11
   

New Jersey cops shoot Radazz Hearn seven times as he pulls up pants

 
 
Reply Sat 15 Aug, 2015 06:20 pm
New Jersey cops shoot Radazz Hearn — an unarmed black 14-year-old — seven times as he pulls up pants
NJ.com



14 Aug 2015 at 09:20 ET

August 13, 2015
Kevin Shea

TRENTON - Salema Jackson broke into tears before she even uttered a word to those assembled at Shiloh Baptist Church in Trenton on Thursday to discuss the shooting of her 14-year-old son by two police officers.

"I just want everyone to know this whole thing is tragic, and it's very hard," Jackson said, after composing herself. "It's hard to see a child hurt and you can't help him."

She said her son, Radazz Hearns, is progressing and is a fighter. He remains in stable condition at Capital Health Regional Medical Center in Trenton.

Hearns was shot seven times in the back of his legs and buttocks as he ran from police officers on Friday who confronted him on a Trenton street while responding to a report of shots fired.
RELATED: Trenton 14-year-old was unarmed when shot 7 times by police, family's lawyer says

The shooting in under investigation by the state Office of the Attorney General because it involved a State Police trooper as well as a Mercer County sheriff's officer, who were in the city as part of a targeted law enforcement initiative to supplement the Trenton Police Department.

The two officers and another State Police trooper saw Hearns and two other males as they were walking along a street. The three officers got out of their vehicle and confronted the trio, and Hearns fled around a townhouse.

The State Police trooper and Mercer sheriff's officer opened fire as they gave chase, according to the Attorney General's Office. Witnesses told authorities the teen reached for his waistband before the officers opened fire, the Attorney General's office has said.

RELATED: N.J. Congresswoman calls for federal probe into police shooting of Trenton 14-year-old

Samuel A. Anyan Jr. told the crowd assembled at Shiloh Baptist Church, just a few blocks from the shooting scene, that Hearns was unarmed when he was shot. Hearns was shot five times in the right leg, once in the left leg and has a bullet lodged in his pelvis, Anyan has said.

The Attorney General's office has declined to say how many times the two officers fired, or name the officers involved. It appears at least 10 shots were fired. Seven hit Hearns and three bullet holes are visible at the scene - two in a car and one in the siding of a house.

"No matter what happened that night, he's here to tell his story," Anyan said of Hearns. Anyan said that his client has not been questioned by police while hospitalized.

"All signs lead to the fact that Mr. Hearns was unarmed and was fleeing from the officers when he was shot," Anyan said.

According to the Attorney General's office, a .22-caliber handgun was found near the scene 12 hours after the shooting. The gun was under a car on a street near where the teen collapsed after being shot, the Attorney General's office said.

U.S. Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman and Trenton Mayor Eric Jackson told those at Shiloh Baptist Church on Thursday that they were frustrated by lack of information made public by acting Attorney General John Hoffman's office.

Watson Coleman and Jackson both said they respected the ongoing investigation, but they need to be able to respond to the most basic of questions from their communities.

Immediately after the shooting, Jackson said he wanted information, as mayor.

"I yelled and screamed at my police director for information, and he could not get it," Jackson said. "We went to the (Mercer) prosecutor's office and could not get it. We went to the State Police - it was not available."

Starting on Monday morning, Jackson said he shared with the Attorney General his concerns on the "lack of sharing and why it was so critical. Why I as the mayor of the city had to have information."

Both Jackson and Watson Coleman left the meeting Thursday at Shiloh Baptist Church, along with other politicians, to speak with the Attorney General's office again about the investigation.

Both returned and told the attendees they urged Hoffman to come before the community to at least explain their methodology, and why they are being so limited with public information.

RELATED: Congresswoman calls for federal probe into police shooting

Watson Coleman and the mayor also said they were startled to read in news accounts Thursday about witnesses that have not been contacted by authorities, and Jackson said the Times of Trenton posed "5 questions" that needed to be answered by authorities.

