holds and trips makes them Operator As Fuck. The others yell, leave and probably go home to cry.

    Shit one dude gave up in his first match after a 17 year old girl leg kicked him ONCE.

    I’m not saying cops need to be John Wick or Conor McGregor but FFS, basic shit here people.

    1. avatar Someone says:

      Its worse, the suspect didn’t even fight, he just wriggled out and never laid a hand on either of those pitiful LEOs.

    2. avatar Sian says:

      It wasn’t 2v1, as all the female officer did was point her gun and look in over her head until she shot the suspect at the repeated request of her incompetent partner.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        She physically assists there at one point. She just gives up essentially immediately because she has no idea what to do.

  22. avatar GS650G says:

    So I sat through all the videos and found 3rd party 11 to be the one to watch.

    It shows Roman come through the door in the cab. The Black Female Cop notices it and says something to him when he walks by. Audio would be very welcome at this point.

    After he walks away, it’s obvious she thinks he dissed her. Looking at it carefully he doesn’t seem to curse or say very much at all. She looks like “no one ignores me and gets away with it” The partner goes to the door ready to alight from the car but Roman stays on the train. He doesn’t appear to be agitated or angry. Never shows aggression. Hes’ not running or trying to evade or dump anything. No weapons.

    In 3rd party 7 The Black Female Cop takes an authoritarian prose with him and walks him off the train. Now he’s clearly not happy about the situation. She is joined by Black Male Cop. It’s unclear if she initially warned him or went to citing and arresting him straight away. On the platform they quickly are handcuffing him so I don’t think they used their heads and voices, they went right to the cuffs.

    The lack of audio aids the cops. They can claim he called them names and told them to self procreate. It’s their word against his. But her shot up the stairs implies he didn’t show her the respect she thinks she deserves.

    The big question is were these two on the train for enforcing these kinds of rules and ordinances or were they looking for some of the numerous murderers, drug dealers, and other fun merchants Chicago is famous for.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      “They can claim he called them names and told them to self procreate.”

      While I never condone vulgarities toward anyone, including LEOs as they attempt to converse with you, it’s nevertheless moot (from a legal perspective) what might have been uttered as long as it wasn’t proactive threats announcing an intent to cause harm. If only insults, then the cops had no basis whatsoever to act.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        Correct. Watch how slowly and calmly he walks away. And she high tails it after him. Mr. Roman’s lawyer is going to have a party with her in court. He won’t be a cook for long, he’ll be a millionaire and can move the hell out of chicago.

      2. avatar Ralph says:

        https://littlevillagemag.com/federal-appeals-court-rules-saying-fuck-you-to-the-police-is-free-speech/

        “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” This has been made binding on the states as well.

        And as we all know the First Amendment is so highly regarded in America that we cannot now go to church; or assemble in groups; or protest government overreach; or organize a protest through speech.

        1. avatar Hans says:

          Ralph, you must be proud of that decision.

  23. avatar American Patriot says:

    Must be a slow day if ya have to dig up reruns……….

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      The government recently released some footage. They refused to release the bodycams. Both cops lost their police powers, which indicates they may face criminal charges. The man is now suing.

  24. avatar Debbie W. says:

    That’s right…if you are a fill in the blank it is legal to shoot you in the back? Not f-n happening. That’s why all charges were dropped against the perp and charges are pending for the back shooting cop.
    Some of the bravado azzhats on this forum who think shooting this particular perp in the back is justifiable are individuals who don’t know the difference between their butt and a hole in the ground. Armchair crime fighters with a “shoot anything that moves mentality” make great poster idiots for gun control zealots. Beyond that they are a turd in the punchbowl.

  25. avatar Debbie W. says:

    Paul…Next time you get pulled over for a traffic violation or for just looking like a stupid bigot be sure to hang your hands out the window. My money says you’ll be extra polite and nasty nice especially if the officer is Black. Ain’t dat right?

    1. avatar Hans says:

      Go, Debbie, go. Paul needs it.

  26. avatar Ralph says:

    Let’s be serious here. The only reason that Roman was shot in the back is because he was running away. If he had simply stood there facing the cops, they would have shot him in the front.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      ….. a second time. She took a nice pose there ten feet away and plugged him once.

