That didn't look unreasonable.

What about the other cops?
Obviously they were there for minutes (?) before the car we are in.
Impossible to tell for sure based on that one tape.

Did he have a gun or not?

So pleased that SPD got the video posted quickly. Hopefully they'll hurry up and get bodycams.

Well, he most certainly went into the car for something, and was not following the commands to give himself up. That is all this video really shows.

Is that what's called 'de-escalation'?

Given that the shooting officers don't seem to be patrol officers even if SPD had bodycams those particular officers might not have been wearing them. As I understand it bodycams would be for patrol officers only.

@6, for the SPD, yes.

@3: He did indeed. At frame :50 you see him holding it by the windshield of the white car.

I know it will never happen but every time I see a one of these videos I wonder just any in the hell we even allow cops to carry guns.

And as always, shitty reporting by The Stranger. Seattle Police recovered a loaded Springfield XC-S semi-automatic handgun chambered .45 ACP which the felon reaching for and was confirmed by police and eye witnesses.

http://spdblotter.seattle.gov/wp-content…

Everything that The Stranger has written about this incident plus comments from the felon's family and the Seattle branch of the NAACP has been a damnable lie.

So the police execute on sight? No question in my mind that this is a police state especially for people of color.

(sic) Springfield XD-S

Additionally the loaded Springfield XD-S, the Seattle PD recovered a stash of hard drugs which are packaged for distribution.

http://spdblotter.seattle.gov/wp-content…

This is on top of the individual being a convicted felon who was previously jailed for assault, robbery and rape.

@11: your screen resolution is impressive. I can only make out blurs.

1. he didn't know they were actually SPD because of how they were dressed and thought he was getting jacked for his drugs.
2. he know his goose was cooked, and chose to go down in a hail of bullets rather than return to prison.

legalize and regulate all drugs.

He'll be deeply missed ... especially by those who were expecting delivery of all that crack and heroin.

You have a known felon with a very violent history making a grab for .45 handgun, within feet of the cops. Do you expect them to wait until he's shot one of them before returning fire?

@13, Springfield doesn't make an XC-S in .45 ACP. In fact, Springfield doesn't make an XC-S. At all.

Given this, I believe that is what the SPD is trying to say. He had a magic "ghost gun".

@21, we have no reason to believe he had a real gun. The SPD can't even tell us what gun it was.

Justified or not, this shooting could have been safely avoided.

The subject was standing next to an open vehicle, which the police rightly suspected might contain dangerous weapons. The correct tactical move would have been to put distance between the subject and the car, by ordering him to put his hands on his head and back away from the car.

Instead, the officers ordered him to simultaneously get on the ground and keep his hands up. This directly exacerbated the danger by maintaining the subject's close proximity to the car.

@26 Backseat policing. So much easier said than done. And if he still doesn't comply and grabs his gun anyway?

Where are the rest of the tapes?

@24 Its a subcompact XD, apparently the fellow posting the pic though the 'D' was a 'C' probably because its a bit stylized.

Can't see shit from that angle. Him going back into the car does seem like the sort of thing that will get you shot, especially if he had a gun in there.

@24. Yes. As I already have established with my @15 comment, I misspelled Springfield XD-S by accidentally brushing the "C" key instead of the "D" key.

Way to go studly. And way to go archaic Stranger comments sections that you can't go back and correct that sort of error.

The felon was a threat to all involved and the police did their job! Good job, SPD.

I prefer when we can cheer these things, like we did when the Oregon standoff guy was killed reaching for a gun.

Studly? Misgendering much?

Hard to even tell who fired. The cop leaning in the car looked like he had a hand on the suspect but also seemed like the only cop in a position to determine what was happening in the car. Did he shoot one handed in the end?

@34 If you're going to act like a pedantic moron who can't be arsed to look down two posts to see the correction to an obvious mis-type, you'll be treated like a pedantic moron. Take your passive aggressive schtick elsewhere.

