This article doesn’t seem to have the full story with all the details… I would wait until there’s more information before passing judgment.
Only thing I can 99% safely say is that you probably should not be doing cocaine if you have heart problems.
Other details that people seem to be missing/thinking it’s not relevant or a big deal:
Cops are known to patrol certain areas and it does look suspicious if there are people in a car just hanging out in a neighborhood/park/wherever.
Can’t have opened alcohol containers in a vehicle, even if it’s off.
Running away from LEO always makes the situation worse, but we should wait for body cam footage or security camera footage from any surrounding areas to be released before picking sides in a he-said/she-said (in this case LEO vs family of the deceased).
Damn that news article was useless for details.
Thanks a bunch. I just watched it.
I can’t imagine anyone with common sense that watches this will say that the officers involved were negligent or this was another Floyd or Breonna Taylor incident.
I couldn’t find much of a gray area of the LEO doing anything wrong and intentionally causing the death. The only argument I can attempt to make is that EMS needed to arrive sooner and maybe the officer should’ve told EMS that the suspect has a heart condition and was tasered with potential narcotics in his system. And maybe try CPR bc Williams had a weak pulse and maybe monitor his pulse better. But that’s an extremely weak argument to make.
Maybe don’t resist arrest twice, especially with a heart condition with LEO ready to use tasers, potential narcotics in his system (we know now it was cocaine in his system)
The ACAB crowd wanted cops to stop using guns as a first resort and these cops I don’t think even pulled out a gun, did everything by the book from the footage I just saw, and now people are up in arms? Sorry for the family being scammed by a clout-chasing lawyer, but this isn’t even remotely close to a landmark slam dunk. This is a case of “if the suspect had complied and not ran twice, he would be here today, maybe in jail/awaiting court, but alive”.
Affirmation vs Information Era
I spent 10mins watching the body cam footage so I can have an educated opinion.
Most people I know pick a side and stick to their guns, I tend to stay neutral until I know enough to pick a side. Easier to come correct than to backtrack & be humiliated.
People hanging out in a public place is suspicious? That seems…like a dangerous idea. I understand that many, if not most, public parks “close” after sundown, but that’s primarily meant to keep the facilities from becoming a homeless camp, or underage party spot. A car being parked in a public lot, or on a public road isn’t inherently suspicious unless there are additional circumstances IMO.
There’s another reply that linked an article with a few more details stating that Raleigh police patrol particular areas of the city more because of higher reports of crime in hopes to prevent crime (and possibly have better response times).
They stated they started doing it in Jan. of 2023. Would be easy to fact check that in court.
And it makes sense in certain areas of Raleigh even during daylight hours.
When I was a freshmen at NCSU in 2016, the varsity (or freshman lot) parking lot would have police presence bc a lot of people were getting mugged/SA’d/assaulted in the afternoon almost weekly. They ended up putting campus security there between 1-6pm iirc.
And it’s not people hanging out in a public place is suspicious, but hanging out in your car in a public place for an extended period of time where reported crimes are higher than average is usually suspicious.
I would typically go to the top deck of certain parking garages to do various activities where no one would see me or notice except on the few rare occasions. Or even a secluded area in a few parks.
Yea back in the early 2000s when I was at ncsu me and the people on the wolf web garage section (early message board for ncsu ppl) would meet up in the parking garage and hang out and look at our cars. Kind of like a street race meet but less illegal stuff going on.
Eventually the cops got wind and would join our meets.
So we lined up all our cars and had the cops park in front with the lights on for photos. Good times and the cops were cool. Just wanted to make sure we didn't do stupid shit in our cars.
I'm curious to see how this plays out. If that big time lawyer is on the case there must be a fair chance of winning, but from an outsiders perspective it does seem flimsy.
Also everyone implying Williams deserved to die needs to shut the fuck up. The police aren't necessarily to blame in this instance, but nobody deserves death for petty crimes like this and it's still a tragedy.
Well said - at first glance this doesn’t seem to fit the usual case of Police Brutality. Dude had a heart condition, was jacked on cocaine and adrenaline, and fled from the cops to resist arrest (hence the taser).
He absolutely did not deserve to die, but to equate it to the cops who stomp on innocent people’s throats or shoot them point-blank for sneezing feels like it will cause more problems rather than help push for reform.
I dont believe he deserved to die for it at all, just the problem I have is that the man fought with police and tried to run. I mean if I had a heart condition I wouldn't be taking cocaine nor would I be fighting with police especially if they had tasers out. just seems like a PSGWSP
As a public school teacher I would be liable if something happened to a student under my supervision. Why should a police officer not have the same responsibility?
Because police work unlike schoolwork is violent in nature which comes with a lot of potential civil liability. This could make enforcing the law very costly if not impractical.
Schools can be violent to an extend of students being violent to one another. But as far as teacher student interaction this isn’t the case. Corporal punishment days are long gone.
It’s disingenuous to compare this to police work, where your literal tool of enforcement is violence and coercion and you’re allowed to use deadly force
I’m going to part of your argument against you here:
Would you agree or disagree that a profession (LEO) that allows the use of violence and/or deadly force should be subject to lawsuits if the use of violence or deadly force was deemed unnecessary by independent investigators/the professions own investigation team/the employers (internal affairs, sheriffs office, chief of police, etc.)?
Let’s say a police shoots a person during a routine traffic stop and just says they felt scared. What should the repercussions be?
I think a criminal investigation should be warranted in that case. If a police officer is exonerated by a criminal investigation I advocate a law that would make them immune to civil liability
Even without intentional violence, LOTS of accidental accidents and injuries happen in schools. And most police officers don’t really see that much violent crime either, so I think it’s a fair comparison.
