Repeater
Regular Member
Scary attitude:
Portsmouth officer testifies in excessive force case
In these kind of civil trials, why should cops be allowed to wear their uniforms? Doesn't that display of authority influence the jury? Is that the intent?
Seems like asymmetrical warfare.
As for his speaking "evenly and unemotionally" about his killing an unarmed man, is there no remorse? His attitude seems characteristic of a sociopath.
I would like an explanation of the disrobed pants. Also, where did the other three bullets go? And "a bullet hole in his boxer shorts" -- why did Rankin fire down there?
Portsmouth officer testifies in excessive force case
The Portsmouth police officer facing civil trial in the shooting death of an unarmed man spoke publicly for the first time about the incident, testifying that he believed he was under attack and that he fired with the intent to “destroy” the man.
Police Officer Stephen D. Rankin said he believed Kirill Denyakin was charging at him with a weapon when he fired 11 rounds that night in April last year. Rankin said he was responding to a burglary call on Green Street and when he arrived he saw Denyakin banging “violently” on the glass door of an apartment building.
In the confrontation, Rankin said Denyakin had a “steely-eyed look” like “he made a decision to come and attack me.”
He said he began firing after Denyakin took “about four strides” toward him and was ignoring repeated warnings to “stop” and “get down on the ground.”
Rankin said even after being hit by the initial rounds, Denyakin continued toward him, but never spoke.
“It just seemed to not affect him until the end,” he said.
Rankin acknowledged that during a prior interview he had said his intent was to “destroy that person.”
Wearing his police uniform and often turning toward the jury when answering a question, Rankin spoke evenly and unemotionally as he recounted the events that night. He was on the witness about two hours over the course of today and yesterday afternoon.
In these kind of civil trials, why should cops be allowed to wear their uniforms? Doesn't that display of authority influence the jury? Is that the intent?
Seems like asymmetrical warfare.
As for his speaking "evenly and unemotionally" about his killing an unarmed man, is there no remorse? His attitude seems characteristic of a sociopath.
What neither side has been able to explain so far is how Denyakin ended up on the ground with his pants around his knees. Rankin testified that he didn’t recall Denyakin ever taking his hand out of his pants and did not recall seeing the man’s pants fall down.
Denyakin’s body was struck eight times by the bullets, ...
I would like an explanation of the disrobed pants. Also, where did the other three bullets go? And "a bullet hole in his boxer shorts" -- why did Rankin fire down there?
Last edited: