sccsux Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 A snarling thug?!? How do you know he is a thug, what evidence is that of that? As for the snarl, I believe that is the luck of the camera. We don't know what was happening there, but I would quess he was shouting at the photographer or someone else to get out of the way. He may have been doing so to stop that person being shot my Moat, who knows? You can read anything into an image. It is also worth noting that he is not looking towards Moat while he is 'snarling'. Then why was he airbrushed out in subsequent reprints of the same photograph? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugh jarse Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 I don't disagree, I just don't think you can blame the officers for using what was issued to them. Same here:thumbsup: if a pitch fork was the only thing at hand...and it did the job of stopping a threat to life then pitch fork it is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Same here:thumbsup: if a pitch fork was the only thing at hand...and it did the job of stopping a threat to life then pitch fork it is! By this time, however, he was only a threat to his own life. Killing someone because they want to kill themselves:loopy:. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernStar Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Judge, jury and executioner? Thought not. Regardless of Mr. Moats wrong doings, I'd have preferred to have seen him in a court and due process decide his fate; I think even if he did blow his own brains out it'd have been a more comforting conclusion to the storey than the possibility of it being caused by a copper with an illegal weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peewee84 Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Then why was he airbrushed out in subsequent reprints of the same photograph? Because people like you jump to conclusions........? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peewee84 Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Indeed, the person responsible was the evil "woman" that was writing to him in prison telling him she was seeing a police officer. She knew what he was capable of, yet continued to provoke him. What? If you honestly believe she is the one responsible for this then your sense of morals and justice is completely out of tilt....as far as I'm aware, she told him this to try to deter the nutter coming back for her when he was released. And even if it wasn't for this reason and it was to provoke him, that justifies what he did to her and his subsequent, violent muderous actions? A normal, decent person would have just left her to it anyway The only person responsible for what happened was HIM, and in the grand scheme of things, I couldn't care less what was used on him and if it was legal or not..the fact that he's dead and can't hurt anyone else is what matters.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 What? If you honestly believe she is the one responsible for this then your sense of morals and justice is completely out of tilt.... To be fair, I think he was trying to be ironic! John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Why? Are you one of the police's marksmen? I am not. I've never fired a gun in my life. The man I killed just got his head smashed into a wall. My point was that, so far from having sympathy for a friend or relative of mine who'd killed people, I would be doing everything humanly possible to make damned sure he didn't kill any more of them. If that includes firing an illegal taser to try and make him drop his weapons, that's what I will do - it is, at least, an option short of killing him outright. If nothing else is available except a rifle, then a bullet through the chest is a necessary evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snook Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Then why was he airbrushed out in subsequent reprints of the same photograph? Probably for the very reason I said... I think he was shouting at the photographer. Who would have airbrushed him out, was this an official police image or a press photographer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Moat had a gun to his head so the police decided to shoot him with a weapon that (if it had worked. As it happened it failed), would have jolted every muscle in his body. That in itself seems very stupid to me unless you were actually wanting the gun to go off , and that's before we get in to why the police were using weapons not passed fit for use and the officer involved admitting he had, had a paltry 5 minutes training with it. You're right, they should have just shot him with a gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.