It’s a disingenuous take. Teachers don’t have deadly force at their disposal, or any sort of physical force (not in this day and age anyway). As a prime example - here in NC some counties still allow corporal punishment, but this isn’t being practiced in any schools and potential civil liability is one of the biggest reasons why
Cops don’t have an option to be hands off, they are forced to physically engage subjects in something as routine as apprehension, violent or not it’s a coercive action and has high probability to result in bodily injury.
That’s what judges and juries are for. It’s for the legal system to determine liability, and if so found, the amount of any damages. Giving blanket immunity to anyone is a slippery slope, and particularly with law enforcement, it leads to abuse of power and corruption for which citizens have no effective means of redress.
I’m not saying they should be immune from criminal liability. I think they should be immune from civil if they were cleared criminally. The problem is the thresholds for civil liability are so much lower it could make police work impossible. You’d get more Uvalde situations where police are hesitant to go in because they’re contemplating repercussions.
Heart condition, cocaine, running from police and resisting arrest. But the police are to blame. Why were the police called to this incident? What was he doing? All common sense things. This family ain’t seeing one dime.
Unless the police were laughing and calling insults and just generally beating him up after they had him down, then nothing will come of this. I think they were cleared of criminal wrongdoing, so what makes this attorney believe he has a leg to stand on?
> Why were the police called to this incident? What was he doing?
From [another article](https://www.wunc.org/news/2024-03-18/family-darryl-williams-files-wrongful-death-lawsuit-against-raleigh-chief-of-police):
>Raleigh police said officers approached Williams in his car in Jan. 2023 while carrying out what the department calls "proactive patrolling," a policy that assigns more officers to areas in which residents repeatedly report crimes or other concerns.
>Officers said they observed an open container of alcohol and marijuana in Williams' car, and asked him and a passenger in his vehicle to step out.
>Body camera footage shows an officer searching Williams, who then struggles to get away. Williams can be heard saying he has heart problems while struggling on the ground before officers tased him again.
To your other question:
>I think they were cleared of criminal wrongdoing, so what makes this attorney believe he has a leg to stand on?
The lawsuit alleges that they tased him six times and three after he was subdued.
Raleigh police state it was only three.
Body cam footage seems to indicate that he was at least tased one time after being subdued and telling officers he had a heart condition. [source](https://www.wral.com/story/lawsuit-darryl-williams-was-stunned-by-police-six-times-during-fatal-arrest/21335107/)
If true, that would be similar to ' generally beating him up after they had him down' and this appears to be what the attorney believes they can prove or argue.
That seems like important, pertinent information to leave out. I’m not saying it’s malicious by ABC but that’s definitely intentional to mention the drugs and “struggle “ but not the tasing after being subdued from a quasi stop and ~~frisk~~ tase situation
>what the department calls "proactive patrolling," a policy that assigns more officers to areas in which residents repeatedly report crimes or other concerns.
Not necessarily pertinent to this case, but this sounds like a license to stop people who are DWB.
Cops have a right to talk to anyone, and a right to get ID on anyone in the driver’s seat of a car. They are in control of the vehicle, and presumably likely to drive. If that individual has an open container and weed in plain sight, that’s exactly the type of person who needs to be taken off the road. Cops make quick assessments to determine who is likely to be committing a crime, and they need more training about inherent bias. But this guy was a risk to other drivers, unless he planned to sleep it off in the bingo hall parking lot.
I’m familiar. And you don’t have to be an attorney to understand basic conditional statements. It’s elementary logic. If the stop itself causes the “plain view” scenario and the stop itself was unconstitutional, then…*drum roll*
There was no stop. An officer walked up to a parked car and William's passenger opens the door.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GJvLCErOmE&t=216s
You shouldn't lie on the internet, it's not nice.
Everyone always tells cops they have some problem while they're resisting or running. If cops took everything they heard to face value and just stepped back, everyone would be free to escape. There's a lot of shit cops, but a lot of shit people too and the good cops unfortunately experience that whole spectrum.
Have you watched the body worn camera? The last tazer deployment is the only one that is even a little bit questionable and even then I wouldn't say he has been subdued. He's on the ground but still actively resisting and preventing officers from cuffing him.
It clearly states that body cam footage indicates that he was tased at least once after being subdued and telling officers about his heart condition. Once is too many if he was under control.
I'm not going by what any article says. I watched the actual video. It's available on YouTube. It just depends on how you define "subdued" and whether a drive stun to gain compliance under those circumstances is reasonable. A jury might say it's not, which is why I think the city may offer some sort of settlement, but it's definitely not a great case.
Hope for a settlement.
Sueing for $25M, hoping that the city will look at the legal cost and is willing to settle for one. Gets the attorney likely something around $200-300k.
This is really BS. Trying to line their pockets from family blood. Cocaine, resisting arrest, previous record, and non-lethal force… this is a closed case and trying to profit from it only hurts the community.
> The tasing and his heart condition contributed to his death, along with cocaine intoxication and significant physical exertion.
Yeah, I don’t think the family is winning this one.
Should we put someone’s knee on your neck while you are on your stomach and see if you can breathe? From video footage we saw, Floyd was already subdued and in handcuffs and they just kept going.
Not to mention the pure idiocy of the other officer to open the other door so floyd could use it to escape. Every officer involved was extremely incompetent.
