it;s clearly a gun, when guy moves to the scene you can see it clear

Looks like a GUN to me. And police...

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/333...10721at110.png


Check the ABC Video link..

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3...10721at110.png

fuck the police! :2 cents: :321GFY

Police said amateur video showed a .45-caliber pistol they believe was used by Harding. Investigators said they recovered what appears to be the same weapon after it disappeared from the scene.

San Francisco police also said an audio recording of Saturday's shooting indicates Harding fired the first shot.

Police said a man seen in a video took the pistol from the shooting scene. They said they've recovered the weapon but that he also took shell casings and a cellphone.

Hey, I'm just as skeptical about police as the next guy. They do some shady shit sometimes. But this case, where I first heard about it I said "Great, another pointless killing by cops."

Then I started reading more about it. And think this case is different than the Oscar Grant where he was shot in the back while face down and handcuffed.

1. This guy was running away because they were approaching him about bus fare.
2. He didn't wanna get in trouble because he's a murder suspect (guilty obviously since he's running from the cops here for a simple bus fare inspection)
3. Shot back at the cops while running (because there is no way he wants to go back to prison)
4. He was probably able to throw the gun, then police shot him.
5. The police shot him back.

there's witnesses on the other side saying he was running with his hands in the air. how is a damn audio prove anything? anyway if he didnt live the wrong way maybe he would be alive. they didnt secure the scene because there was a ton of gangsters in their face and they were scare.

Now why would you say that? Maybe he's a forensic expert and is on to something new. :1orglaugh

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

I guess if they shot the guy at close range, in the hand, there could be some powder burn.

correct depends on how close they were. im sure some security cameras have the full story.

Right, and it absolutely impossible to differentiate if he was the one holding the gun or just jogging near by. I personally can't believe that this young outstanding citizen would even carry a gun. Its a police cuspiracy, my brava !!!

But wait. Security cameras have low resolution and we would want you to get confused if he was running and holding a gun or a pack of lollipops for poor under privileged children.

that's an interesting point.. i have seen a few instances where rendering has done some crazy things to video

Reason enough to shoot him right there TBFH.

Then you obviously don't read your own post.


:1orglaugh

Simply put : The cops that shot him have residue on their hands and they could
contaminate his hands by touching him.

Get a grip.

I'm not saying the guy didn't shoot, I'm just saying that the test is not 100%
when the shooters have touched the guy after shooting him 5 times.

http://www.startribune.com/local/eas...&prepage=2&c=y
In other words, the victim was shot by someone else but still had gunshot residue on
her hand as if she shot herself.

You dont know this neighborhood. Its a bad neighborhood and that guy should be shot for just being in that neighborhood because chances are if you are in that neighborhood and you are not the cops you are doing something wrong.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh 1981? How about Billy the Kid back in 1881?

Fuck off dude.