If Lavoy Finicum is a right handed shooter, why would he put his pistol in his left hand coat pocket? And why would he use his left hand to draw it since this video shows his right hand clearly?
David DeGerolamo
Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
I see only two officers in the video. Which one of the two pulled the trigger? The video is a bit fuzzy but, I see no recoil or puffs coming from the two firearms.
If you watch the extended videos, you will see the additional officers and the shots fired at the truck after LaVoy died.
Lavoy was shot three times -- the first was by the shooter in front of him by the road. This happens just at the end of the drone camera zooming in and refocusing. The second and third shots are fired by the shooter behind him. You can clearly see the impact shock of the second shot; Lavoy staggers forward a bit, and then his head turns, searching for the new attacker. But before he even sees the shooter behind him, the third shot comes and he goes down.
At this point, however, Lavoy was still alive. You can clearly see in the video that his arm comes up -- whether another gesture of surrender, or a plea for help, I can’t say.
This rises to the level of intentional MURDER because they knew he was still alive, down in the snow. Yet they provided no medical assistance to him, even though he was no longer any type of threat.
None of the “officers” on scene even approaches him, not even the slightest move is made to do so -- they all leave him for dead, and that is what makes it a sure case of intentional MURDER, because levaing him unattended in the snow with multiple gunshot wounds was a purposeful (and very likely premeditated) act of what is called at law, “Depraved Indifference Homicide”.
Regardless of whether there is a declaration that “the shoot was good”, the willful refusal to provide medical care after the fact elevates this situation to that of a prima fascie homicide, due to the depraved indifference of every officer/agent on scene, and each should face trial for the same. Should they not face trial, then other means of obtaining Justice would be within reason to pursue, given the circumstances.
They intend to cow us by another demonstration of their wanton brutality; but by God in Heaven they have ignited a fire which shall consume them, one and all, afore long.
I shall watch this video more closely. I pray the people of this nation demand the body be returned to the family in a condition that will allow an independent autopsy. I doubt very much we will ever see the truck.
Thank you for your post LT.
no matter how we try to explain the fraudulent doctored up FBI video , the short of this, the man was murdered in Cold blood and for that reason alone we all should not rest until every one in the FBI, ATF, CIA and BLM who are involved in this go to jail or be hanged . who ever gave these orders from on top must be found out and hanged with the rest of the rogue scum of lawless agents in these agencies..
He was having holes punched in him as he walked with his hands up. The court case will require discovery and the sound will prove he was being shot as he walked. His family will be wealthy which is no consolation.
If the left hand coat pocket were an inside coat pocket, rather than an outside coat pocket, then it might have been easier for him to get at when he was sitting in the truck. .
We may never know if he had a pistol or not. I can only speculate what I would do in those circumstances.
If I felt the situation could be resolved peacefully, I would get out of the truck with my hands up. I would see no reason to have a pistol in a left hand pocket or anywhere on my body before I left the truck.
If I felt the situation could not be resolved peacefully, I would make sure that my pistol was easily accessible. I saw no indication that Mr. Finicum pulled a firearm from his coat in the enhanced video.
If Mr. Finicum has a gunshot wound in the left side of his abdomen from the front, I would expect that he was shot while his hands were in the air. As I would do, I would bring my arms down to cover the wound. To me, it looks like he turned and tried to go back to his truck. I don’t think he ever saw the man shoot him from behind.
I will say that even if he was shot in cold blood and the evidence was overwhelming, people would still argue that the shooting was justified.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
What you would do doesn’t really matter. What matters is what happened. I was just answering the question of why a right-hander might have put a gun in his inside left jacket pocket. If you watch the full video again, you’ll see that just as the Finicum car is leaving the roadway and going off to the left, an officer comes up from the road onto the snow area from behind the left-side police car that is blocking the road, and the Finicum car’s rear right side either knocks down the officer directly or plows enough snow onto him that knocks him down. That may have played into the happenings thereafter. I didn’t notice it until I set YouTube to play at .25 speed for the part of the video where the car approaches the roadblock and thereafter.
I agree with your point: what I would do does not matter. I was responding to your speculation which also doesn’t matter.