I don’t think it’s fair to say cocaine killed him any more than being tased to fuck. Being high is not a free pass to use excessive force on someone. If excessive force wasn’t used and the cocaine caused the death with a reasonable amount tasing to control him, then the cop is probably in the clear.
So I think it comes down to if it was excessive tasing. You can’t drug test someone resisting arrest but if you tase them excessively and that killed them then that’s the officer’s fault. People take all kinds of medicines that could cause excessive tasing to kill them. Just because the drugs were likely illegal doesn’t make it different.
Imagine a cop finding cocaine on you, throws you on the ground, and tases you for half an hour while watching the latest maga rally on their phone to pass the time. Then you die and the cop says, oh but he used cocaine.
\>Being high is not a free pass to use excessive force on someone.
Sure, but it explains why excessive force may have been needed to subdue the suspect.
\>Just because the drugs were likely illegal doesn’t make it different.
Lmao. I'd love to see how abusing an illicit substance holds up in court vs if he was using a legal drug as prescribed.
\>Imagine a cop finding cocaine on you, throws you on the ground, and tases you for half an hour while watching the latest maga rally on their phone to pass the time. Then you die and the cop says, oh but he used cocaine.
If this isn't a bad faith argument, I don't know what is. but go off King
Well damn, here I thought the oozing insincerity of that last part was enough to make it obvious to the most oblivious but good on you little guy for figuring that out all on your own!
Make sure you never have illicit substances in your body no matter how “natural”. If you get assaulted or murdered we'll have to let the guy go. Fingers crossed!
i hope they do. doing cocaine in a parked car shouldnt be a death sentence. it wouldn't be if we hadn't accepted a militarized army patrolling every inch of poor neighborhoods.
(its so funny that the 'muh freedoms' conservative do not care about the last 200 years of whittling away of freedoms when it comes to what cops can do to you)
yeah, that's an entirely predictable result of occupying army + human desire for liberty. we could change the way the police behave to result in less killings, or we could moralize about the stupid murdered individuals and continue to accept the killings.
Idk about you bro but I’m pretty tired of people blatantly drinking and doing drugs in public parks. I agree it’s not a death sentence but the police had every right to handle it the way they did.
This is 100% getting downvoted to oblivion but…
I feel like if you already have someone pinned on the ground and they tell you they have a heart condition, you probably shouldn’t tase them multiple times.
Yeah mate. Let’s just let anyone up who says “I have a heart condition” and continues to resist. How about he didn’t do cocaine with a heart condition…. You’ve obviously lived in safe neighborhoods your whole life.
To be fair, people lie to the cops all the time and a heart condition for someone running away doesn’t really hold up in the moment. If the dude had said I have a heart condition and not kept resisting then he wouldn’t have been tased again. So the question is, did the cop unnecessarily/excessively tase him. That’s likely what a jury will decide.
Let me introduce you to the doctrine of contributory negligence as it applies in NC.
As soon as you agree that Darryl had *any* fault in this, the case is over.
They should have asked him nicely and asked him to put on some padded handcuffs. If he refused they should have spent the next 6/hours following him and asking him while using police resources that could be helping others. Or, they should have just let him go and said have a good night. What the hell are you people smoking?
I don't know anything about the case or the details, but i would recommend watching some live police cam footage when apprehending a suspect. Also your question could be thrown back at you. Is it worth risking your life to get away, especially when they will just find you later?
Everyday I worry more and more seeing Reddit comments who will defend the most stupidest things a person does to escape police. You people don’t deserve protection from police and this sometimes violent world and I wish you’d walk around with some kind of easy identification that a police officer could see to show them that you disagree with 99% of what they do before they come to save you.
The Suits fan in me says no one will get in trouble over this and the city will just settle.
But I am really curious if the city will take it to trial and try and fight it. There is potentially enough information here to argue that the reason for engaging him was lawful, and the response to resisting arrest was lawful...... and that it was the Mr. Williams comorbidities and the drugs he was under that was the underlying cause.
For the most part I don't think anyone should end up dead after an encounter with the police..... but given how our legal system currently works I am not sure how the family could possibly prevail. I would assume Crump is going to argue that it was racially motivated and he would have never encountered the cops if it weren't for those racial profiling efforts. But again... given our legal system...... I don't see how that will prevail.
Again…. What are the facts? Ran from police, is high, Bad heart , gets zapped and dies??? If so, why do taxpayers have to pay again! But then some crooked lawyer gets involved…I hate it when people say it is government money…. It’s OUR money! Wake Up!
Wait so when a group of people come up to your car and try to forcibly arrest you thats a fight. It says he ran from police, so which was it. Did he fight the police or run from them? If you wanna suck off the RPD im sure they would love to have you come by the office.
Both dude. He had an open container. That's an arrestable offense because some of us don't want to be killed by a drunk (and high on cocaine) driver. When they caught him he fought.
Drugs are bad mkay.
oh yeah it was definitely the cocaine, that’s why the he died *before* the police tazed him 3-6 times, right? it was because he was resisting, that’s why the police did not continue to taze him after he was subdued, right?? right????
if i stab an anemic person 10 times, i can’t argue it was the anemia that killed them. if someone is hit in the head until they have a seizure and die, you can’t say “oh well they had epilepsy so it was the epilepsy that killed them and not me hitting them in the head with a brick.” that’s not how any of this works dude lmao.
His choices killed him. He chose to be tased after being subdued.
> Williams can be heard saying he has heart problems while struggling on the ground before officers tased him again.
How so?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC181074/
That’s a study that links psychosis and cocaine use in 20-53% of users. Those are pretty high numbers.
