Man who called 911 in Ohio Walmart shooting changes his story after viewing video

Now you put it that way it sounds like suicide by cop. The Police tell him to drop the rifle and he turns his back on them like he's trying to load one in the chamber, then spin around and open up? Little wonder why they shot him. Of course the police had the right to feel threatened, he was carrying a very realistic looking assault rifle replica pellet rifle (see photos I already posted). An assault rifle that will make Swiss Cheese out of their body armor at that range. They tell him to drop it and he turns his back on them rifle still in hand??? Of course he's going to get shot. I'd like to nominate him for a Darwin Award.........

The Darwin Awards salute the improvement of the human genome by honoring those who accidentally remove themselves from it...

http://www.darwinawards.com/darwin/

 

As I already said, he didn't drop the rifle when told to. If he was still holding the realistic looking assault rifle and turned away, he could have been loading one in the chamber to spin around and open up on the Cops. Body armor is no protection against rifle caliber rounds. Let me bottom line it for ya'all, when the cops are pointing guns at you and tell you to drop something.........drop it immediately.

In this case evolution ran it's course as it should. The Law of evolution dictates the strongest and smartest survives, the weak and stupid perish and don't reproduce for the good of the rest of the species.

 

Why are open carry not treated in the same manor...or why was this man not treated the same as an open carry gun owner.

People became upset that Kroger was being called out for not banning long rifle carrys in the store...What if PD operated the same way to every open carry person?

That is why citizens call for rules and restrictions...to prevent either 2nd amendment right being violated...or people being shot for having a firearm.

No way open and conceal carry would put up with being stopped at gun point and ordered to drop their weapon every time they went about their business. NO WAY.

can't have it both ways.

 

Have you seen the video? Its not released yet, so you have not.

How many times do the cops act first (shoot, tase, or tackle) and then start yelling for the person to "stop resisting"? Thats part of their procedure, even after the person is down they keep saying "stop resisting" to cover their ass.


The guy was on his phone, he was minding his own business, he was perfectly legal, he had no reason to expect anything, and all of a sudden he is faced with a bunch of cops with guns pointed at him. I'll bet he was surprised and shocked for a moment. I can easily imagine the cops - who are expecting the worst and hyped up to protect themselves at all costs - coming aroound the corner, telling him to drop it, and then as he hesitates for a split second in surprise then moves to drop it they kill him.

Once the cops have the "active shooter" mindset, someone is going to die. It didn't matter what the guy did, any hesitation, and movement, and they were going to kill him.

Ritchie lied on the 911 call and should go to prison.

The cops betrayed the trust given them by the public and betrayed their oath to protect. They should be in prison.

 

---No. He is a normal person experiencing what is probably a normal day: talking with a friend on a cell phone while handling merchandise inside of the store where it is being sold.

---He was not a trained police officer. He was not trained to deal with aggressive police officers prepared to shoot him. Is it unreasonable that his gut reaction was the explain that the so called weapon in his hand was actually a toy?

---The police were trained. They were the persons relying on practiced experience. The ordinary citizen was not. Why are you holding him to the same standards the police?

---You sound like your espousing some police state where citizens should be prepared for violent contact with police at all times, and if they dare respond with anything outside of lock-step procedure they may be fired upon. It's unreasonable for our citizens to be surprised by threatening police presence when they are NOT COMMITTING CRIMES? That is crazy. That means I could be shot for similar reasons. Unacceptable.

EDIT: On What planet are you given a "Darwin Award" for behaving like a customer inside of a store? 1 guy (the deceased) knew what he was doing. 3 others (the caller and responding officers) didn't know what he was doing and when he tried to explain, he was killed. How exactly is he culpable in his own death when it took 3 other people outside of his own awareness to bring it about? He had no (*)(*)(*)(*)ing clue the (*)(*)(*)(*) storm that was about to hit him.

 

Have you seen the video? Its not released yet, so you have not. So how do you know the Cops betrayed the trust given them by the public, betrayed their oath to protect and should be in prison?

 

Fn Scar-l Rifle​

Crossman MK-177 air rifle.​

If a guy was standing in your living room with either of these, you're between him and your family, how long would you wait to shoot him after you tell him to drop it and he doesn't?