    2. avatar Chief Censor says:

      The first time she shot at him was when he was standing still facing her while whipping his eye. Then he ran because they were trying to murder him. She shot at him again.

  27. avatar Paladin says:

    That female officer is worthless! She couldn’t handcuff a cadaver! But you watch the new mayor will defend her as she was the pope’s sister! Chicago another shooting, by the cops! You never here how many they are responsible for, unless their on video!

  28. avatar Hannibal says:

    Same situation presented as the bystander videos. The first shot looks unjustified and the second is even more so.

    You. Can’t. Shoot. Someone. Just. For. Running. Away.

    No, not even if they resisted arrest for your penny-ante BS infraction. Not even if they called you bad names. Not even if they (gasp) smacked you while they were trying to get away because you’re not good enough at your job to stop them. The only way you can shoot someone for running away is if they are an IMMINENT threat of death or great bodily harm. Some guy with a knife who killed someone and is running at a bunch of kids in a playground? Sure. A bank robber who said he had a gun and is fleeing? Well… maybe. But some dude that pissed you off and didn’t stop for a ticket? No.

    None of this is new caselaw. Something people don’t always understand is that there’s two kinds of people that ‘fight’ the police. The first, and by far the most common, are those trying to get away. They can be dangerous, in the right circumstances, but will take any opportunity to run. But then you have the bad guys- the guys who are looking to actually kill a cop. You cannot treat these two groups the same. But I guess if you’re some flunky that got put on a post because the bosses hoped you would stay out of trouble there (because they know you’re an F-up) you don’t know enough to tell the difference.

    1. avatar Red in CO says:

      That’s a very good point about the two types

  29. avatar Michael Christensen says:

    I will volunteer to be on the jury to send her to prison for attempted murder! Wow, she was not in any danger of being hurt by an unarmed suspect and she shoots him twice. Her partner also needs to goto prison as well for telling his partner to shoot him several times. WOW

  30. avatar Harrison Bergeron says:

    Pathetic! If these two officers displayed this level of incompetence, poor decision-making, lack of training, capability, proficiency and ability to deescalate a situation for a better delayed outcome here, it wasn’t the first time they performed this abysmally. I blame affirmative action, in this instance, as these are common scenes that play out frequently in many departments, and government service writ large. There are many other reasons “shitty” officers end up in departments, but not relevant to this incident.

    Unfortunately, jobs such as police officers have more dire consequences than the secretary that cant do her job but was hired anyway due to affirmative action. Take issue with that assessment, I don’t care. After 40 years in the military, state and federal government service at many levels, it is a qualified assessment. This is the performance you get when you don’t hire the best qualified and capable people, that goes for nepotism, and any other way shitbags slip through the process. I found it best during initial training programs to have peer evaluations, along with instructor evaluations. Works well in various SOF schools.

    The three most basic tenets for the use of deadly force are intent opportunity and capability. Now there can be other factors, but if you dont have all three, it general does not warrant deadly force. This guy showed no direct intent to harm the officers, there may be some disregard in his not complying, but not stated or direct. The guy had limited capability, but no weapons, nor direct or stated to use any. He had opportunity, as he was present if you argued himself, hands/feet were a weapon but they werent being used to harm the officers nor were the officers out numbered, over-matched, etc…so that argument gets thin.

    But, dont worry 20 people were shot today alone in Chiraq and none made the news, move on, move on please.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      Chicago “needs” a certain amount of cops. Less and less people want to be cops, for reasons that should be obvious to many. Unless the city wants to pay more and increase benefits- which, spoiler alert, it does not- this leads to the entirely predictable situation where it must hire people who are less suited to the job than previously.

      So the new hire, maybe with more crimes in their background, maybe just not as qualified physically or mentally, gets sent to the academy. Ideally they would be trained into being a good cop or dropped. Unfortunately the city is loathe to kick someone out after they’ve paid a bunch of money to get them to that point. So even when someone SHOULD be dropped from a class… they often aren’t. The city needs warm bodies in uniforms.

      Then they go to field training. Here, these same cops again should probably be failed. But they aren’t. FTOs have little or no power and many don’t even want the job and often have neither the training or long experience to do well at field training new recruits. So the new cops are passed from one to another until they ‘graduate’ to become cops. Then what?