The Springfield XD-S is a paramilitary firearm that retails at 600+ dollars. We're talking about something Blackwater would use, not some rickety Sig that you don't mind tossing after a drive by.

This is not the kind of weapon you would normally find being used by a male African American felon.

@39, cute homophobic slurs, especially coming from "RentBoy".

@39 You're a bit off. An XD-S retails for around $500, a sig is closer to $1000.

Here's the other bit you missed. I-594 passed, how'd the felon get the gun?

@40, well kept Sigs are great guns. Poorly maintained Sigs that will fire if you shake them wrong are all over the street. That wasn't a commentary on Sig quality so much as an observation of what I've seen firsthand being carried by felonious drug dealers.

@42, a cheap Sig on the street can be had for under 100 dollars. You can't get cheap Springfields on the black market for the most part.

This guy is cracking me up. Sigs with bodies on'em for a bill that fire when shaken, and Springfield is a Navy Seals Rainbow Six Blackops Agent Orange Commando gun.

Thanks to SPD Officers for making a good, quick decision during maximum stress.
All you "coulda, woulda, shoulda's" out there can look at tis as a textbook example of justified shooting.

@45, project much? I could care less what you think of the availability of cheap Sigs, and the second half of your statement is so divorced from anything I said it is clear you are not paying attention to what I am typing, and instead only reading what you want to see.

Guise, Guise, GUISE!

Can everyone else please stop commenting on this thread so the MEN can get down to answering the important question: Which string of letters correctly identifies this particular firearm?

If someone even mentions the word 'assault' I am going to lose my shit.

@49, since not all of us are "MEN", no.

@49, I'm not a man, so "assault."

@49, PS, I knew that was tongue-in-cheek.

@51, I am aware of what the letter of the law permits SPD to do. I have not argued otherwise.

But to claim this falls under any kind of "reasonable conclusion". You cannot ascertain that much information in that little time, and since the SPD has a DoJ acknowledged violence problem, their instinctual reactions cannot be trusted until after a lot more review and training. Honestly the SPD should be directed in these instances not to shoot and to turn it into a car chase. The SPD is simply that problematic.

Your response to #46 is not only wrong, it is illegal. It amounts to conviction prior to trial, and violates innocent until proven guilty.

@12 correct answer. police should not have guns [they can have a shotgun or rifle in the car I suppose, but should not have sidearms].

@55 - let's say SPD let this guy - who by the way appears to have been in the process of committing his third strike, and was thusly looking at life without parole - drive away rather than confronting him before he got into the vehicle.

Convicted rapist/robber then drives away and pursuit ensues. Convicted rapist/robber, who is carrying a handgun, begins shooting at cops or crashes car into innocent bystander, injuring or killing them. Are you saying that would be a better outcome than what happened here?

@57, I am saying I believe that the SPD is so trigger happy that high speed vehicular pursuit would endanger less lives in our community than an armed engagement (assuming they do not go hand in hand, but I don't trust the SPD to be precognizant, either). They are that bad, yes. Oddly, bizarrely, surreally bad.

@57, are you inappropriately including the overturned convictions on his rap sheet?

How can anyone watching it tell who the other police are in that video? Three guys in plain clothes came after the homicide victim with guns drawn. They're fortunate that he he didn't effectively defend himself.

Regardless, there was apparently zero attempt at deescalation. Police appear to have moved in anonymously, dressed as common criminals, ramped the situation right up to the point where they could kill the man, then shot him dead.

When some in the community back a convicted rapist, robber, who had a loaded .45 and dealing hard drugs, who certainly didn't appear to have his hands up in the video, it really makes the whole BLM or anti cop movement look bad. Yeah having a record isn't a license to be killed, but having a fucking .45 auto at hand when the cops go to arrest you is! Sorry, gotta back SPD on this one, good job. Although I do have to fault them for really shitty police tactics, they should have done a "felony stop", for their own protection. Had the guy actually had time to use his .45, cops could have been shot easily.

@61, please. This will no more hurt BLM than their Bernie protest did. That was much more potentially damaging and they came out on top and looking more effective than ever when all was said and done.