When the cops are pointing guns at him and tell him to drop a realistic looking assault rifle.....he should have just dropped it and the situation would have ended. The Darwin Award thing to do was to turn his back on them while still holding what they told him to drop. Part of the evolutionary process is to be able to adapt to situations and follow instructions. This gent couldn't seem to do that and went down an evolutionary cul-de-sac instead.

 

---You're a character.

---The gun BELONGED in the store. The deceased BELONGED in the store. The deceased was not trespassing or committing any crime. You take your position completely out of context to give it any credibility. That speaks volumes.

---I will note that you're ok with people being killed because they are handling a toy that resembles a gun they are LAWFULLY allowed to carry anyway. You don't care whether or not people break the law, just that they immediately obey authority. Some kind of American, for sure....

 

Neither can you. Are you saying the police were clairvoyant? They can somehow know beyond what information they received on a radio call? You seem to forget they received a radio call stating a 911 caller reported a man pointing a rifle at children inside a Wal-Mart store. THAT is all they have to go on till they get there, end the reported threat and investigate. Your comparison to the Kroger story is simply false, NO ONE called the police saying that man or any of the other sweeping generalizations you've made were pointing their open or concealed carry weapons at anyone or the situations would likely have been vastly different. The 911 caller should be tried for murder, the cops were just doing their jobs based on the information given. Before passing blanket judgements, contact your local Police dept and go on a ride along if they allow it (most do).

- - - Updated - - -

Are you saying the police were clairvoyant? They can somehow know beyond what information they received on a radio call? You seem to forget they received a radio call stating a 911 caller reported a man pointing a rifle at children inside a Wal-Mart store. THAT is all they have to go on till they get there, end the reported threat and investigate. The 911 caller should be tried for murder, the cops were just doing their jobs based on the information given.

 

0311 - Now what?

 

I accept there is a probability that a cop can mistake a toy for a weapon. In some rare cases, trigger happy goobers just need an excuse. Sometimes they just get scared. Walmart is a very well-lighted environment, by the way. It isn't every time a person (kid) gets killed by a cop with a toy gun in his hand that the officer was justified. Each case is unique, and each person deserves justice.

 

This wasn't a random encounter with someone who happened to be (or appear to be) carrying a firearm. The police were responding to a report that he had been waving the gun around and pointing it at people. That report may well have been wrong but they didn't know that at the time. In that context it seems reasonable to temporarily disarm the suspect before establishing what the actual situation was.

 

Obviously I have not seen the video. That does not mean there are no facts to base a conclusion.

The most glaring fact is that a completely innocent man who was doing nothing illegal or suspicious has been killed by cops.

There is the fact the video has been seen by the family.
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/new...-shooting-victim-figuring-next-step/15125291/

Crawford Jr. said security footage of the shooting and the time leading up to it – which he and family lawyer, Michael Wright, have viewed – shows that his son was standing in an aisle of the pet department holding the air rifle with his left hand with the barrel pointing to the floor. Crawford III was talking on his cell phone to Johnson with his back to the officers when he was shot, his father said.

"The footage we saw, he didn't know the officers were in the store. There was no reaction (from him) at all by the time the trigger was pulled," Crawford Jr. said.

"We were waiting to see him menacing, waving this thing in a threatening position with women or children. None of that happened from the footage we saw. He wasn't doing anything. He was just standing there. The final analysis is that my son was murdered."

"All this nonsense of (them saying) 'Put the weapon down' two or three times. There was no reaction from him. There couldn't have been a cadence given."​

Do you think they are lying? The victims dad - the man who is quoted above - is a parole officer. His statements have been in the public and the police and DA have neither questioned nor refuted them.

At a minimum, the cops failed to protect the public, failed to ascertain the facts, failed to follow procedure, and killed a totally innocent man and should be in prison for manslaughter.

 

Well that's saved them the hassle of an inquiry, prosecution and trials. We can just submit your post to a judge and can get all the police officers present tossed in a cell.

Or maybe, just maybe, we should wait for the professionals to review all of the evidence in context, without personal bias or tabloid spin and reach a formal, considered conclusion. Just a thought.