Jackson said he also put those and other questions to the Attorney General's office.

"To a lot of these questions, we did not get good answers," Jackson said.

Watson Coleman, earlier on Thursday, called on federal officials to take control of the investigation.

Watson Coleman said she made that request of Paul Fishman, the U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, saying she told him: "We are not a community that wants to be upset, that wants to be inflamed."

"That's all were asking for, we're asking for justice and all the information necessary to make a determination, and that's where I left it," Watson Coleman said.

Jackson and Watson-Coleman said the community's concerns are their concerns. "We are trying to reach out to every level of the government. We're trying to tell them your frustration, your concerns," Watson Coleman said.

"We are working to get the answers we need" Jackson said
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/08/new-jersey-cops-shoot-radazz-hearn-an-unarmed-black-14-year-old-seven-times-as-he-pulls-up-pants/
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 11 • Views: 3,756 • Replies: 71

 
snood
 
  3  
Reply Sat 15 Aug, 2015 06:24 pm
I don't think the law is supposed to allow them to shoot someone fleeing unless he's posing a threat to the cops or someone else. Some of these m**herf**kers seem to love to shoot black people and running from them is all the excuse they need.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Sat 15 Aug, 2015 08:17 pm
@snood,
They are being given a pass every time they claim that they felt their lives were in danger. We need to take investigation of shootings away from the shooters' department and the DAs.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Aug, 2015 08:35 pm
@snood,
You are right.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 16 Aug, 2015 10:48 am
@snood,
snood wrote:

I don't think the law is supposed to allow them to shoot someone fleeing unless he's posing a threat to the cops or someone else. Some of these m**herf**kers seem to love to shoot black people and running from them is all the excuse they need.


What I don't understand is why those that protest these shootings don't protest for a Black police department in their neighborhoods? I say that since in a history of U.S. police departments there was a chapter about the NYC police, and sometime in the late 1800's, the decision was to let the Irish police their own neighborhoods, since no (white) Protestant patrolman felt safe, in daylight, in those neighborhoods. And, with the departure of most working class (white) Protestants from NYC, the Irish inherited the NYC police department for a good half-century.

The only reason why that might not be as simple as the historical decision in NYC is, because in a country where factories are now overseas, a police job is a good livable wage for a person, and it would likely not be something that white police would want to abandon?

Also, shouldn't one ask the question as to who would even want a job in a police department that included precincts in a basically hostile demographic? Sociology professors are not looking to be police officers. So, who are? Answer that question, and then one might see, in my opinion, that part of the problem is in the concept of who the police are supposed to be. Perhaps, sort of like a drill sergeant in basic training, i.e., "Yes, sergeant." "No, sergeant." Now if the respective demographic does not subscribe to such deferent behavior, then that will be a problem, unless surliness is only for white police officers?

So, perhaps there should be a call for "let us police our own."

bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Sun 16 Aug, 2015 02:24 pm
@Foofie,
Wouldn't this be an application of "separate but equal"?

How about bringing in more black cops and stop all the combat training that brings out firearms and shooting resolutions for every interaction with white cops and young black males.
chai2
 
  2  
Reply Sun 16 Aug, 2015 02:46 pm
Ok, I'll be the bad person again by asking a question....

When he was running away, and grabbed at his waist, did the police see that as him grabbing at a weapon, and not pulling up his pants, thus presenting a danger?



bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Aug, 2015 03:00 pm
@chai2,
That's he problem: cop's word against another dead kid. Camera up and audio every single cop with tamper proof equipment.
chai2
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 16 Aug, 2015 03:10 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

That's he problem: cop's word against another dead kid.


So in other words, the police could have interpreted his grabbing at his waist as grabbing for a weapon. You are saying that is a possibility, right? You are saying that a police officer chasing someone running from the scene and grabbing at their waistband could be seen as a person running and at the same time grabbing for a gun.

