• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

John Crawford III

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,439
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Recent events, including the lawsuits against Beavercreek and Sean Williams being ordered to proceed, have made me look at this case again.

Wikipedia has an article and a talk page on the shooting—including arguments over the use of the word “toy” in reference to the air rifle.

Even snopes.com has a page on the shooting, including this finding:

What's True
Almost every detail of the case is presented accurately in the meme.
What's False
There is a significant dispute over whether police shot John Crawford "before he even knew what was going on." The officers involved asserted that he failed to obey instructions to put down what they perceived to be a loaded rifle.
That there is a dispute does not mean anything is false. If you watch the video, Crawford did NOT fully react to having heard the commands, indicating that he was indeed fatally shot by Sean Williams “before he even knew what was going on”.

Furthermore, if you listen to the audio, it is obvious that Williams did not give Crawford time to process the commands before opening fire.

We need to hold police officers accountable for unjustifiable use of force. Don’t let this case just fade away.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
7,378
Location
here nc
Let’s see now...oh ya...no video nor audio, nor lead in nor background...

Yepper i got it eye95...

cite(s) [hopefully not from whio]
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,439
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Some updated rulings from the lawsuit:


Generally reasonable, except the trying of the cases against Williams and Walmart to proceed together. Two completely different kinds of liability. Walmart was at worst negiligent. Williams’ pulling of the trigger was a deliberate act.

Also, Walmart has deep pockets. Williams does not. I can see a jury wanting to punish the deliberate act of Williams by raiding the deep pockets of Walmart.

[Oh, and the url may be from the Dayton Daily News, but I read the story on WHIO’s news app. I hope no one gets triggered.]
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
11,755
Location
White Oak Plantation
From 4 Jan 2018 - In deposition documents related to a federal wrongful-death lawsuit, Officer Sean Williams said he did not see Crawford point a gun at anyone at the Walmart store.

The police officer said he shot 22-year-old Crawford because he felt Crawford was “about to” aim a rifle at him and Williams felt an imminent threat.

Williams has been cleared of any wrong doing. Good luck on any civil remedy.
 
Last edited:

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,439
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
There is a difference between “being cleared” and the government choosing not to prosecute. Furthermore, the burden of proof in a civil case is a lower hurdle to clear than in a criminal case.

Based on the information I have at the moment, I’d find Williams liable.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
11,755
Location
White Oak Plantation
He was cleared of any wrong doing by the cop shop, which mitigated any charges/prosecution.

I agree regarding your assessment of the outcome of the civil suit. It would be good if a jury held your view as well.
 
Top