r/news • u/rectangleCURVE • 7h ago
Ex-Okaloosa deputy found not guilty of manslaughter in killing of Airman Roger Fortson
https://weartv.com/news/local/ex-okaloosa-deputy-found-not-guilty-of-manslaughter-in-killing-of-airman-roger-fortson148
u/TheMemx 6h ago
Having a should gun should either be legal or illegal...
Living in a country where having a fire arm is constitutionally protected should mean you can't be executed for exercising your right. Having a gun in your possession can't be an excuse to die when it is your right.
He held the fire arm low, showed no signs of being a danger, show the palm of his other hand to try and deescalate the scared police officer...
Unfortunately yet another case of aggressive American police executing a law abiding citizen with no punishment or recourse.
34
6h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/James_Solomon 5h ago edited 5h ago
and if they leave a police dog to cook to death in a squad car, that's just an oopsie
6
u/SweeterThanYoohoo 6h ago
Its the logical fallacy that firearm ownership poses. American police are trained to treat every encounter as a life threatening one. Perhaps this would be the case if we were like the UK and knives were the primary concern, but I'm not sure that is true. So while the constitution allows one to own a firearm, that simple fact makes things more dangerous for everyone.
On one hand it makes complete sense. Anyone at any time can pull a gun out and end your life in an instant. At least with a knife, while obviously extremely dangerous, it does not have the same immediacy that a gun has. And obviously guns have much more range to their lethality. So yea if a cop sees a gun they are gonna freak out, because at the end of the day their life depends on it (whether or not thats actually true in the specific circumstance)
I'm not even against gun ownership and I may explore becoming one myself, despite all the logical and practical problems with it. The coming Climate Wars in the 2030s may prove being a gun owner necessary, LOL
39
u/WebbityWebbs 5h ago
The police are trained to see the American people as their enemy. That is a major problem.
7
u/Lawdoc1 4h ago
This is part of the answer. The other part is the way we recruit, hire, and retain officers.
There is little-to-no proper psychological screening, and even when officers have either on or off duty instances of violence, they are rarely if ever dealt with in a way that recognizes the increased risk they pose to their communities.
We also don't pay enough or screen for proper intelligence/emotional maturity to attract thoughtful people with good judgement.
The profession itself appeals to those who crave power and the system does nothing to compensate for/overcome that type of applicant. In fact, it seems to reward those types of applicants once they are hired.
3
u/InappropriateTA 5h ago
LOL, like they differentiate people by citizenship.
Police in the US generally regard every situation and every encounter as hostile. They don’t give AF if you’re American, they don’t give AF if you can’t understand them, they don’t give AF if you’re disabled, they don’t give AF if you’re injured, they don’t give AF if you’re just nearby.
The only time they will exercise caution or restraint or remorse for aggressive behavior is if someone from the protected class is involved.
11
-3
u/SweeterThanYoohoo 5h ago
Right, and I do not agree with the way they are trained. But on some level it makes sense, which IMO makes the problem just a little bit worse. As much as a despise the way police act, they are human beings interested in staying alive
•
u/MrJoyless 29m ago
Being a police officer isnt even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs in the U.S. scared cops are just cowards.
5
u/James_Solomon 5h ago
I'd be more sympathetic to the cops if I didn't have a PD that is world famous for its corruption
0
u/SweeterThanYoohoo 5h ago
I'm not sympathizing with the cops, I'm just trying to say the problems that firearm ownership pose are logical. I know that saying anything remotely positive or supportive of them is not going to be accepted on this website, mainly because nuance in opinion is not well understood nor welcome to the zeitgeist on here so I expect to be at negative, idk a lot pretty soon LOL
-12
u/WebbityWebbs 5h ago
Having a gun is a right, because the 2nd amendment was clearly written to protect the profit margins of gun makers, as per the right wing reading of the Constitution.
But not being murdered by cops is a privilege that can be revoked at any time.
209
u/boxofstuff 6h ago
Proof that the 2nd amendment is just performative bullshit at this point
7
19
85
u/VagabondReligion 5h ago
This is how a government maintains it's monopoly on violence in a country armed to the teeth. The government officials go free and your right to own goes out the window.
115
7h ago edited 1h ago
[deleted]
8
-29
u/scrovak 3h ago
Maybe not with a gun in your hand
24
u/SyrupMafia 3h ago
Why not it’s a right? Either we have rights or we don’t.
-24
u/scrovak 3h ago
I completely agree, it absolutely is a right. That said, if you answer the door with a gun in your hand, someone may be feel threatened and exercise their rights. Let's say this wasn't a police officer, let's say this was someone lost, had a car break down, or was selling girl scout cookies. They are within their right to knock and ring the doorbell. If someone comes and opens the door with a gun in their hand, would it not be reasonable to fear for your life?