Thank you for clearing that up.

The suspect did in fact run from the scene when confronted by the police, when responding to a call about shots being fired. So maybe there was just the remotest possibility when they were responding to a call about a gun being discharged, they were thinking they may come across someone with a gun. They might then just be prepared for the possibility that someone with a gun may try to shoot at them. Then, someone who they approach tries to escape, and reaches for their waistband while running away.

Naw, you're right. Such an outlandish scenerio could never happen.

0 Replies
 
chai2
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 16 Aug, 2015 03:18 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

Camera up and audio every single cop with tamper proof equipment.


Yes, because it's been well established that people taking videos from the sidelines on their phones never do any editing before publishing them on the internet.

We can rest assured when we see someone's video of an occurance that it is the complete and unedited video.
0 Replies
 
chai2
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 16 Aug, 2015 03:52 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

That's he problem: cop's word against another dead kid.


Thirdly, the kid is not dead.

Let's not get ahead of your agenda bob.

We can only hope that he does die, and soon, to complete your version of events.

**********

I think it's ******* amazing how people who have no police training, no knowledge of what they are looking for as signs of danger to their person, and have never themselves even remotely been in a position where you approach complete strangers that may themselves think all police officers deserve to die, or thousand other crazy, bad, stupd or criminal thoughts know Exactly and each time how the responding police officer should act.
I guess that's a skilled acquired by having one's posterior firmly settled on a cushioned chair, and half ass reading the actual police story.

I sure don't have that experience, but I do have the luxury of being a Monday morning quaterback, if I wanted to. Instead I prefer to think that if approached by a police officer, I shouldn't take off running.

ossobuco
 
  2  
Reply Sun 16 Aug, 2015 04:00 pm
This is one more vomitous episode. I sort of get varied points of view, but I am stopped by the whole scenario, people running around with guns out of control, often those being the police.

Jesus, it is like five year olds with pop guns.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  4  
Reply Sun 16 Aug, 2015 04:20 pm
@chai2,
I don't buy this at all Chai.

Police have training (as you note). As part of that training, they are supposed to learn how to make the correct decision on the use of deadly force against children. Fourteen year old kids don't have training.

This is why your suggestion that it is the kids fault when an adult, professionally trained police officer shoots an unarmed 14 year old is ridiculous (if not barbaric). Police take on the responsibility and the risk to be police officers. It comes with the job. The idea that it is acceptable to act in a way that leads to kids being shot as a way to reduce risk to themselves is crazy.

Do you know any 14 year old kids? How would you feel if this happened to one of the 14 year old kids in your neighborhood?

Black Lives Matter.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2015 09:19 am
@chai2,
chai2 wrote:
Instead I prefer to think that if approached by a police officer, I shouldn't take off running.




That's a luxury white people have. If Sandra Bland had run off she might still be alive today.
Foofie
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2015 10:00 am
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

Wouldn't this be an application of "separate but equal"?

How about bringing in more black cops and stop all the combat training that brings out firearms and shooting resolutions for every interaction with white cops and young black males.


"Separate but equal" had to do with a states rights rationale for segregated schools. How would it apply here? Anyway, I thought schools would not be equal if separate. Are you saying that Black males need to be arrested by white cops to be equal to white males being arrested by white cops????



chai2
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2015 10:24 am
@izzythepush,
If Sandra Bland had put out her cigarette, which could have been used as a weapon, when requestsed by the police officer, and taken her ticket for warning for lane change without signal, she might still be alive today too.

Or, she might still be dead, because it's been established, regardless of the family saying "She would never kill herself", that she had in fact made a previous suicide attempt

Listen, I'm not saying this police officer was justified in this case with shooting. But I'm not saying he wasn't.

I am just sick and tired of the bandwagon that is getting more and more crowded by the minute with people seemingly thinking all/most/many police officers are "out to get black people" or any other shade for that matter.

