U.S. Marshal Shooting Surveillance Video from DC

imported post

http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0107/387273.html
Video http://dynamic.wjla.com/watch?s=wjla&i=387273

All caps is from the original webpage.
- WJLA Script -

Anchor:
ONLY ON 7 TONIGHT: SURVEILLANCE VIDEO THAT COULD PROVE A DISTRICT TEENAGER DIDN'T DESERVE TO BE SHOT. U.S. MARSHALS OPENED FIRE ON THE YOUNG MAN ONE WEEK AGO. THEY CLAIM HE TRIED TO RUN THEM OVER WITH HIS CAR.

BUT THE DRIVER'S LAWYER SAYS THE VIDEO TAPE SHOWS HIS CLIENT DIDN'T DO IT.

SAM FORD IS LIVE IN THE NEWSROOM WITH THIS EXCLUSIVE STORY.

Sam Ford on set:
WE'RE WITHHOLDING THE YOUTH'S NAME BECAUSE HE'S A JUVENILE, BUT A MOTHER AND HER ATTORNEY ARE DENOUNCING U.S. MARSHALS TONIGHT. THEY SHOT A 16-YEAR-OLD BOY LAST WEEK WHOM THEY SAID TRIED TO STRIKE TWO DEPUTIES WITH HIS CAR. THE ATTORNEY
RELEASED SURVEILLANCE TAPE TO US, WHICH HE SAYS SHOWS marshals USING EXCESSIVE DEADLY FORCE.

Story:
THE APARTMENT COMPLEX'S SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS WERE THERE TODAY, AND ATTORNEY DAVID SHURTZ SAID HE OBTAINED ON BEHALF OF HIS CLIENT THE VIDEO FROM LAST WEDNESDAY WHEN HER 16-YEAR-OLD SON DROVE UP HER TO VISIT A FRIEND. VIDEO SHOWS THE YOUTH GET OUT OF A CAR AND WALK TO AN APARTMENT BUILDING. TWO MINUTES LATER HE RETURNS TO THE CAR. PUNCHES IN THE CODE TO UNLOCK THE DOOR AND PROCEEDS TO ATTEMPT TO DRIVE AWAY, AND FOR REASONS NOT OBVIOUS MARSHALS RUN UP ON THE CAR.

David Shurtz, Attorney: "Boom first shot, with seconds. We went and did a second by second analysis and he's backing out and they're starting to shoot."

IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE INCIDENT LAST WEEK. U.S. MARSHALS ISSUED A STATEMENT DEPUTIES WERE ABOUT TO ENTER A BUILDING TO BEGIN AN EVICTION "BEFORE THEY COULD DO SO AN INDIVIDUAL ATTEMPTED TO STRIKE TWO DEPUTIES WITH HIS VEHICLE."

David Shurtz: "He was not tryingto run them over they're tryingto run him over with their bodies they're literally trying to get on top of the car rather the than out of the way of the car. Some people might say when they walked up on him, whole bunch of bullets."

THE YOUTH AFTER HE FLED THE SCENE. HAPPENED TO DRIVE PAST HIS FATHER ON THE STREET, WHO DROVE THE BOY TO GREATER SOUTHEAST HOSPITAL. HE WAS MEDIVAC TO MEDSTAR WHERE HE REMAINS. TWO SHOTS IN THE CHEST, TWO BULLETS GRAZES TO HIS HEAD. HIS MOTHER AND ATTORNEY ATTEMPTED TO VISIT HIM TODAY BUT WERE TURNED AWAY BY HOSPITAL AUTHORITIES WHO SAID HE'S IN D.C. POLICE CUSTODY.
Cheryl Fenwick, Boy's Mother: "They did not have to shoot my son like that. He's handcuffed to the bed like a dog."

David Shurtz: "The victim's chained to the bed, the criminals are out on the street. Arresting other people and evicting other people."