 

You said............

Do you think every Cop was in the Marine Corp and can tell the difference between the two pictures I posted at a distance?

Pop Quiz: If there are two cops pointing their guns at someone holding a very realistic pellet rifle and they tell that person to drop it......what should that person do to prevent getting shot?

A) Flip the Cops the middle finger and shoot a pellet at them to prove it's not a real gun.
B) Turn their back on the cops and fiddle with the rifle like they were racking one in the chamber.
C) Scream at them he's a Marine and he knows a real gun when he's holding on and this one isn't real.
D) Drop it and don't move.

 

Eyewitness accounts are unreliable? That's the opposite of what you have said about the MICHAEL BROWN SHOOTING....

 

Mind telling me what he was doing with the rifle OUT OF THE BOX IN THE PET DEPT! and not in sporting good where the air rifles are sold??? Since the details were sketchy at first, I assumed he was still in sporting goods, looking at the pellet rifle deciding on a purchase. However, if he removed the rifle from the box and proceeded to walk around the store, he may very well have pointed it at children like the 911 caller reported. Little wonder why he got shot.

 

Cops make mistakes, too. I don't rush to judgement to defend them or condemn them.

 

How many of these cases do we have to go through before you realize that the "professional review" is a cover-up? In these investigations of police by police, the most biased people are the investigators.

And no matter what you claim, the ultimate fact is that a completely innocent & harmless man ging about his business in a Walmart was killed by police. Unquestionably, the cops failed to do their job.

 

Crawfords father saw theentire video. Unless you think Crawfords father is a liar, according to Mr. Crawford his son held the air rifle in his left hand pointed at the ground, never waved it around, never pointed it at anyone. The only time the son moved the gun was to lean it against his shoulder for a few seconds and even then it was never pointed at anyone.

And in case you haven't heard, the 911 caller (Ritchie) has modified his story - after the DA let him see the WalMart surveillance video. Its clear that Ritchie lied in the 911 call.

Ritchie was the only person to call 911, no other shopper was concerned about Crawford.

And Crawford did nothing - NOTHING - illegal. Taking the air gun out of the box, being in the pet department, walking around the store, are all totally legal. In fact, he went to the pet area to talk privately on his phone (to the mother of his children) away from his girlfriend. In the video (according to his dad), he stood motionless talking on the phone.

You are really grasping at straws to justify murder.

 

So you think tabloid media quoting victims' families and lawyers judged by random kooks on the internet is better? Or maybe you just think you should be judge, jury and executioner?

If you really believe the system is so fundamentally broken, you should be suggesting improvement or replacement to the system. Anything less makes you as guilty as anyone else you might care to accuse.

 

For whatever reason, maybe ignorance, maybe a refusal to admit the police are out of control, you deny the problem. Literally every day a cop unreasonably kills someone.

Cops are given by Citizens extreme authority to protect the Citizens, and cops are supposed to be answerable to those Citizens. Citizens are the ultimate judge and jury of the police.

How do you know I am not active in promoting change? As vocal as I am here, it should be obvious that I am equally vocal in "real life". Part of the problem is educating people like you that there is a problem.

 

This is the surveillance video of the shooting, I don't see where he is pointing the rifle at anyone.....

http://youtu.be/S9FtNOV6Qhk

 

Great post, 911 call synced with the video, and store audio at the end.

Lets see what all the pro-cop fans have to say about it now.

The cops murdered the guy. I didn't hear anyone yelling at Crawford until after he was shot. In fact it didn't appear Crawford even knew the cops were there until they shot him.

 

The video is out.

See post #73.

The gun was not in a box, Crawford did not remove the pellet gun from a box, he did not point the gun at anyone. Crawford passed multiple people in the store, he was not aggressive or threatening, and nobody was concerned.

Ritchie can be seen in the video, Crawford was on his phone during that time and almost motionless, he did not point the gun at anyone.

There is audio at the end. It appears Crawford did not even know the cops were there until the cop shot him.


Its indisputable. Crawford did NOTHING illegal or threatening. Ritchie blatantly lied in the 911 call. The cops murdered Crawford. Both Ritchie and the cop should be arrested, held without bond, and tried for murder.