Cops caught on camera 'executing' criminal (WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT)

Fudzy said:
I thought he was a security guard?
Click to expand...

Ooops, I think you are right. I might be thinking of that dude who killed the minister's son.
But anyway, this guy's actions here alone were serious enough to regard him as a serious threat.
 
LazyLion said:
Ooops, I think you are right. I might be thinking of that dude who killed the minister's son.
But anyway, this guy's actions here alone were serious enough to regard him as a serious threat.
Click to expand...

If you have a gun, and someone is shooting at you, you shoot back. What's the point in carrying a gun otherwise?
 
Fudzy said:
If you have a gun, and someone is shooting at you, you shoot back. What's the point in carrying a gun otherwise?
Click to expand...

Are you talking about the cops or this perp? Cos the video shows that this perp opened fire on the cops first...
 
LazyLion said:
Are you talking about the cops or this perp? Cos the video shows that this perp opened fire on the cops first...
Click to expand...

Either really. Both sides are defending themselves, one of them have the law on their side. Up to a point.
 
StrontiumDog said:
Perhaps the cops in that precinct had agreed beforehand to execute violent criminals if the opportunity presented itself?
Click to expand...

Good point especially given the amount of cops killed on duty. Gets worse when footage of cops getting killed go viral and end up at the precincts.

Creates a whole new mindset even for normally disciplined cops looking to abide by the law.
 
LazyLion said:
Ooops, I think you are right. I might be thinking of that dude who killed the minister's son.
But anyway, this guy's actions here alone were serious enough to regard him as a serious threat.
Click to expand...

He was already incapacitated, the cops had already defended themselves...anything after that is murder, irrespective of who is lying on the ground.
You cannot even justify doing that to a dog.
 
Cop 'execution' case postponed to Friday

JOHANNERSBURG – The presiding magistrate in the case against three Krugersdorp police officers accused of killing a suspected robber has postponed their bail application, saying he wants to consider all the factors first.

Titus Mabela, Jason Segole and Puleng Sebetwa were arrested and suspended earlier this month for allegedly killing Khulekani Mpanza, who was seen on CCTV video footage lying on a pavement before being shot.

A fourth accused, Dipuo Chipu, was charged with defeating the ends of justice and released on bail last week. Magistrate Keith Page first adjourned proceedings so that he could view video footage before making a decision on
Click to expand...

More at http://ewn.co.za/2015/11/10/Cop-execution-case-Case-postponed-until-Friday
 
I heard something interesting over the weekend from a Lawyer friend.

Apparently only unedited footage is allowed in court cases and it must have a time a date stamp on it. He says these recording from what he has seen does not have the time stamp and they are edited. However this doesn't mean the originals are not in the hands of the NPA. I didn't know that, I though normal CCTV footage would suffice. Not all CCTV cameras have a time stamp do they?
 
Pitbull said:
I heard something interesting over the weekend from a Lawyer friend.

Apparently only unedited footage is allowed in court cases and it must have a time a date stamp on it. He says these recording from what he has seen does not have the time stamp and they are edited. However this doesn't mean the originals are not in the hands of the NPA. I didn't know that, I though normal CCTV footage would suffice. Not all CCTV cameras have a time stamp do they?
Click to expand...

There are witness's in any event.
 
Pitbull said:
I heard something interesting over the weekend from a Lawyer friend.

Apparently only unedited footage is allowed in court cases and it must have a time a date stamp on it. He says these recording from what he has seen does not have the time stamp and they are edited. However this doesn't mean the originals are not in the hands of the NPA. I didn't know that, I though normal CCTV footage would suffice. Not all CCTV cameras have a time stamp do they?
Click to expand...

Should be a setting to enable or disable.
 
Pitbull said:
I heard something interesting over the weekend from a Lawyer friend.

Apparently only unedited footage is allowed in court cases and it must have a time a date stamp on it. He says these recording from what he has seen does not have the time stamp and they are edited. However this doesn't mean the originals are not in the hands of the NPA. I didn't know that, I though normal CCTV footage would suffice. Not all CCTV cameras have a time stamp do they?
Click to expand...

the dvr implements the time stamp on an analogue system like that appears to be. or nvr on a basic ip system. In either event it is a setting generally. surely there is more to it than that anyway, i.e what stops someone from editing a timestamp in? forensic experts probably know what to look forr and use meta data and software tools and what not.
 
Pitbull said:
I heard something interesting over the weekend from a Lawyer friend.

Apparently only unedited footage is allowed in court cases and it must have a time a date stamp on it. He says these recording from what he has seen does not have the time stamp and they are edited. However this doesn't mean the originals are not in the hands of the NPA. I didn't know that, I though normal CCTV footage would suffice. Not all CCTV cameras have a time stamp do they?
Click to expand...

The originals with time stamp are available.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qf5Uz25ecc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X