dougb wrote:
Wouldn't be the first person who went for the cops gun, but apparently it would be better if the cop lets the BG take a shot or two. He wasn't shot for domestic violence or interfering. According to the cops, Clarkes hand was on his gun. And no, you are not withholding judgement.

A single photo of the scene should make it clear whether he was shot standing or on the ground.

gator68 wrote:

dougb wrote:
Wouldn't be the first person who went for the cops gun, but apparently it would be better if the cop lets the BG take a shot or two. He wasn't shot for domestic violence or interfering. According to the cops, Clarkes hand was on his gun. And no, you are not withholding judgement.

A single photo of the scene should make it clear whether he was shot standing or on the ground.

Gov. Dayton has seen the video over a week ago and met with the Clarke family and told them that he saw nothing that contradicted the official report. I heard him mention that on MPR my self.

gator68 wrote:

dougb wrote:
Wouldn't be the first person who went for the cops gun, but apparently it would be better if the cop lets the BG take a shot or two. He wasn't shot for domestic violence or interfering. According to the cops, Clarkes hand was on his gun. And no, you are not withholding judgement.

A single photo of the scene should make it clear whether he was shot standing or on the ground.

There were no pictures reported of Clarke beating up the woman, but a few scattered videos of the confrontation with cops.

If a single photo doesn't exist, it doesn't exist. Cops probably just stopped their cars and left them pointing which ever way they were, as they failed to appoint a filming director to control the cameras for best shots. The available footage apparently is distance shots with low resolution cameras hand held and shaky. Even without seeing it, people are assigning guilt based on it.

dougb wrote:

gator68 wrote:

dougb wrote:
Wouldn't be the first person who went for the cops gun, but apparently it would be better if the cop lets the BG take a shot or two. He wasn't shot for domestic violence or interfering. According to the cops, Clarkes hand was on his gun. And no, you are not withholding judgement.

A single photo of the scene should make it clear whether he was shot standing or on the ground.

There were no pictures reported of Clarke beating up the woman, but a few scattered videos of the confrontation with cops.

If a single photo doesn't exist, it doesn't exist. Cops probably just stopped their cars and left them pointing which ever way they were, as they failed to appoint a filming director to control the cameras for best shots. The available footage apparently is distance shots with low resolution cameras hand held and shaky. Even without seeing it, people are assigning guilt based on it.

No, I mean a single photo of the body and blood laying on the ground. There's going to be a big difference in physical evidence when someone is shot standing vs on the ground. You saying the police wouldn't have taken photos of the body and environment?