Constitution Club

To Help Educate America on the
Principles of Liberty and the Constitution.

On August 4, 2107 another innocent American was shot and killed by the Los Angeles City Police Officers. A rookie law enforcement officer felt threatened, so he opened fire and ended the life of Todd Hurlburt. 

The officers involved, have filed a report that is substantially from the eye witness account of Victoria Stockton. Los Angeles City Police Chief Charlie Beck reported to the media that th shooting was justified.

Hopefully the District Attorney will compare the testimony of both Victoria as well as the officers involved. After a thorough investigation I believe that it will determined that the officers were guilty of extremly poor  judgment that led to the death of Todd Hurlburt.

I believe that Victoria should be required to take a lie detector test and if she fails the test, the officers involved should be cleared on all charges, but it her testimony rings true the officers should also be required to take a lie detector test to determine whether or not he acted lawfully.

Just because a man is wearing a badge doesn't give him carte blanche to shoot innocent people because they feel threatened. If law enforcement officers who use deadly force know in advance that their guilt or innocence would be determined by a jury of the people rather than the County Sheriff, I  believe we would have far fewer victims of misconduct by officers of the law.

I believe this case should be submitted to the Grand Jury to determine if there is sufficient evidence to indict the officer who killed Todd Hurlburt.

Image may contain: 3 people, people smiling, outdoor

Views: 129

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

the testimony of an actual witness must be considered and delved into.  A police officer works for the state or county or city....NOT for the PEOPLE, as the police are required to do!   Get the testimony out in the open for a jury of the PEOPLE to view and decide upon whether or not to convene a grand jury for this case.  Police officers appear to be known to protect their fellow officers, right or wrong.

do we have another witness? the new training guidelines are for personal; defense of the officer . The point being made that if he/she feels threatened they can fire upon the offending party. The Police i talk to tell me that the new training will lead to more deaths such as this one.

seems that is allowing the intentional killing of anyone the officer feels is a threat to them whether there is a reality to the officer's feelings or not.  what is the statute if the other person feels the officer is a threat their safety, does that mean the officer can also be shot because of ones feelings?   I wonder what Jesus would have said about these new "laws"?

Laws  let me see if i remember this

When public opinion honors that which is despicable and despises that which is honorable, punishes all virtue and rewards vice, encourages that which is harmful discouraging that which is useful, supports lies and buries the truth under indifference and insult, a nation will turn it's back on progress and can only be restored  by the terrible lessons of catastrophe.  Frederic

Bastiate                                   i have a hard time with that one.



© 2019   Created by Keith Broaders.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service