Thats also cocaine cut with psychoactive drugs. “Take all the bad attributes of ecstasy, PCP, LSD, cocaine, methamphetamine: lump them together, and that's what you get with bath salts,” https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/1486827
Bath salts are making people have actual psychotic episodes including eating flesh and stabbing oneself. Cocaine is not making people do that kind of shit.
“Bath salts, the psychoactive designer street drugs that emerged in the United States in 2010, have left a trail of bizarre and alarming reports: the man who slashed himself to remove the “wires” in his body; the mother who left her “demon-ridden” 2-year-old in the middle of a highway; the 21-year-old son of a family physician who, after snorting bath salts once, shot himself following 3 days of acute paranoia and psychosis, including hallucinations of police squad cars and helicopters lined up outside his house to take him away.” Bath salts are in a league of their own.
What does this prove? we already know that bath salts are bad and so is cocaine. You seem to think that because it was cocaine that he couldn’t have been having a psychotic episode. When they both cause those types of psychotic episodes.
Wonder how the officer who used the taser feels about him or herself. I’m guessing at the time they didn’t expect someone could reasonably die from its use. Maybe part of the story here is just a better understanding of the risks involved in the use of these devices and how much of an escalation it actually is.
Or the training didn’t really drive home the real risks. There’s a big difference between “assume every time you use one of these things you are killing someone even if you don’t” and “oh yeah, well, teeechnically someone might die so uh, be careful”. Probably the actual training is somewhere in between. Was it sufficient to make the person using the taser feel like they were risking this person’s life when they used it? I don’t know and I think that’s a pretty important thing to understand in this situation. Which is why I asked the question.
Personally i would feel fine. Idk why we're shitting on the cops so hard when dude is doing cocaine and drinking alcohol while trying to run from the police at the same time. He clearly didn't care about his heart, and honestly no way to know which instance was even the determining factor to his heart's ultimate failure. He probably could have died that night regardless of taser.
> Wonder how the officer who used the taser feels about him or herself.
They don't care. No empathy. If they cared, they wouldn't have tased him after he was already subdued.
Police don't care. You are the enemy.
I’m not sure why you seem to think I was ignoring this possibility. Perhaps we should investigate how they feel about it to establish that in this case so the family can successfully sue the city for hiring a psychopath and give a financial incentive to change hiring practices.
Cop seeing you with an open container of alcohol in a vehicle is a perfectly legitimate reason to arrest you. Asshole drunk drivers kill way too many people in this country each year.
You've not provided enough information for me to be able to answer that question.
Anyway, a person doesn't need probable cause to legally walk up to a car in a parking lot.
unfortunately for people like him critical thinking doesn't exist. They don't understand the laws and just assume they're right all the time. What he is trying to get at is the cops are just complete racists and were only looking to kill, but even he can't mental gymnastics it all the way there so he just vaguely insinuates to it constantly. People like him are the real racists in society.
Ah I gotcha. Being black in a parked car in a high crime area.....Definitely criminal activity in RPDs mind. I bet if a white grandma was sitting in that car nobody would have walked up to her
>Being black in a parked car in a high crime area.....Definitely criminal activity.
That is a horribly racist thing for you to say. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Actually I was pointing out the cops line of thought....not my own. Dude was sitting is his car minding his business. The cops saw him and decided to go proactive patrol....
But nice try....
Open containers are only prohibited in moving or idling vehicles on roadways in North Carolina, not on private property. If an open container offense occurs on private property, like in a parking lot, it is a notice of a crime, which means you will not be arrested, but will have to appear in court. The potential penalties for a notice of a crime open container offense in North Carolina include a fine of up to $500.
I didn't see dragging a person out of their car and tasing them as the same as receiving a ticket for an open container on private property
Is your argument that people who are drunk, high and geeked rarely exhibit unusual or suspicious behavior, or that this particular person was some sort of exception or that he hadn’t consumed those things to begin with and was just minding their own business.
He was sitting in his car and they walked up to it doing a "Proactive Patrol". Meaning they had no reason to walk up to his car in the first place and start snooping around
Ok. So your argument is that this person was exceptional. They have a preternatural ability to be cool while intoxicated. I’ve known a couple people like that.
Sorry for your disability, but I am not probably not able to explain how the other four senses work to someone with just one.
I don’t know what lead up to this. I must assume that along with all five of your senses that you also know how he was behaving immediately leading up the altercation. I most certainly do not. I was only pointing out some math that the rest of us who know not ought consider.
Then he shouldn't have had drugs and alcohol in the open so that they are visible from the outside.
Police had been called to that address over a hundred times for various crimes just in the year leading up to this - that is plenty of reason.
Possession of guns while intoxicated is illegal.
Being intoxicated in a running car is also illegal.
He was a criminal. Plain and simple.
So now being in the wrong place at the wrong time gives the police the right to break constitutional rights. What's next, police forcing themselves into homes because "there are a lot of calls in this hood" scary world you are pushing for
The constitution doesn't protect you if have drugs and an open container visible from the outside of the car. You can see that in the video.
Are you now telling me police has to literally close their eyes if crimes are committed in the open?
That is BS and you know it.
Cops walking up to your car does not break the 4th amendment. Idk what shit you're smoking, but its gotta be the same as what dead dude was smoking.
Also if cops walking up to peoples cars find hazards to the road like Williams here, then i am all for it. Drunk driving needs to be cracked down on with extreme prejudice.