      Then people usually see what a F-up the new guy is and they do their best to get rid of him. From one shift to another, one section to another, until they find a place to stick him where he HOPEFULLY won’t have to do anything. In some places these are how “school resource officers” get picked (remember the shooting in Florida where the deputy did jack-all?). Or maybe some do-nothing community outreach section. Or maybe transit where they’re supposed to ticket fare-jumpers. If they stay hired long enough maybe they manage to get into the ultimate house-mouse job where they won’t have to shoot anyone… the police academy. But even there sometimes they manage to kill someone (see: Baltimore, 2013) with their idiocy or lack of supervision.

      But then one of the bright bulbs that you’ve stuck in some broom closet ends up in a police situation and does not have the skills to deal with it or the brains to stop. And you get this. And suddenly everyone has no idea how this could have happened. It happened because you’re hiring shit cops to save money. And it probably does save money because the civil settlement costs less than raising the salary for 5 years.

  31. avatar L. Shamus McQuade says:

    This is Law enforcement?….ITS A JOKE…These LE personnel are OBESE/FAT…plus incompetent….No clue on how to take down a perp using hand to had. They are not up to the task due to their poor physical stature. Then pull the weapon and most likely in their fear/Adrenalin hit the trigger…….INCOMPETENT!!!!

  32. avatar Ralph says:

    I remember when a fat guy in a silly uniform was a jolly old elf who brought you presents. Now he’s a mean cop who wants to prone you out and do nasty things to your buttocks.

    1. avatar Hans says:

      ralph boy, you have little good to say about LEOs.

      What will you do when you have a criminal emergency?

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        Are you done yet, Hans?

        1. avatar Hans says:

          Are you Ralph or his bro?

  33. avatar Alan says:

    From the way this story reads, possibly some salient information is missing, possibly not, the following questions come to mid.

    1. How much will this cost Chicago’s insurer?
    2. How will Chicago cover up the fact that some of it’s police officers are “trigger happy”, if not worse.
    3.What career might this female office pursue in the future, as her career in the Chicago P.D. might be drawing rapidly to a close.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      They will move her into hostage negotiation. As soon as she gets her GED.

    2. avatar Hannibal says:

      It will cost a lump sum which is probably less than the city would have to pay to raise its hiring and training standards.

    3. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

      Hopefully the 1st few years of training for her new career will be in making license plates!

  34. avatar Robert Messmer says:

    The State of Illinois ended the death penalty on 1 July 2011. I didn’t bother to google it but I am pretty sure that at no time was ‘walking from one train car to another’ considered to be a capital offense. While the article says that narcotics charges were dropped, no where in the article does it say that the officers observed him handling narcotics. Even it they did, since that is a non-violent offense it is unlikely to have resulted in any jail time. Especially now when jails and prisons around the country are being emptied of child molesters, rapists and murderers simply so they don’t maybe catch the flu.

  35. avatar The Grey Man says:

    I know quite a bit about this since I’m from Chicago. The 2 coppers were only on the job 2-3 years, they normally don’t work the trains, the guy was jumping cars and has a backpack full of drugs, the guy was passively resisting, a LOT of robberies on the trains that’s why these two were reassigned there, the radios don’t always work in the tunnels, the female cop NEVER went hands on and was totally useless, both coppers are very nice people, it was a bad shoot… And I’m not a cop but I’m friends with plenty of them….

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      “ the guy was jumping cars and has a backpack full of drugs”

      Interesting claim, do you have a source to back up your assertion?

  36. avatar birda40 says:

    All of this over a train ride? If some one tased, peppered and shot me , I would be running for my life also. As someone said above years ago a good beating would have sufficed, I also have to wonder about their training? Is this what the Academy teaches? If so some revision needs to take place, this is wrong in so many ways. I’m sure settlement has been made already and hope he didn’t need a lawyer he deserves it all.

  37. avatar dookie says:

    Don’t be a bad partner. The female officer is worthless and they both need MORE training. They weren’t communicating well, they didn’t seem to have a plan when the suspect didn’t just roll over and fully comply with their demands. She seemed more interested in calling in for back-up and running the clock-out. But it seemed like no one was coming and she didn’t know what to do other then just do what her partner told her “shoot him”. Gracie Jujitsu has LEO training programs that uses technique to make suspects comply without having to use your firearm. Just so cringe having to watch these incompetent cops embarrass the CPD. Train more!