I don't know anything about the guy other than what the news is saying, but, if he's a rapist and a repeat knucklehead, why would anyone defend him? I can't see shit on the tape, i can hardly even see him, so i don't know if he was going for a gun but if there is one thing these streets don't need it's another knucklehead out there being a pain in the ass for everyone he encounters.

@63, the man spent 22 years behind bars for a series of crimes, the conviction for which was overturned. Society failed this man decades ago. Should we not have sympathy for those society has broken? Should we not defend a person from character assassination? Are not the dead also innocent until proven guilty? Or do we now convict corpses?

@59 - http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news…

"His convictions, in King County, included first-degree rape, four counts of first-degree robbery, a drug offense, unlawful possession of a firearm, two counts of second-degree assault and taking a motor vehicle without permission, the spokeswoman said.

He also had previous convictions for two counts of first-degree robbery, taking a motor vehicle without permission, possession of stolen property, escape and a drug offense, serving time between 1989 and 1990."

@64, you are so out of touch it is funny. Approaching a minority with guns drawn is practically SOP. The DoJ isn't here for nothing.

Approaching a vehicle with guns drawn due to past history is not legal. If there is no reason to believe an aggressive crime is actively being committed the cops have no cause to pull their guns. Prior convictions of the individual or prior experiences from the officer do not change that. If the officer can't separate the two incidents in their own head they have no business on the force. Period. They are being paid and given the license to kill because they are supposed to be that professional.

@66, I know he had a criminal record not including the overturned convictions, but some people here are including them anyways. It was an honest question, not a condemnation.

@66, wait one minute. I can almost guarantee The Times is including those overturned convictions, as they frame his release from prison as a standard release as opposed to rectifying a miscarriage of justice. Hardly a NPoV.

libertine, i agree somewhat. however, i don't know if this guy is really a rapist or not, this system is pretty fucked up and it's easy to fall into it, especially a black man. what i'm saying is, there are enough knuckleheads out there, wannabee gansters, tough guys etc.., who are trying to act like the crap they see in the movies, and yes, also act like this country acts. as if it owns the universe. all I can tell you is that I'm tired of dealing with jackasses and i don't need problems, and don't tell me it isn't possible, i was abused, beaten etc.., and i try to act right, there aren't excuses.

what's been overturned, lib, do tell. I don't necessarily believe anything the news says but i did glance at this guys facebook and he looked like a pure knucklehead.

@69 - I think you are conflicting the guy who got shot with his friend from prison. The friend from prison is the one with the overturned convictions, not the guy who got shot.

@18: Macbook Pro with Retina displays are indeed impressive. But I do concur with your other points - except decriminalize hard drugs, don't legalize them - e.g. don't legalize heroin for retail sales for christ's sake.

@72, I don't think so. State vs. Taylor, 1992 conviction, 1997 denial of appeal. That's the case that was overturned. The overturned charges were first degree rape, four counts of first degree robbery, and two counts of second degree assault. His prior robbery convictions still stand, as do prior drug charges.

@75 - the convictions you mention were all affirmed by the appellate court. That's what kept him in prison until 2014.

http://wa.findacase.com/research/wfrmDoc…

@77, you're off. That is concerning the 1997 denial of appeal. The witnesses hadn't recanted yet. That link is to the case in general. The appeal mentions it was procedural, concerning only the use of a previous robbery conviction. There is no mention of the recanting witnesses (because they didn't recant until just a few years ago).

@78 No, you are confusing HANKERSON's case with Taylors. Taylors case was NOT overturned. Btw here's the text of what he did

At trial, Taylor admitted that he and his codefendant, Alonzo Warren, went to Tip Top Trailer court to steal drugs and money from two women he knew from prior drug dealings. Taylor said he knew Warren was armed with a loaded gun.