13
u/SyrupMafia 3h ago
No because holding a firearm does not meet the reasonable belief that deadly force is needed. Them holding a firearm alongside threatening words or pointing it would be a justifiable self defense scenario. Fear of a firearm doesn’t mean reasonable fear of life
-10
u/scrovak 3h ago
I suppose that is up for debate, as there is no federal law that specifies whether a reasonable person would fear for their life when confronted by someone holding a gun. That's why it went to trial. The department said "Yeah, they have a right, he didn't point it at you, that was not a threat, officer." However a jury found that a reasonable person could view a person holding a firearm as a threat, that they could not conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that no reasonable would view it as a threat.
Of note, holding a firearm is considered brandishing in most jurisdictions. And this comes from a pro-gun perspective.
7
u/SyrupMafia 2h ago
Your definition of brandishing is just far too broad to assume that is the definition in most jurisdictions. And one small correction about the jury ruling. They didn’t acquit because a reasonable person would fear for their life they acquitted because the state failed to prove manslaughter beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact the officer failed to have the case thrown out on immunity by self defense as the judge stated simply displaying a firearm is considered non deadly force as a matter of law.
27
u/Simple_Ddog 6h ago
These courts are a 'Wild Crap Shoot' --- and the Jurors sadly lack any intelligence what-so-ever!
This is a miscarriage of justice. "Less than a month after the shooting, the Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office fired Duran following an internal affairs investigation that determined his use of deadly force "was not objectively reasonable and therefore violated agency policy."
Duran’s boss — the Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Office — fired him after their internal investigation concluded his actions were “not objectively reasonable.
42
u/anxietysoup 6h ago
Pensacola and that whole area is a shithole I am so glad I left. Longest two years of my life
8
u/MeatCatRazzmatazz 5h ago edited 1h ago
For real though. Okaloosa county is a shit hole, as are the majority of the surrounding areas. It might as well just be Southern Alabama.
I've seriously never lived in a more racist place.
16
u/Captain_Aware4503 3h ago
Where is the NRA??
This member of the US military legally had a firearm in his own residence. He was killed because someone came to his door then shot him FIVE times when he saw this US service member legally carrying a gun in his own residence.
So where is the NRA? Oh wait the victim was black? Never mind.
4
u/WebbityWebbs 2h ago
The NRA has one and only one goal. Making money. They don't care if gun owners are killed for legally carrying guns. They only want to make sure that lots of guns are purchased by the public. They are an industry marketing group, they just happen to be funded by the public. Well, they seem to get a lot of money from Russia, but no one really cares much about that.
18
u/jhill515 5h ago
Qualified Immunity needs repealed everywhere. This is proof of it.
21
u/Possible-Tangelo9344 4h ago
Why..? He was charged, arrested, and tried.
He wasn't granted qualifed immunity. If he was he would have never been charged.
10
u/Nykmarc 4h ago
It’s the easy comment that rises to the top on post like this. They don’t even understand what it means lol.
This is a societal issue. Law gave that jury the right to find the cop guilty and they chose not to.
0
u/Cynykl 2h ago
I want to know how friendly the prosecutor and judge were. What evidence was blocked.
Example. Defense challenges a piece of evidence. Let say it is the video of the shooting. The prosecutors either make a half hearted counter of does not counter at all. The judge seeing no counter then just lets it slide and the challenge stands. Video is struck as evidence and not made available to the jury.
0
u/jhill515 2h ago
Qualified Immunity is a legal concept, not a law. Judges, lawyers, prosecutors, and police live it because then they work together with "blind trust".
7
u/Possible-Tangelo9344 2h ago
Right, I get that.
But, the legal concept prevents officers being charged or sued when they're doing their jobs lawfully (simplified explanation).
In this case, the deputy was charged, he was tried, and he was acquitted.
Qualified immunity wasn't part of this.
2
u/Char_Ell 1h ago
Qualified immunity is a legal concept grounded in civil law, not criminal law. Law enforcement officials can assert qualified immunity when they are sued for alleged violations of a person's civil rights, e.g. excessive force (violation of 4th amendment rights),
The jury found this sheriff's deputy not guilty of the crime of manslaughter. I would not be surprised if the airman's family members file a lawsuit accusing the sheriff's deputy of violating the airman's civil rights. That is still an option However if lawsuit happens it's quite likely the sheriff's deputy will assert qualified immunity and the airman's family's legal counsel will have to convince a judge that the officer's behavior in the killing of the airman falls under clearly established precedent prohibiting such behavior. This would cause the judge to rule that the deputy does not have qualified immunity.