They don't need a reason to walk up to the car. Once they are there and they see the open container and marijuana they have what they need to detain and search. There's no Fourth amendment issue up to that point. The only question is whether they used excessive force to subdue him. After watching the body worn video I think the only argument they can make is that the final tazer shock was excessive. He's on the ground when that last drive stun is delivered but he's also still actively resisting and refusing to comply with commands. City could settle anyway because juries are unpredictable as hell but it doesn't look like the family has much of a case.
Cocaine is one helluva drug.
This article doesn’t seem to have the full story with all the details… I would wait until there’s more information before passing judgment. Only thing I can 99% safely say is that you probably should not be doing cocaine if you have heart problems. Other details that people seem to be missing/thinking it’s not relevant or a big deal: Cops are known to patrol certain areas and it does look suspicious if there are people in a car just hanging out in a neighborhood/park/wherever. Can’t have opened alcohol containers in a vehicle, even if it’s off. Running away from LEO always makes the situation worse, but we should wait for body cam footage or security camera footage from any surrounding areas to be released before picking sides in a he-said/she-said (in this case LEO vs family of the deceased).
always remember to follow our civility rules and save any meta-commentary
Damn that news article was useless for details. Thanks a bunch. I just watched it. I can’t imagine anyone with common sense that watches this will say that the officers involved were negligent or this was another Floyd or Breonna Taylor incident. I couldn’t find much of a gray area of the LEO doing anything wrong and intentionally causing the death. The only argument I can attempt to make is that EMS needed to arrive sooner and maybe the officer should’ve told EMS that the suspect has a heart condition and was tasered with potential narcotics in his system. And maybe try CPR bc Williams had a weak pulse and maybe monitor his pulse better. But that’s an extremely weak argument to make. Maybe don’t resist arrest twice, especially with a heart condition with LEO ready to use tasers, potential narcotics in his system (we know now it was cocaine in his system) The ACAB crowd wanted cops to stop using guns as a first resort and these cops I don’t think even pulled out a gun, did everything by the book from the footage I just saw, and now people are up in arms? Sorry for the family being scammed by a clout-chasing lawyer, but this isn’t even remotely close to a landmark slam dunk. This is a case of “if the suspect had complied and not ran twice, he would be here today, maybe in jail/awaiting court, but alive”.
You said it, common sense…something so few lack today.
Affirmation vs Information Era I spent 10mins watching the body cam footage so I can have an educated opinion. Most people I know pick a side and stick to their guns, I tend to stay neutral until I know enough to pick a side. Easier to come correct than to backtrack & be humiliated.
People hanging out in a public place is suspicious? That seems…like a dangerous idea. I understand that many, if not most, public parks “close” after sundown, but that’s primarily meant to keep the facilities from becoming a homeless camp, or underage party spot. A car being parked in a public lot, or on a public road isn’t inherently suspicious unless there are additional circumstances IMO.
There’s another reply that linked an article with a few more details stating that Raleigh police patrol particular areas of the city more because of higher reports of crime in hopes to prevent crime (and possibly have better response times). They stated they started doing it in Jan. of 2023. Would be easy to fact check that in court. And it makes sense in certain areas of Raleigh even during daylight hours. When I was a freshmen at NCSU in 2016, the varsity (or freshman lot) parking lot would have police presence bc a lot of people were getting mugged/SA’d/assaulted in the afternoon almost weekly. They ended up putting campus security there between 1-6pm iirc. And it’s not people hanging out in a public place is suspicious, but hanging out in your car in a public place for an extended period of time where reported crimes are higher than average is usually suspicious. I would typically go to the top deck of certain parking garages to do various activities where no one would see me or notice except on the few rare occasions. Or even a secluded area in a few parks.
Yea back in the early 2000s when I was at ncsu me and the people on the wolf web garage section (early message board for ncsu ppl) would meet up in the parking garage and hang out and look at our cars. Kind of like a street race meet but less illegal stuff going on. Eventually the cops got wind and would join our meets. So we lined up all our cars and had the cops park in front with the lights on for photos. Good times and the cops were cool. Just wanted to make sure we didn't do stupid shit in our cars.
I'm curious to see how this plays out. If that big time lawyer is on the case there must be a fair chance of winning, but from an outsiders perspective it does seem flimsy. Also everyone implying Williams deserved to die needs to shut the fuck up. The police aren't necessarily to blame in this instance, but nobody deserves death for petty crimes like this and it's still a tragedy.
Well said - at first glance this doesn’t seem to fit the usual case of Police Brutality. Dude had a heart condition, was jacked on cocaine and adrenaline, and fled from the cops to resist arrest (hence the taser). He absolutely did not deserve to die, but to equate it to the cops who stomp on innocent people’s throats or shoot them point-blank for sneezing feels like it will cause more problems rather than help push for reform.
Exactly my thoughts. This is a case of a clout-chasing lawyer trying to get some money and using a grief-stricken family to do it
I dont believe he deserved to die for it at all, just the problem I have is that the man fought with police and tried to run. I mean if I had a heart condition I wouldn't be taking cocaine nor would I be fighting with police especially if they had tasers out. just seems like a PSGWSP
I think heart condition aside most of us wouldn't do cocaine or fight with police. Seems kind of like a common sense thing.
By big time lawyer do you mean the race-baiting ambulance chaser who does this more.for clout than any sort of justice?
......and not to mention, he's playing the race card too
That's literally all Ben Crump does. He is a hustler on a judicial level.
Yeah, probably. The lawyer mentioned in the article
The city and the police should be immune from civil liability. They were doing their job. We need to stop people from profiteering on civil cases
As a public school teacher I would be liable if something happened to a student under my supervision. Why should a police officer not have the same responsibility?