Taylor and Warren first entered Amber Scherbinske's apartment. They demanded Scherbinske give them crack cocaine. Shortly thereafter, Shawn Cowell and Mike Keller walked into the apartment. Taylor and Warren searched Cowell and Keller and threatened to shoot anyone who lied about having drugs. Taylor also admitted telling Warren to shoot Keller because he thought Keller was reaching for a kitchen knife. Warren pointed the gun at Keller but did not discharge the weapon.

Taylor admitted taking approximately $8 from Keller and $20 from Cowell. Cowell also testified that a $25 money order was taken from her.

Scherbinske testified that Taylor hit and kicked her repeatedly and that she suffered bruises, a back injury, and what she believed was a concussion. According to Scherbinske, Taylor took about $30 in food stamps, $5 in currency, and a money order from her. Taylor denied taking any cash or a money order from Scherbinske.

After leaving Scherbinske's apartment, Taylor and Warren entered J.C.'s apartment. J.C., her eight-month pregnant daughter, K.C., Waylon Rickert, David Gernackey, and Gary Stark were in the apartment. Taylor and Warren demanded cocaine from J.C. At some point, Gernackey advanced towards Taylor. Taylor admitted hitting Gernackey with a six-pack of soda.

Warren then jumped up, pulled out the gun and told everyone to get down on the floor, "this is a robbery[.]" Taylor admitted throwing a bookshelf at J.C. after she began yelling at him.

K.C., Rickert, and Stark testified that Taylor pressed himself against J.C. in a sexual manner before dragging her into a bedroom. J.C. testified that Taylor raped her vaginally while striking her several times. She said she attempted to fight Taylor off but did not scream because she feared for her daughter's safety.

Taylor admitted dragging J.C. into the bedroom, but claimed that he did so to search her and the room for drugs. He denied sexually assaulting J.C. He claimed that he "reached up, grabbed her pantyhose and pulled them down[,] separating her panties and her pantyhose" to look for drugs. About five to seven minutes later, Warren yelled to Taylor that they needed to leave. Taylor testified that at that point, he "walked up on the bed, I kicked [J.C.]. I spit on her and I turned and walked back in the living room."

Before leaving the apartment, Taylor admits kicking Stark and taking money from him. K.C. testified she gave Warren food stamps in the hopes that he and Taylor would leave the apartment. After they left, K.C. observed her mother curled up "in a little ball." J.C. told Stark that she had been raped and called 911 to report the crime. J.C. stated that her recollection of the night's events were not "too good," but she denied taking any drugs that night.

Dr. Anthony DiJulio, a physician who examined J.C. after the alleged rape testified that J.C. was in a coma-like state, medically referred to as "obtundation." DiJulio conducted a rape examination and found semen in J.C.'s vaginal vault. J.C. stated that she had not had sexual intercourse for approximately two months before the alleged rape. J.C. tested positively for marijuana, cocaine, Trazedone, Benedryl and caffeine. She also admitted taking Atavan. Trazedone is a sedating hypnotic and "affects one's memory of events." DiJulio stated that J.C.'s level of lethargy was unusual for a rape victim who had not suffered a head injury. DiJulio did not observe any evidence that led him to believe that J.C. suffered a head injury, but could not conclude that she did not suffer such an injury.

During closing, the prosecutor argued that Taylor's testimony should not be believed because he admitted to lying to the investigating officers and because "he has also had the opportunity to sit here during the course of the trial and listen to the stories that were presented by the versions [sic] or the testimony presented by each of the victims in this case, so he had the opportunity to mesh his story together with theirs and to present a story to the court that eliminates the most serious charge." Defense counsel did not object to the prosecutor's argument. Defense counsel conceded Taylor's guilt on all the offenses except the rape.

As to the rape charge, the trial court orally ruled that J.C.'s testimony alone did not provide sufficient evidence because her memory may have been affected by her drug use and Taylor's kicks to her head. The court found however that J.C. sounded "alert and coherent" when she reported the rape to 911, and that Stark, Rickert, and K.C. all provided circumstantial evidence that Taylor raped J.C. The court also noted that the hospital examination revealed sperm in J.C.'s vaginal vault and that the only evidence of sexual activity was two months prior to the date of the alleged rape. The court dismissed the attempted rape charge, but found that Taylor had committed all the other charged crimes, including first degree rape, beyond a reasonable doubt.