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      Somebody who is afraid to go hands-on shouldn’t be a cop. And a lot of police don’t get enough training in how to do it.

      But ultimately, no matter how much training and strength you have, there’s someone out there that can beat you in a fight. And that’s where training and knowledge of the law comes in.

      A cop should always know what he or she can do at that time. “Do I have enough evidence to achieve reasonable suspicion and detain this person? Do I have probable cause to arrest them? Has this person done anything to make me think they are armed and dangerous such that they can and should be frisked? If this person runs, am I within policy to chase them? Is it a good idea to chase them? If the choice is between them getting away or me using deadly force, is there justification to use that force?”

      It’s a lot to ask of someone in a fast situation but we have to ask it anyway. Especially when it comes down to the last one. If an officer conducts a bad arrest or search, it can be fixed. Can’t expunge bullets.

  38. If the two police officers could have performed their duties properly, the man would not have been shot. Due to the fact the two inept officers could not properly handcuff the man, he was shot. I say the city should get out their checkbook.

  39. avatar Billy Bob says:

    BITCH ! First of all, why the fuck are females allowed to be patrol cops ! Come on. That is insane. I guess the only good news here is the guy the bitch shot is white so there wont be any race riots over this. Silver lining I guess.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      The male officer didn’t exactly show himself to be capable in this scenario.

      I have known women police officers that I would trust just more than some of the males. While the latter tend to have more strength, it’s foolish to make such generalizations when it comes to all the factors that go into being a cop.

      One of, if not the most important keys is being able to make quick and reasonable decisions. Being unable to cuff this dude was not that big a deal. Deciding to shoot him in the back as he ran away was.

    2. avatar Hans says:

      Ding, ding, Billy Bob! The LEOs union should have
      staged a work slow down or strike to protest women
      working the beat.

      Too many leftist mayors and Chef of Policees.

      In this case, she stood over the two contesting males,
      like a referee, waiting to call the match. The feline officer
      was completely worthless.

      As for the patrons pasting by and offering any helf, they were
      practicing social distancing, as required by Her MayorShip Leadfoot.

  40. avatar bryan1980 says:

    Another bad decision made by another quota-hire cop. The skin color of those involved doesn’t fit the narrative, thus no rioting.

  41. avatar Aaron says:

    the female cops shot him in the back – twice – even though he didn’t seem to be a threat to bystanders.

    i guess she was just too weak and lazy to catch him the old fashioned way.

    remember when officer scott shot an unarmed fleeing black man in the back, and all the racial unrest that caused?

    Where are the riots and sympathetic news coverage? i guess nobody really gets inflamed when a black female cops shoots an unarmed fleeing white or hispanic man in the back.

  42. avatar Aaron says:

    this comment section seems to be mostly idiotic authoritarians advocating police powers to shoot people in the back VS idiotic libertarians unwittingly arguing for a Hobbesian state of nature

    1. avatar Hans says:

      Hobbes (hŏbz), Thomas 1588-1679.
      English philosopher and political theorist best known for his book Leviathan (1651), in which he argues that the only way to secure civil society is through universal submission to the absolute authority of a sovereign.

      1. avatar Aaron says:

        and….?

        I’m clearly not saying libertarians are Hobbesians.

  43. avatar Kevin Muma says:

    Here’s a joke, 2 fat, physically incompetent sacks of shit try to take down somebody of normal body mass. While trying to deal their inability to accomplish this task, the person of normal body mass escapes. The fat shits fail to arrest despite numerous non lethal attempts and draw their guns to kill the person that can run faster than the fat incompetent police. Go POLICE UNION defend these pieces of shit.

  44. avatar Dan says:

    Attempted murder by the useless POS female cop. Conspiracy and accessory to attempted murder by the useless male cop. The man may have been resisting but when he was shot he posed NO CREDIBLE THREAT to either of them….or anyone else. WHY he was being arrested is IRRELEVANT. In sane and just world BOTH of these doughnut monsters do YEARS of hard time. Sadly this world is neither sane nor just.

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