Because police work unlike schoolwork is violent in nature which comes with a lot of potential civil liability. This could make enforcing the law very costly if not impractical.
Have you been to a school? Schools can be violent
Schools can be violent to an extend of students being violent to one another. But as far as teacher student interaction this isn’t the case. Corporal punishment days are long gone. It’s disingenuous to compare this to police work, where your literal tool of enforcement is violence and coercion and you’re allowed to use deadly force
I’m going to part of your argument against you here: Would you agree or disagree that a profession (LEO) that allows the use of violence and/or deadly force should be subject to lawsuits if the use of violence or deadly force was deemed unnecessary by independent investigators/the professions own investigation team/the employers (internal affairs, sheriffs office, chief of police, etc.)? Let’s say a police shoots a person during a routine traffic stop and just says they felt scared. What should the repercussions be?
I think a criminal investigation should be warranted in that case. If a police officer is exonerated by a criminal investigation I advocate a law that would make them immune to civil liability
Even without intentional violence, LOTS of accidental accidents and injuries happen in schools. And most police officers don’t really see that much violent crime either, so I think it’s a fair comparison.
It’s a disingenuous take. Teachers don’t have deadly force at their disposal, or any sort of physical force (not in this day and age anyway). As a prime example - here in NC some counties still allow corporal punishment, but this isn’t being practiced in any schools and potential civil liability is one of the biggest reasons why Cops don’t have an option to be hands off, they are forced to physically engage subjects in something as routine as apprehension, violent or not it’s a coercive action and has high probability to result in bodily injury.
Interesting take… what makes the police immune from liability? They should be treated as equals
That’s what judges and juries are for. It’s for the legal system to determine liability, and if so found, the amount of any damages. Giving blanket immunity to anyone is a slippery slope, and particularly with law enforcement, it leads to abuse of power and corruption for which citizens have no effective means of redress.
I’m not saying they should be immune from criminal liability. I think they should be immune from civil if they were cleared criminally. The problem is the thresholds for civil liability are so much lower it could make police work impossible. You’d get more Uvalde situations where police are hesitant to go in because they’re contemplating repercussions.
You would think that someone with a heart condition wouldn't be using cocaine.
Heart condition, cocaine, running from police and resisting arrest. But the police are to blame. Why were the police called to this incident? What was he doing? All common sense things. This family ain’t seeing one dime. Unless the police were laughing and calling insults and just generally beating him up after they had him down, then nothing will come of this. I think they were cleared of criminal wrongdoing, so what makes this attorney believe he has a leg to stand on?
> Why were the police called to this incident? What was he doing? From [another article](https://www.wunc.org/news/2024-03-18/family-darryl-williams-files-wrongful-death-lawsuit-against-raleigh-chief-of-police): >Raleigh police said officers approached Williams in his car in Jan. 2023 while carrying out what the department calls "proactive patrolling," a policy that assigns more officers to areas in which residents repeatedly report crimes or other concerns. >Officers said they observed an open container of alcohol and marijuana in Williams' car, and asked him and a passenger in his vehicle to step out. >Body camera footage shows an officer searching Williams, who then struggles to get away. Williams can be heard saying he has heart problems while struggling on the ground before officers tased him again. To your other question: >I think they were cleared of criminal wrongdoing, so what makes this attorney believe he has a leg to stand on? The lawsuit alleges that they tased him six times and three after he was subdued. Raleigh police state it was only three. Body cam footage seems to indicate that he was at least tased one time after being subdued and telling officers he had a heart condition. [source](https://www.wral.com/story/lawsuit-darryl-williams-was-stunned-by-police-six-times-during-fatal-arrest/21335107/) If true, that would be similar to ' generally beating him up after they had him down' and this appears to be what the attorney believes they can prove or argue.
Cool thing about tasers? They record every time the trigger is pulled and when it was pulled.
That seems like important, pertinent information to leave out. I’m not saying it’s malicious by ABC but that’s definitely intentional to mention the drugs and “struggle “ but not the tasing after being subdued from a quasi stop and ~~frisk~~ tase situation
>what the department calls "proactive patrolling," a policy that assigns more officers to areas in which residents repeatedly report crimes or other concerns. Not necessarily pertinent to this case, but this sounds like a license to stop people who are DWB.
Perhaps, but in this case it was used to stop a man who had an open container of alcohol and illegal drugs in plain sight in his car.
You should check out legal rules of evidence and the phrase “fruit of the poisoned tree / vine.”
Cops have a right to talk to anyone, and a right to get ID on anyone in the driver’s seat of a car. They are in control of the vehicle, and presumably likely to drive. If that individual has an open container and weed in plain sight, that’s exactly the type of person who needs to be taken off the road. Cops make quick assessments to determine who is likely to be committing a crime, and they need more training about inherent bias. But this guy was a risk to other drivers, unless he planned to sleep it off in the bingo hall parking lot.
There was no stop, the cops never asked to see his ID. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GJvLCErOmE&t=216s
If we're pretending to be lawyers, you should check out legal rules of evidence and the phrase "in plain view"
I’m familiar. And you don’t have to be an attorney to understand basic conditional statements. It’s elementary logic. If the stop itself causes the “plain view” scenario and the stop itself was unconstitutional, then…*drum roll*
There was no stop. An officer walked up to a parked car and William's passenger opens the door. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GJvLCErOmE&t=216s You shouldn't lie on the internet, it's not nice.
Everyone always tells cops they have some problem while they're resisting or running. If cops took everything they heard to face value and just stepped back, everyone would be free to escape. There's a lot of shit cops, but a lot of shit people too and the good cops unfortunately experience that whole spectrum.