Are there bad apples? Yes. Are police officers overwhelming doing their job the best they can to protect and serve? Absolutely.

I have a question. It was brought up before we need more black officers. Are black people applying for these positions? I don't know. Are they applying and wanting to go through training, and being denied?

Has a black officer ever pulled a gun on anyone who was running, but seemed like they were making a move to grab a weapon, and shot them? I'm not going to look up statistics, but I'm thinking yes. Has a white officer ever done the same to any other white person, or an asian or hispanic?

Not running is only a luxury for a white person? Give me a break. That's really reaching.

Yes, if a black person waits for an officer to walk up to him, and makes no aggressive moves, he's going to end up getting shot in the chest or face. That's just the way it is, no denying that. What other choice does any black person have when seeing a police officer but to run away? Absolutely none.

All this one sided, not knowing the entire story, seeing videos that latch onto the one moment, without any background, not posting and obviously not even reading the complete story (BTW, sorry to say, Hearn is still alive. He better hurry up and die for everyone can add on a murder charge.) and saying really ridiculous things like only white people have the luxury not to run away is incredible.

Overall, this blame of white officers against especially blacks has turned into a witch hunt. Oh, but when a police officer approaches the stray white person who's acting aggressive, they get blamed for that too.

Again, I'm not defending, supporting or condoning inappropriate force, but it's getting to the point where officers of the law are expected to be more concerned with pleasing every you tube viewer rather than concentrating on their jobs.





HesDeltanCaptain
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2015 10:27 am
@bobsal u1553115,
As everywhere else, a suspect's hands in their pants or wasitline is justified grounds for shooting. If they have a weapon, that's where it's gonna be.

Flight suggests guilt, reaching for your waistline, too bad so sad.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2015 10:56 am
@chai2,
Quote:
Again, I'm not defending, supporting or condoning inappropriate force, but it's getting to the point where officers of the law are expected to be more concerned with pleasing every you tube viewer rather than concentrating on their jobs.


There are a several problems with your argument, Chai.

1) First of all, you don't seem to understand the job of a police officer. The police work for the public. Their job is to "protect and serve" the public. They are, and they should be, accountable to the public. Police officers don't have the right to use excessive force. They don't have the right to shoot people (except under very strict circumstances). And they don't have the right to hide their actions, or to avoid scrutiny, from the public.

That is their job. Someone who can't accept that shouldn't be a police officer.

2) Police officers shouldn't shoot unarmed 14 year old kids, period. When a police officer shoots an unarmed 14 year old, it is the police officer who has fucked up. You can't blame a 14 year old kid when he ends up shot in a confrontation with a professionally trained adult. This is ridiculous.

3) When I was a kid, after an after-hours prank at my school, someone called the police. I ran from the police, a couple of kids were picked up. No one was shot. No one should have been shot. Of course, I was a white middle class kid running from the police... there was zero chance of me getting shot (or even roughed up)

4) You, Chai are completely ignoring the racial injustice. Black kids are getting shot by police officers at a disproportionately high rate compared to White kids. Unarmed kids shouldn't be shot at all, but when kids are put at risk because of the color of their skin, it is maddening unfair.

The police are professionally trained, adults who are responsible for doing their job. Part of their job is to know when force is appropriate... and using it with restraint.

When they are shooting unarmed kids... they are ******* up. And when they are shooting unarmed Black kids, they are acting as agents of racial injustice. There is no way around this.
HesDeltanCaptain
 
  0  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2015 11:09 am
@maxdancona,
Police don't work for the public. They're the armed wing of business who in turn support government. Ever see police gather around an individual's home to protect it in a riot? Ever see police gather around a business in a riot?
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2015 11:13 am
@chai2,
So not putting out a cigarette is grounds for being murdered in a cell. I'm glad I'm not black and in America.
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
  1. Forums
  2. » New Jersey cops shoot Radazz Hearn seven times as he pulls up pants
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/24/2020 at 06:52:03