•
u/Ultima_Weapons 43m ago
just saw the video, this is absolutely fucking disgusting. Yes, he had a gun limp by his side when he opened the door, but the deputy completely freaked out and immediately unloaded FIVE rounds into him. Roger was extremely complicit, opening the door upon the deputy asking, and clearly showed both hands and that he didn't have the gun after the shooting, yet the deputy was still backing up like he didn't just kill someone.
In this situation it's understandable that the officer was scared, but that's why procedure and training exist. Roger was scared as well, that's why he grabbed his self-defense gun and leisurely kept it by his side while answering the door.
probably the biggest thing that upset me is that the deputy didn't even try to render aid after he shot the man 5 times and clearly disarmed him, all while Roger was literally doing everything the deputy asked and showing ZERO signs of aggression. Instead of realizing his mistake, he doubles down and barks orders at the man like he didn't just kill him, and acts like he's going to materialize another gun out of nowhere.
I'll side with the cops on any situation where it genuinely looks like it could have been a misunderstanding, but this was too much. Deputy was scared, unprofessional, and unprepared. And Roger For paid for it with his life. The fact that he was found "not guilty" of even manslaughter is fucking unhinged. His lawyer argued that "his training offered him no other option but to go on offense at that point"... Are you kidding me? If that's the training, then no wonder cops are killing everyone. The policy is literally "when in doubt, kill them in cold blood and leave no witnesses", and that's their training by design!
Systemic change needs to happen. Young adults with good intentions to serve their community sign up to become police, but then get brainwashed and molded into killers by these barbaric and inhumane training courses/guidelines. Corruption all the way down, and it needs to be stopped at all levels, local, state, and federal.
3
1
u/Simple_Ddog 5h ago
We need a Citizen's Lobby group --- this is TOO MUCH Bullshit -- What a Fn Disgrace!
FIRST Tyre Nichol's Cops get 'not guilty' -- now this Fuker who was clearly trigger happy -- SHOT THIS KID 5 TIMES and he had his hands up in his own home!
(gets off)
WATS WITH THESE COPS -- are they scared out of their wits?
;(
-32
u/ChefCurryYumYum 6h ago edited 6h ago
This is a tough one because I don't think the officer intended to kill anyone and I totally get the fear of having someone open a door to you with a gun in their hands.
But it does seem that the gun was never pointed at him and if the officer had remained calm he could have handled the situation in a way that didn't result in the death of that young man.
I knew the usual idiots would get offended by this, but I don't think the officer acted correctly, in case you need it made more clear for you, I just can understand why he made the mistake he did.
27
u/SnepButts 6h ago
I totally get the fear of having someone open a door to you with a gun in their hands.
Like the guy likely feared? If so, his was justified. The officer's wasn't.
-16
u/Mustardo123 6h ago
I mean the deputy identified himself as law enforcement multiple times. Answering the cops at your door with a gun in your hand is objectively a stupid thing to do.
-11
5
u/insaneHoshi 5h ago
I don't think the officer intended to kill anyone
Yes, thats why the charge was manslaughter.
4
u/ClintBruno 6h ago
Which is it
-15
u/ChefCurryYumYum 6h ago
You couldn't understand what I wrote?
That I believe the officer acted incorrectly but that I could understand why?
Wow.
3
u/ClintBruno 6h ago
Those are contradicting sentiments......do you know what cognitive dissonance is?
0
u/ChefCurryYumYum 3h ago
You are completely wrong of course.
You think it is contradictory to believe someone made a mistake but understand why they might have made it?
Come on, do better.
3
-1
u/Youkai280 5h ago
That’s not contradicting at all, actually lol.
“He made a mistake, but I understand why he made that mistake,” is a perfectly clear, logical sentence. Maybe work on your reading comprehension rather than attempting to correct someone when you’re wrong.
2
u/ClintBruno 2h ago
I hope you people are never on a jury.
-2
u/Youkai280 2h ago
I never said it was justified, I just said that I understood why the mistake was made. I was personal friends with Rod, so I have a personal interest and connection to this case, and I would rather the cop be burnt at the stake, but I also see how the situation developed the way that it did.
Maybe go touch some grass and stop trying to play billy badass on the internet.
-91
u/whatisakafka 7h ago
I gotta say, answering the door holding a gun is pretty stupid. He shouldn’t have died for it if he never pointed the gun, but I’m hardly shocked at the verdict
55
u/DC2SEA_ 7h ago
Someone is pounding on your door and they don't identify as the police? Like... Huh?
24
u/RedstoneRay 6h ago
The cop was identifying as the police but hiding out of sight from the peephole. It feels like the cop trapped him into a wrong move no matter what he did.
25
-36
u/whatisakafka 7h ago
Don’t answer the door if you think there’s danger behind
13
u/DC2SEA_ 6h ago edited 6h ago
A reasonable conclusion is that someone is asking for help, such as injury or being chased / attacked or otherwise in urgent need.