@79 while I was willing to admit the man was no saint even if the conviction was overturned and I don't quite have the search results for his criminal record back yet, I am willing to admit I am likely wrong on this one. As I do not consider this place to be one where I need to pump up my ego, am willing to admit when I have erred.

The author is right, of course, a criminal conviction is not reason for shooting someone. But this point is absurd to make when you have, on camera, an armed felon reaching for a weapon as he is swarmed by cops - more than enough reason to blow him away. C'mon, The Stranger. Surely there is an instance where you're willing to admit that the (admittedly imperfect) SPD are in the right. Very, very disappointing reporting. You're making this liberal Seattleite feel like a redneck conservative.

@82 Citations please lol.

I think as well that he was reaching for something in the car.

Considering that we only see a small snippet of the encounter towards the end, I am unsure why people are declaring the police never identified themselves.

Police were already there well before the car with the camera showed up, we have no idea if they identified themselves or anything that happened before they got there, #60's hilarious interpretation of this event aside. I am pretty sure that one guy in the video can be seen wearing a police uniform.

Regarding the officers not wearing uniforms: a reasonable person, especially one who has been arrested before, is going to know that the 3 white guys moving in holding their guns in two-handed grip and shouting "Hands up Get down!" in cop voice are in fact cops. Robbers don't act like that.

That video doesn't actually tell you anything. Maybe he was going into the car for a gun. Maybe he was getting down on the ground with his hands behind his head. The suspect is entirely hidden by the car once he goes down. This case will be down to the testimony of the only living witnesses, the cops.

@86: Actually, there were civilian witnesses, whose statements all match and back up the police report. Not that this will convince you (I am sure you believe the witnesses were paid off or are plants put there by the cops), but there it is.

Black Lives Matter!!!
So do the lives of our Police Officers.
When police officers instruct someone to put their hands up, and instead they reach for a pistol, that person will be shot, regardless of ethnicity.
Thank God the only person killed was the repeat felon with the handgun he shouldn't have had in the first place.
Nice job SPD. THANKYOU!!!

Regarding whether the police made themselves reasonably identifiable as such: The vehicle from which the footage was recorded, and which is shown aggressively moving in to block the car's exit, is a marked SPD SUV.

Regarding the fanciful "what if Taylor tried to start a vehicle pursuit" scenarios: not gonna happen. The white Taurus isn't going anywhere, somebody else is in the driver seat, and anyway, it's blocked in by the police SUV. The black Magnum, which I suspect was Taylor's car, was pretty far out of reach.

Regarding witnesses: SPD has stated that civilian witnesses from inside the car have backed up their version of events. I'm willing to believe that, but I'll feel better when I've heard it from their own mouths instead of secondhand.

@85- A friend of mine was once robbed by someone doing pretty much exactly that. Honestly it's a good idea to comply regardless if someone has the drop on you with a firearm. Nothing in my wallet is worth getting shot over.

Washington is an open carry state.
Taylor was killed by the cops because he was open carrying.
And yet, you never hear about some white guy getting killed by the cops just for open carrying.

90 so someone posed as police and robbed your friend? I wouldn't doubt that happens too but this guy with his past more than likely knew that several white guys with guns drawn were police. In those kinds of moments, who knows what goes through someone's mind if anything other than panic, but I tend to think he knew and decided to go out fighting. Sometimes the cops just have to shoot people, what do they do in suicide by cop scenarios? A person wants to die and doesn't want to do it in a cowardly way so they attack police. More than likely not even wanting to hurt them at all. A fucked situation.

