[Some racist cops are sophisticated, masterful liars] Black Teen Shot in the Back in Fort Wayne While Running Away from White Cop who "thought he saw a [unfound] gun" after the chase started

"The Mystery Surrounds [your belief in] the Gun." An experienced trial attorney will tell you that it is very difficult to get a judge to believe a cop is lying. The "inaccurate statement(s)" almost have to be totally outrageous before most judges will go there. A better strategy, especially if the defendant is Black, is to get the judge to believe the cop is incompetent in some way or just mistaken. Reality or anything too real (such as racism) in court is simply unbelievable to judges in the fake world created in court. Many racist cops are sophisticated, masterful liars who are taught how to testify and create persuasive, detailed police reports. Mixing actual facts with nonsense sounds & looks real in court. White prosecutors and the white media are also eager and programmed to believe anything foul cops say about Blacks. In a case involving a "missing" weapon and no video, like this one, the evidence would simply consist of a credibility contest between a sworn white police officer and a Black teenager[s]. Prediction: in this case, a white jury or judge will believe that a gun existed - though not a single detail about the gun will be provided. Why would a cop make it up? Because they will believe it.

From [HERE] A Black mother has sued a white Fort Wayne police officer in federal court, alleging he used excessive force when he fired at her 17 year-old son as he chased him and two other Black teens last month on the city’s south side.

Gina Dodson filed the complaint in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana on Wednesday. The suit names Officer Robert Hollo as an individual and claims he used excessive force “in violation of the U.S. Constitution” when he fired off four shots at the boy just before 1:30 p.m. June 21 in the 2800 block of Smith Street, near the Whitney M. Young Early Childhood Center at East Pontiac Street.

Hollo said he was investigating reports of gang activity in the area, in an unmarked car, when three teenagers approached the vehicle. As the teens walked up, Hollo reportedly got out of the squad car.

At that point, Hollo reported the teens noticed he was an officer, and they ran off. As Hollo chased after them, Police Chief Garry Hamilton said witnesses heard him order them to stop repeatedly and they did not comply.

At some point then, Hollo said he thought he saw a gun on one of the teens. He then fired four shots, one that struck the teen in his lower back. The other two teens ran off.

No gun was found on the teen, who has not been named. He was seriously hurt.

Right Right. First of all running away from the cops when you are not under arrest or legally stopped is not a crime. In most jurisdictions, flight alone from police without any other circumstances is not a basis for a valid Terry stop. However, flight along with other specific factors may imply consciousness of guilt. So far, no other circumstances exist in this case.  

1) Here, the teens began running when they saw the cop. Prior to them running they had not been stopped by the cop. When this white cop encountered them he had no information that any of them had committed any crime at any time. When he first encountered them they were not under arrest and there was no particularized, reasonable suspicion to stop them.

Apparently, the cop began chasing them simply because they were running. He was unaware of any crimes that any one of the teens had committed. 2) The white cop then ordered them to stop. Yet they had committed no crime and he had no reasonable, artuclable suspicion they had done so. At this point a stop would have been unlawful (at least as the 4th Amendment applies to white folks) and no alleged gun had been seen before he yelled stop. 

3) Next, the white cop claims he saw a gun. Which one had the gun? Did he describe each teen? No details were provided as to how far away the cop was when he saw the gun (he obviously was not close enough to catch them) or how he observed the teen holding the gun and where the gun was. Remember, he did not see a gun at first -- so did the cop witness the teen pull the gun out as he ran? What part of the gun did the cop see? It was broad daylight so he should have some information. No details were provided about whether this cop saw the teen discard the gun - of course such detail would mean the cop knew the teen was not armed though when he shot him. Then the cop shot the teen in the back. Did he fire at all three? Like the white reporter said, "the mystery surrounds the gun?" or your own belief in the gun based on what the white cop said. Don't worry about the deceivers, they will always find suckers - just drop the belief.  

Hamilton said the gun police said was found at the scene was inside a car that pulled up next to the squad car after the incident unfolded. The driver of that car admitted he had a gun in the car and had come to the scene after he heard gunshots, Hamilton said. [this irrelevant information is used by the white media to confuse. Read it again.]

Hamilton said he held the press conference Wednesday to remain fully transparent with the public.