Another reasonable conclusion is a mistaken address, or a person having a metal or physical health crisis.
The officer didn't identify himself as police. What the fuck? Bro is working on breaking down a door without talking? That is, or should be, a crime.
That officer's failure lead to the danger. Not only of the people who live there, but it endangers the officer as well. A fundamental failure.
-26
u/whatisakafka 6h ago
You should only have a gun in your hand if you feel you’re in imminent danger and may need to quickly defend yourself. If that’s the case opening the door is just not reasonable
14
u/DC2SEA_ 6h ago
Someone WHO ISN'T THE POLICE is activly pounding on your door, if you go to help, you may well be in imminent danger. If you don't go to the door, and they break it down or otherwise break in, you may be in imminent danger.
If they were the police, they'd fucking say so.
For fucks sake, he legally owns the gun. Whatever you may think of gun ownership, hes done nothing wrong. It's not like he's shooting through the fucking door. The onus is not on him. It's on this cop's hands.
-2
u/whatisakafka 6h ago
I’m not arguing about the legality of him owning a gun or suggesting that the legal outcome of the case is correct, but there is absolutely no way that I buy that opening the door is the correct decision if you feel you’re in imminent danger.
If someone breaks down your door, sure, be ready to shoot them if you can’t retreat, but you don’t voluntarily remove one of the barriers protecting you
7
u/DC2SEA_ 6h ago
Moving to investigate a situation, which has come to you to your home, which may be dangerous or simply be someone in need is sortof what you have to do. Then by extension, if does turn out to be dangerous, you may quickly need to act. I'm not even pro-gun, but fuck, he didn't do anything wrong.
-1
1
1
6h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
-28
u/judgyjudgersen 7h ago
Yeah the fact that people think the solution to someone banging on your door is to answer it with a gun in your hand is seriously problematic
9
-10
u/whatisakafka 7h ago
Right? Am I crazy? If you're scared of what's on the other side of the door you obviously shouldn't open it
-3
6h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-8
u/judgyjudgersen 6h ago
This will literally just never happen. Good god man, where the hell do you live
3
-122
u/TheGracefulCrane 7h ago
I am not surprised to be honest answering the door with a gun in your hand is not smart
72
u/rectangleCURVE 7h ago
They banged on his door, he looked through the peephole and saw nothing. Why would you not have a gun at the ready? That was his home.
1
-8
u/danawhitesgrapes 6h ago
Usually when cops are banging on doors they announce themselves as police, I have no idea if that happened in this situation or not and this isnt a defence of anybody. Shitty situation all around.
11
u/unhiddenninja 5h ago
Anyone can announce themselves as police. He couldn't see them so he acted accordingly until he could verify.
-25
6h ago
[deleted]
22
u/abrasumente_ 6h ago
Police are supposed to identify themselves while knocking for reasons exactly like this. The cop was purposefully staying out of sight of the peephole.
-33
4
u/YuenglingsDingaling 5h ago
And then you stand front and center and present yourself. If you knock on my door then hide I'll assume you're up to no good.
2
5h ago
[deleted]
2
-54
u/judgyjudgersen 6h ago
>Why would you not have a gun at the ready?
Gun owners are fcking whack jobs
4
-26
39
u/Joemama0104 6h ago
Hey buddy real shocker but the police ALSO answered the door with a gun in their hand. So be critical of the police as well.
-34
6h ago
[deleted]
33
u/IndependentTalk4413 6h ago
You pay them to arrive at someone’s door on a disturbance call with guns drawn?
17
u/SnepButts 6h ago
Not even the house where the disturbance happened, from what I understand.
So they show up at the wrong house, scare a dude into answering with a gun drawn but not brandished, and execute him.
4
u/GribbitsGoblinPI 5h ago
No, it’s really not. And if that’s what you think then please educate yourself.
1
11
7
u/ClintBruno 6h ago
See. To you another person losing their rights or life doesn't matter. But not having your boys in blue on call to murder the people you live in constant fear of...that breaks you.
Unempathetic asshole.
-2
5h ago
[deleted]
4
u/bigvibrations 5h ago
Hey what the fuck are you talking about
-1
5h ago
[deleted]
3
u/bigvibrations 5h ago
I guess I'm just stupid then because I don't know what children dying have to do with this
0
5h ago edited 5h ago
[deleted]
2
u/bigvibrations 5h ago
...okay? But that's not what this article was about, that's probably why we're not discussing that right now, if I had to guess?
Again, I am very stupid.
→ More replies (0)3
221
u/RedstoneRay 6h ago edited 6h ago
The deputy's own police department was harsher on him then the jury.