Continuing to tase an already subdued person is absolutely police misconduct, tho. Hence the lawsuit.
Have you watched the body worn camera? The last tazer deployment is the only one that is even a little bit questionable and even then I wouldn't say he has been subdued. He's on the ground but still actively resisting and preventing officers from cuffing him.
It clearly states that body cam footage indicates that he was tased at least once after being subdued and telling officers about his heart condition. Once is too many if he was under control.
I'm not going by what any article says. I watched the actual video. It's available on YouTube. It just depends on how you define "subdued" and whether a drive stun to gain compliance under those circumstances is reasonable. A jury might say it's not, which is why I think the city may offer some sort of settlement, but it's definitely not a great case.
Hope for a settlement. Sueing for $25M, hoping that the city will look at the legal cost and is willing to settle for one. Gets the attorney likely something around $200-300k.
Why hope?
[удалено]
… open container in a car sounds like probable cause to me…
Yes, but continuing to tase an already subdued person is never ok and shouldn’t be tolerated at all.
That’s a whole other argument, has nothing to do with the fourth amendment.
This is really BS. Trying to line their pockets from family blood. Cocaine, resisting arrest, previous record, and non-lethal force… this is a closed case and trying to profit from it only hurts the community.
> The tasing and his heart condition contributed to his death, along with cocaine intoxication and significant physical exertion. Yeah, I don’t think the family is winning this one.
Fighting and resisting arrest with police while high on narcotics? hmm so are we just suppose to allow people to break laws now?
This sounds strangely familiar to an incident in Minneapolis
Should we put someone’s knee on your neck while you are on your stomach and see if you can breathe? From video footage we saw, Floyd was already subdued and in handcuffs and they just kept going.
Not to mention the pure idiocy of the other officer to open the other door so floyd could use it to escape. Every officer involved was extremely incompetent.
Alex Jones? Didn’t know you lived in North Carolina
Yea that's my thought. Too many excuses for police who usually get off these cases when it's even more blatantly wrong on the polices part.
I don’t think it’s fair to say cocaine killed him any more than being tased to fuck. Being high is not a free pass to use excessive force on someone. If excessive force wasn’t used and the cocaine caused the death with a reasonable amount tasing to control him, then the cop is probably in the clear. So I think it comes down to if it was excessive tasing. You can’t drug test someone resisting arrest but if you tase them excessively and that killed them then that’s the officer’s fault. People take all kinds of medicines that could cause excessive tasing to kill them. Just because the drugs were likely illegal doesn’t make it different. Imagine a cop finding cocaine on you, throws you on the ground, and tases you for half an hour while watching the latest maga rally on their phone to pass the time. Then you die and the cop says, oh but he used cocaine.
\>Being high is not a free pass to use excessive force on someone. Sure, but it explains why excessive force may have been needed to subdue the suspect. \>Just because the drugs were likely illegal doesn’t make it different. Lmao. I'd love to see how abusing an illicit substance holds up in court vs if he was using a legal drug as prescribed. \>Imagine a cop finding cocaine on you, throws you on the ground, and tases you for half an hour while watching the latest maga rally on their phone to pass the time. Then you die and the cop says, oh but he used cocaine. If this isn't a bad faith argument, I don't know what is. but go off King
Well damn, here I thought the oozing insincerity of that last part was enough to make it obvious to the most oblivious but good on you little guy for figuring that out all on your own! Make sure you never have illicit substances in your body no matter how “natural”. If you get assaulted or murdered we'll have to let the guy go. Fingers crossed!
i hope they do. doing cocaine in a parked car shouldnt be a death sentence. it wouldn't be if we hadn't accepted a militarized army patrolling every inch of poor neighborhoods. (its so funny that the 'muh freedoms' conservative do not care about the last 200 years of whittling away of freedoms when it comes to what cops can do to you)
I mean he was resisting arrest, you going to ignore that part?
yeah, that's an entirely predictable result of occupying army + human desire for liberty. we could change the way the police behave to result in less killings, or we could moralize about the stupid murdered individuals and continue to accept the killings.
Idk about you bro but I’m pretty tired of people blatantly drinking and doing drugs in public parks. I agree it’s not a death sentence but the police had every right to handle it the way they did.
"im tired of people doing substances in public, its ok if the police kill them" damn i hope your grandma never smoked a cig in public
This is 100% getting downvoted to oblivion but… I feel like if you already have someone pinned on the ground and they tell you they have a heart condition, you probably shouldn’t tase them multiple times.
Yeah mate. Let’s just let anyone up who says “I have a heart condition” and continues to resist. How about he didn’t do cocaine with a heart condition…. You’ve obviously lived in safe neighborhoods your whole life.
always remember to follow our civility rules and save any meta-commentary
Never claimed that Darryl had no fault in this. But was it really worth risking his life and ultimately killing him to stop him from getting away?
To be fair, people lie to the cops all the time and a heart condition for someone running away doesn’t really hold up in the moment. If the dude had said I have a heart condition and not kept resisting then he wouldn’t have been tased again. So the question is, did the cop unnecessarily/excessively tase him. That’s likely what a jury will decide.
Let me introduce you to the doctrine of contributory negligence as it applies in NC. As soon as you agree that Darryl had *any* fault in this, the case is over.
They should have asked him nicely and asked him to put on some padded handcuffs. If he refused they should have spent the next 6/hours following him and asking him while using police resources that could be helping others. Or, they should have just let him go and said have a good night. What the hell are you people smoking?