@91 The more plausible explanation is Taylor was killed because he was a known violent felon who reached for a weapon as he was swarmed by police. That's a ticket to getting (justifiably) shot and killed by the police, regardless of your race. Not everything is a conspiracy.

too many commands at once. How can he comply? Hands up. Get on the ground. Which? you can't keep your hands in the air and get on the ground. the car is in the way of getting on the ground. maybe he was trying to lie down on the car seat in front of him. they did not say he could turn around. they did not say get away from the car. They did not say he could turn around. They did not tell him to "freeze". This is execution by failing to comply during a 3 second period of undoubted confusion. Are they cops? video does not show them identify as cops. Yes the video is from a cop car, but he does not see cop car he is looking at the guys dressed in jeans coming from a plain car approaching him with guns telling him to do opposite things at the same time, while a car is blocking his motion from complying.

Yes, @95. That's what the video looked like to me. Too much happening too quickly. It could have been that he sort of had his hands up, and was sort of getting on the ground. Just commenting in the interest of accuracy.

Che should have watched the Chris Rock video: How Not To Get Your Ass Kicked By The Police
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igQDvYOt…

@95, @96 Yeah if cops simultaneously told me to put my hands up and get on the ground I would definitely become so confused I would lunge into the car where my .45 is. Come on. This guy was a career criminal facing a third strike who decided he'd rather shoot it out than go back inside for good.

Yep. That looks pretty much like murder. Even if he did have a gun, he wouldn't have had time to drop it, let alone aim and fire it. It is CRIMINAL that several years into the Consent Decree SPD officers are not wearing body cams all day, every day, so we could have seen what these assassins in uniform saw towering over their target.

@81: "But this point is absurd to make when you have, on camera, an armed felon reaching for a weapon as he is swarmed by cops - more than enough reason to blow him away."

I have not seen evidence proving that he reached for a weapon. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't. I can't say right now. I'm glad they released that video. But it, on its own, is far from conclusive. The camera is too far away.

I am not going to equate what police say happened with facts, absent evidence to back it up. That mistake has been made before, with disastrous consequences.

In most police killings of everyone (blacks especially, but not only) cops claim the suspect had a weapon. When Walter Scott was shot to death running from an SC officer, the officer put in his report that Scott was armed.

1- Cops carry 'throwaways', guns they confiscate but dont report in order to drop next to dead suspect when needed. Several police documentaries and autobiographies have reported this as a common thing, going back to the 80s.

2- Cops can, legaly, claim ANYHING is a weapon. To the public media and to the courts. Driving a car? Thats a weapon. Folded pocketknife in your pocket? Thats a weapon. Larger black person with giant negro scray fists? Thats a weapon! Walking stick for a veteran? Thats a weapon!

3- MOST IMPORTANTLY- You need to be able to parse out when police reports say "A weapon was found a the scene/he had a weapon on him" from "He aggressed upon an officer with a weapon". That "reached for" bullshit is just that. Amadou Diallo was shot 44 times after he 'reached for' his wallet complying with officers orders. Cops lie. Especially in Seattle. Even the most privileged of the locals (White, wealthy, microsoft techies) have shown this repeatedly.

@100, 102: Just curious, when that Oregon militia guy was shot and killed by police for reaching for a weapon, did you also figure the cops were just lying and used a "throwaway" gun in that case? Do you feel he was murdered by the cops for fun? Because I did not see any posts or articles from either of you decrying that use of force.

Why not? What was different in that case?

@103

1- You mean the white guy who spend more than amonth occupying lands with zero response while threatening offiers with rifles? (Contrasted to the unarmed black protesters in Baltimore and Ferguson who had tanks, ATV's and fully auto weapons trained on them for being angry that cops killed unarmed black people and racist prosecutors helped them get away with it?) Yes.

2- I didnt see any Bundy supporters backing black people facing REAL oppression from the government. Not "Why cant I let my cattle illegally nuisance federal lands without paying a *fucking MINIMAL* fee" -oppression. More like "Why I cant be black in my own home/neighborhood without being stopped, harassed, assaulted and murdered by white cops in a Modern American city.

3- See your boy @105. Fascism/Racism is rampant amongst your ideological ilk/Trumpists.