U.S. MARSHAL SUPERVISOR ROBERT BRANDT CAME TO ABC 7 NEWS TONIGHT AND VIEWED AND ISSUES A STATEMENT; THAT THE MARSHAL SERVICE INVESTIGATES ALL AGENCY USES OF FORCE. IT SAID THE FOOTAGE WILL BE CAREFULLY EXAMINED, BUT until THE REVIEW IS COMPLETED THE AGENCY CANNOT COMMENT.

WE ASKED IF THE OFFICERS INVOLVED WERE ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE, BRANDT SAID HE DID NOT KNOW.

imported post

More video with a different angle.
http://dynamic.wjla.com/watchvideo.hrb?s=wjla&id=795

imported post





What we don't know is if the Marshall's told him to halt and he then attempted to leave. I think that would make a lot of difference.



Goliath

imported post

Goliath wrote:

What we don't know is if the Marshall's told him to halt and he then attempted to leave. I think that would make a lot of difference.



Goliath

Click to expand...

No, the real question was if the kid was trying to assault them with his vehicle.

imported post

I hate the very idea of police and this only supports my politics

imported post

From the video, it looks like an unreasonable use of force. The kid was geting in his car and before he started to move, he was being shot at. He was not the subject to be evicted from the apartment complex, so the marshalls had no need to detain him in the first place. Why were they trying to?

imported post

gsh341 wrote:

He was not the subject to be evicted from the apartment complex, so the marshalls had no need to detain him in the first place. Why were they trying to?

Click to expand...

People being "evicted" are not normally detained - they are simply evicted.

imported post

Ididn't know it was the U.S. Marshalls job to evict people , Ithought it was the locals or was this federal housing?

imported post

In Washington, DC the U.S. Marshals also get to do the civil deputy sheriff work usually handled by City or County Deputy Sheriffs in other areas. As you know Washington, DC is federal land, so the Deputy U.S. Marshals get stuck doing evictions there.

imported post

I happened to talk to a Marshal(Deputy), out of the same office as the one's involved in this incident. The Marshal's were waiting for the moving truck that was going to haul the stuff out the evicted person's apartment. While they were waiting, the 16 year old drove up, prior to being 'on camera' he ran over a curb or some other eradict driving, that is what first got the attention of the Marshall's.

The Marshall's noticed pecularities about the vehicle, license plate had been altered, door lock punched out and a towel draped over the steering wheel. They were running the tags when the kid came back out. They called to him as he was approaching and while he was getting into his vehicle.(you can see him look over his shoulder while he was standing about to get into the car.)

The explaination he gave me of the shooting didn't realy jibe with how I rememermbered the video, I'll have to go look at it again. The Marshal did also say the t.v. version is edited. FWIW, said 16 year old is a twice convicted felon and the vehicle was stolen.

imported post

VAopencarry, that's kinda what I was figuring, too. Not that I'm a big fan of 'em, they do have a job to do, which is tough enough. No doubt we have not seen all the video from all the angles, which would tell a better story.

imported post



Gee, who woulda thought that the liberal media would edit a video instead of giving the whole truth. There should be a lot of physically fit people on this board from all the jumping to conclusions.

imported post

Don't jump to the conclusion that the marshall's office is telling the truth either. They've already been caught in one lie, that he was supposedly trying to run them over (when it was clear he was just trying to get away from assholes shooting at him). It's not like government agencies never lie! They lie more than they tell the truth. There may be some CYA going on...

EVEN IF he has a record, EVEN IF the car was stolen (which is hardly a given as far as I'm concerned), there is no way the shooting agents could have known he had a record, and there certainly are better ways to stop a car thief. The agents could have shot his tires out; they were right on top of the car, and it would have been no feat of marksmanship. As it is, they shot him twice in the chest and STILL didn't prevent him from getting away.

They clearly had zero justification for shooting this guy. There was no threat to these agents, other than that created by themselves when they all started banging away like crazy. Marshals are supposed to arrest people, not shoot them on the spot for no reason.

Ask yourself, if you thought you saw someone getting away in a car that (allegedly) was stolen, would you be justified in whipping a gun out and trying to kill him? Or would you be hauled in front of a court with leg irons?

Don't believe in government.