If you watch the video closely, you will see that the ambush is set up around a bend in the road. What options do you think a car travelling at a high speed has when presented with a road block? Or would you rather that LaVoy plowed into the cars blocking the road?
at the least the officer on the hill who shoots him is a total moron . shooting at finicum but also directly at his fellow conspiritors . why was he alone hid in the woods without a buddy ?is clear that they never intended anyone walking away . some better training wouldve gone a long way in preserving his life and diminishing the chances of the officers .a recon patrol . comunications . a propper convoy with security . why were there two women in the vehicle .
It’s called a cross draw. Like I said… it looks to me like he reaches to his left side with his right hand and there is clearly something in his right hand as he starts a turn to his left and in the direction of the shooter behind him. I certainly don’t know that it is a gun but it looks to me like it could be something with a long barrel. If it is, the shear length of the draw makes a cross draw more effective. Heck, one of my carry methods involves cross draw from a jacket pocket (designed to do just that ) that is about chest high. Shoulder holsters are cross draw too (could easily have been that). Slow it down and look… am I the only one that see him reaching down and in… then an object protruding from his right hand as he starts to turn to his left toward the shooter behind him who, by the way, is a lefty. I have read accounts that said he expressed that he didn’t want to be taken alive… again it’s hard to know what to believe. If he tried to defend himself, I can’t say I blame him. I think he may have tried to protect himself from the guy in front… and didn’t see the guy in back but heard the guy behind him and turned instinctively… which put him at a distinct disadvantage to both shooters as he was then unable to effectively engage either one. This sort of reminds me of a video of a drug crazed teen not too long ago in Chicago… I saw something in his hand too… there was a definite metallic flash. That, however, turned out to be a knife… but the cop took the opportunity, not only to shoot the guy but to dump his whole magazine and, was reloading to keep shooting… only to be verbally stopped by other officers. I am certainly not trying to argue with anyone… just trying to understand what I see.
Are you looking at the enhanced, colorized version?
Criminal Complaint Filed By FBI
The Complaint was filed by Katherine Armstrong, Special Agent of the FBI. Ms. Armstrong has 1 and 1/2 years of experience. The following are the qualifications she lists in the Complaint: She took training at Quantico where she learned the use and practical application of investigative techniques.
And now to find that our premier law enforcement agency is hiring lawyers and giving them badges is further evidence that my analytical conclusion that the objective of the New World Order is an Empire of the Black Robes with the black robes obviously being the judges as the arbiters of what is lawful is correct. If they control all branches of the Justice System, they have that Empire in the United States.
http://tvoinews.com/featured/lawyer-with-a-badge/
Well, it’s not really an ambush when you’ve been given the opportunity to acquiesce peacefully quite a bit earlier. It was a roadblock, standard SOP in such a situation. Finicum had the choice of going into it at high speed, or slowing down and stopping. The video shows a gentle bend in the road and sufficient room for him to have stopped without going off the road. He also had the choice of following the instructions of the officers who first stopped him much earlier on the same road, and quite a way behind where he ended up. So he could have chosen to just stop and accept the arrest he deserved for the actions he’d taken, at the time of the first stop. The police aren’t the ones who chose for him to take off and run from the first place he was stopped. He made that choice, and he made another to travel at the speed he was going, and to not stop when he could have stopped. I don’t think he intended to hit the officer when he went off the road, but that doesn’t matter in a situation of fleeing from the law. What matters is what happened as a result of HIS choices to flee the first stop, not stop and instead barrel off the road and knock down an officer, and not to drop to his knees with hands over his head after getting out of the truck.He made some very bad choices, and unfortunately they led to his death. But they were HIS choices that led to his death.
Please remember that a handgun round isn’t nearly as devastating as Hollywood tells you. Particularly with heavy winter clothing.
To my eye, it appears the first shot comes via handgun from the “officer” by the road. And typical of poorly trained individuals, is “jerked” low and impacted in the lower left torso or upper left hip area. The muzzle energy is on the order of getting hit with a baseball bat with the immediate reaction of reaching to the impacted region.
He then tries to retreat and the coup de grâce is delivered in the back via long-gun from the “officer” in the woods. Muzzle energy being approximately an order of magnitude greater.
I have no doubt this will be claimed as a “justifiable killing” in certain circles.
So it appears you are trying to rationalize murder (“legal” murder or not). Both sides, as is typical, made poor decisions. One side is dead, and the other will likely have to live with their conscience, as an only consequence. Where is the justice (if I can use that term) in this?
The core issue is ENFORCEMENT OF WILL. In such a conflict, it is always the BOSS who wins. I will leave it to you to figure out who is boss.
Key points:
1) Was violence necessary to resolve this “conflict”?
2) Who initiated the violence?
3) Aside from the “participants”, was there any reasonable concern for public danger?
4) Who (if anyone) attempted to de-escalate the situation?
5) Would the outcome been different if the side that initiated the immediate conflict withdrawn to a safe distance and let things cool down (i.e. de-escalate)?
6) Was this not an option, and if not, why?
This is a much-slowed down, and zoomed in video that most of you might find interesting.
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/watch_weve_slowed_down_the_vid.html
The speed does not matter since I can pause and restart the regular video (which I have done). At the magnifications in this video, I cannot make any judgments on whether he was armed or not.
I’m not at all surprised by your response. Even if it were so clear that there was absolutely no doubt there was a gun in his hand, I suspect you would find some other reason to deny that the man caused his own death with his own decision and actions.
A standard Alinsky tactic. If someone does not agree with you, isolate and discredit them. Speculation concerning how I think gives no credence to your views on this murder. I am still waiting on your “reason” why the police fired on the truck after his murder.
Call me skeptical, but I would have been surprised if some firearm wasn’t “found” on Finicum’s person.
Again -- it does not matter whether Finicum had a gun, or whether he ‘charged at the officer’. His actions, in toto, are irrelevant. The deciding factor which makes this a clear case of murder is the Depraved Indifference after the fact, on the part of every OSP and FBI officer on scene, for refusing their duty to provide aid once Finicum was down in the snow and no longer a threat.
All other arguments aside, this is the deciding factor -- did the officers commit Depraved Indifference Homicide in abandoning Levoy Finicum to die in the snow? And the answer is obviously yes, since noone even went to check his condition. And THAT IS MURDER. Period.
Every other argument is moot, in the face of this prima fascie case of Depraved Indifference Homicide. And under these circumstances, DIH can absolutely be prosecuted as a Capital Murder case, at a minimum for those officers who caused the injuries which lead to his death -and- for the FBI Agent in charge of the roadblock.
Does someone really need to spell out a reason for you why the police might use standard tactics to force the surrender and compliance of the passengers in a car, from which someone had previously gotten out and shot at them? Do I have to explain why Finicum wasn’t given immediate medical treatment also, while there were potentially armed individuals and compatriots of his nearby who had thusfar refused to surrender and step out of the vehicle and drop any arms they might have? Apparently someone did have to explain it to you. Of course, you have a different alternative, I’m sure.I’m not interested in hearing it. Anyone who has to have common sense actions explained to them certainly isn’t someone whose viewpoint carries any interest for me. Bye.
All of this chitter chatter means nothing, in the end these law enforcement agencies have once again murdered and innocent man in cold blooded violence and for this alone people must be hanged at some point. this is just another repeat of Waco and Ruby Ridge and the cold blooded murders of Randy Weavers family where the lawless agencies had the same claims, these are satanist liars working for these scumbag lying drug and gun pushing agencies.
I’m curious kaku raku when were the officers fired upon ?and at what point was a weapon branished against them ?also how is it that the occupants were supposed to step out of the vehicle into the line of fire when their companion was just gunned down mere feet from them ?stuck in a snowbank nonetheless ?also Ryan was shot several times but did not return fire even though he was armed .. he is a much better man than I because if my life were being threatened in such a manner i would’ve fought till I was dead or incapicitated .also how is it the passengers are responsible for the actions of the driver ?
