Who shot Ashli Babbitt?

“The Biden-Garland Justice Department and the Pelosi Congress have much to answer for the over the mishandling and cover-up of this scandalous killing of an American citizen by the U.S. Capitol Police.”

I don’t know what the venue will be or who will do the questioning but this is long over due.

Maybe McCarthy can hold house hearings on it in 2023 and 2024 and 2025…just like Benghazi

Then we will get to the bottom of it.

Allan

My link

He did not see anything in the female protester’s hands prior to the gunshot," the Internal Affairs Division report stated.

1 Like

Didnt WW already establish that “no gun no shot” does not apply?

No. @WorldWatcher offered an opinion rationalizing his desired outcome.

4 Likes

I thought he cited the DC governing codes which are different than your battlefield rules.

Which sense is required here…hearing…or vision? :sunglasses: :tumbler_glass:

Another report on an interview with a Capitol Police officer on Feb. 4 stated, “He did not hear any verbal commands” before Babbitt was shot.

This contradicts the self report issued and is a genuine problem for Cap PD. Video supports no verbal commands.

So not only was it a criminal shoot…Cap Police tried to cover it up.

3 Likes

Whaaaaaaat? Is there any conflict with investigating yourself for a potential crime?

3 Likes

He did. But it doesn’t fit the desired narrative for the ashli supporters.

Allan

Actaully WW posted the DC codes on use of lethal force. There is no requirement that a weapon be visible. That is not an opinion that is the law.

Secondly the law requires that the law enforcement officer have a reasonable belief that their actions are in the defense of themselves or other from serious bodily injury or death.

Given the totality of the circumstances and the violence the rioters displayed any reasonable person would be justified in protecting themselves and others from a demonstrably violent riot when the rioters breech a law enforcement barricade.

There were multiple barricades breeched and the one to the Speakers Lobby was the last line of defense with the entrance to the House Chamber just feet away. All other options had been exhausted at that moment in time.

WW

3 Likes

That should put the “no gun, no shoot” to rest…but it won’t because some people are not interested in facts.

As ashli climbed though a broken window though a barricaded speakers lobby.

Ya wanna see a picture.

Photographic evidence of that moment in time.

Allan

Problems is…just the opposite is happening.

There are questions. They will be asked.

No.

Sorry.

Reality is what is, not what you(c) want.

Sorry.

WW

One set of rules. Not special blue laws.

Yes, that is the problem that posters here continue to use “no gun, no shot” as the prevailing legal condition when it clearly is not. People will continue to post that despite it being incorrectly applied.

I’m fine with that. You may want to contact…

Council of the District of Columbia
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20004

#1 So will a reasonable belief of serious bodily injury or death to self or others be the standard you want to apply to civilians and law enforcement,

or

#2 Will it be that deadly force is not authorized unless the person has a firearm or explosive device visible prior to the use of deadly force.

That means that if someone breaks into a house at night:

  • Under #1 the homeowner can exercise their 2nd Amendment right to defend themselves when a reasonable person would perceive a threat.
  • Under #2 the homeowner cannot exercise their 2nd Amendment right unless they turn on the lights and the person breaking into their home clearly has a firearm visible.

WW

“Reasonable”

A reasonable person would not shoot an unarmed woman.

1 Like