If you’d watched the extremely slow video with an open mind, you wouldn’t have to ask the first and second questions. By being in the car, and having been at the “occupation”, the subjects in the car were reasonably considered potentially armed, and by not exiting the car after their compatriot was down, they showed apparent disregard for the instructions of the officers. But I already answered that one before, so perhaps the second time around it will connect. Don’t fret, given time you can put yourself into a similar situation and find out exactly what it’s like. I’m not sure anyone said the passengers are responsible for the actions of the driver, but think whatever you want.
you said in your previous post that someone had gotten out of vehicle and shot .. your own words . there is no evidence to support this accusation at all .please get the facts first .also at what point were the occupants told to exit the vehicle ?as you are insinuating the officers instructed them too ?it is obvlious you are trying to stir up trouble and not really interested the truth .as for the comment of my demise id rather die for freedom than live in slavery
I’d rather you die for freedom than live in slavery, also. None is so blind as he who cannot see, and in this case, there’s even a video to see it on. I’m sorry the old man died. It’s a shame. But he’s the one who caused it, with his actions. I didn’t come here to start trouble. I simply answered a question that was asked by Dave, with a quite reasonable answer/explanation of one of his questions. Instead of reading an adult reply that yes, that could be a possible way it could happen, instead there’s just been more and more BS. That’s fine. I followed a link to see a slowed down version of the video, so I could see for myself what happened, and afterward saw the questions and answered one, which was challenged so I answered that, and so on and so on. It’s pretty obvious no one here except me has been willing to look at it in any other way than that the man was murdered, and I even understand why that is -- because it fits nicely into whatever predisposition is held here. I had no predisposition. I’m all in favor of police refraining from killing people unnecessarily. I’m appalled and angry when it happens. I don’t see it having happened in this case. Believe what you want. Think what you want. It’s your right. Please admit reality when you see it. Please accept the facts before your face. Please open your eyes when you look at something and try to view it dispassionately. Please stop looking for boogeymen around every corner and in every government employee. You’re already living in freedom, so there’s no reason to die for it. You don’t even have a clue what slavery really is. It’s more than just having to obey the law. Bye.
you were the one spreading misinformation by stating the officers were fired upon .and still you wont admit you were wrong just try to redirect or half truth . as for freedom ? a freeman dose not have to pay homage to the state to retain that which is his own .so no were not free as long as we have to pay income/property /death or whatever else taxes. it has been many years since a man was truly free in this constitutional republic.yes we can move freely about as long as we don’t bring undo attention to ourselves or we aren’t put onto some “list” ,then your subject to no knock warrants and indefinite detention .and before you say it yes there are some functions the government needs to perform however the scope of their reach is far beyond that image of our founders .i don’t have to look for the boogeymen they collect yours and my data and track everyone who has a cell phone from the pope to you even our politicians aren’t immune from the prying eyes of the monster we have created .Im not trying to start a fight here just trying to get you to understand the freedoms you think you have are a illusion and we wont have those if we don’t start claiming the rights GOD gave us .ie life and liberty
I was the one spreading misinformation? This is a quote from LT: “Lavoy was shot three times — the first was by the shooter in front of him by the road. This happens just at the end of the drone camera zooming in and refocusing. The second and third shots are fired by the shooter behind him.” Where is the proof of Finicum being shot 3 times, and if there is none, why didn’t you questions LT as to why they were spreading misinformation? Here’s a quote from you: “why was he alone hid in the woods without a buddy ?is clear that they never intended anyone walking away.” Where is your proof that the officers never intended anyone to walk away?” Just as LT stated what they thought they saw in the video, I stated what I thought I saw in the very slowed down version of the same video. Where you got your information about there being no intention of anyone getting away seems to have come from out of nowhere, since there’s nothing in the video that shows that the officer was hiding in the trees all along, and didn’t get up on that side after arriving in a vehicle that was chasing Finicum from the first point where his car was stopped, seeing that the other officer was drawn on Finicum, and he climbed the hill further down and came around from the other direction. I guess the only objection you have to the “spreading of misinformation”, which I don’t agree is a fair representation of what I said, is if it doesn’t fit in with your own spreading of misinformation or the spreading of misinformation that fits in with the way you want to see the situation. I’d get into the rest of what you said, but I’ve already wasted enough time in here.