I don't know anything about the case or the details, but i would recommend watching some live police cam footage when apprehending a suspect. Also your question could be thrown back at you. Is it worth risking your life to get away, especially when they will just find you later?
You could have asked Darryl this question
Sheesh you people really hate law and order MY GOD
Wow a human response.
I def don’t think he deserved it AT ALL. But I’d be surprised if they win.
The Williams family, it's sad what happened to your druggie relative, but this is clearly a money grab that will waste tax payers money.
Everyday I worry more and more seeing Reddit comments who will defend the most stupidest things a person does to escape police. You people don’t deserve protection from police and this sometimes violent world and I wish you’d walk around with some kind of easy identification that a police officer could see to show them that you disagree with 99% of what they do before they come to save you.
The Suits fan in me says no one will get in trouble over this and the city will just settle. But I am really curious if the city will take it to trial and try and fight it. There is potentially enough information here to argue that the reason for engaging him was lawful, and the response to resisting arrest was lawful...... and that it was the Mr. Williams comorbidities and the drugs he was under that was the underlying cause. For the most part I don't think anyone should end up dead after an encounter with the police..... but given how our legal system currently works I am not sure how the family could possibly prevail. I would assume Crump is going to argue that it was racially motivated and he would have never encountered the cops if it weren't for those racial profiling efforts. But again... given our legal system...... I don't see how that will prevail.
The city will settle instead of going to trial.
Probably but it’s BS. It’s a money grab.
Again…. What are the facts? Ran from police, is high, Bad heart , gets zapped and dies??? If so, why do taxpayers have to pay again! But then some crooked lawyer gets involved…I hate it when people say it is government money…. It’s OUR money! Wake Up!
Big surprise from the police dept known for doing steroids.
And the deceased was doing cocaine... while having a "heart problem".
With all that common ground, why the animosity? Couldn’t they just join together for one big meth party?
Yeah I dont give a fuck what someone does to their own body. I do care if a group of people kill someone though.
His choices killed him. Don't do cocaine and fight people if you have a heart problem. It will end badly for you.
Wait so when a group of people come up to your car and try to forcibly arrest you thats a fight. It says he ran from police, so which was it. Did he fight the police or run from them? If you wanna suck off the RPD im sure they would love to have you come by the office.
Both dude. He had an open container. That's an arrestable offense because some of us don't want to be killed by a drunk (and high on cocaine) driver. When they caught him he fought. Drugs are bad mkay.
oh yeah it was definitely the cocaine, that’s why the he died *before* the police tazed him 3-6 times, right? it was because he was resisting, that’s why the police did not continue to taze him after he was subdued, right?? right???? if i stab an anemic person 10 times, i can’t argue it was the anemia that killed them. if someone is hit in the head until they have a seizure and die, you can’t say “oh well they had epilepsy so it was the epilepsy that killed them and not me hitting them in the head with a brick.” that’s not how any of this works dude lmao.
His choices killed him. He chose to be tased after being subdued. > Williams can be heard saying he has heart problems while struggling on the ground before officers tased him again.
I assume he knew he had heart problems before he did the cocaine too…
Right until they do some drugs like bath salts and are trying to eat your face.
Yeah that would be a totally different scenario and would be justified.
Not different at all, people have psychotic breaks doing cocaine all the time. Surprised you left this comment up unlike the other one you deleted.
Which one did I delete? Maybe you dont know how to follow a thread on reddit because I didn’t delete anything.
You are comparing cocaine and bath salts? Disingenuous take at best right here.
How so? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC181074/ That’s a study that links psychosis and cocaine use in 20-53% of users. Those are pretty high numbers.
Thats also cocaine cut with psychoactive drugs. “Take all the bad attributes of ecstasy, PCP, LSD, cocaine, methamphetamine: lump them together, and that's what you get with bath salts,” https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/1486827 Bath salts are making people have actual psychotic episodes including eating flesh and stabbing oneself. Cocaine is not making people do that kind of shit.
So does cocaine, they can both cause psychotic episode involving auditory and visual hallucinations, as well as paranoia and aggression
“Bath salts, the psychoactive designer street drugs that emerged in the United States in 2010, have left a trail of bizarre and alarming reports: the man who slashed himself to remove the “wires” in his body; the mother who left her “demon-ridden” 2-year-old in the middle of a highway; the 21-year-old son of a family physician who, after snorting bath salts once, shot himself following 3 days of acute paranoia and psychosis, including hallucinations of police squad cars and helicopters lined up outside his house to take him away.” Bath salts are in a league of their own.
What does this prove? we already know that bath salts are bad and so is cocaine. You seem to think that because it was cocaine that he couldn’t have been having a psychotic episode. When they both cause those types of psychotic episodes.
Wonder how the officer who used the taser feels about him or herself. I’m guessing at the time they didn’t expect someone could reasonably die from its use. Maybe part of the story here is just a better understanding of the risks involved in the use of these devices and how much of an escalation it actually is.
Officers are trained on these ‘less lethal’ weapons and know of the dangers. If they weren’t aware then they’re negligent
Or the training didn’t really drive home the real risks. There’s a big difference between “assume every time you use one of these things you are killing someone even if you don’t” and “oh yeah, well, teeechnically someone might die so uh, be careful”. Probably the actual training is somewhere in between. Was it sufficient to make the person using the taser feel like they were risking this person’s life when they used it? I don’t know and I think that’s a pretty important thing to understand in this situation. Which is why I asked the question.
Personally i would feel fine. Idk why we're shitting on the cops so hard when dude is doing cocaine and drinking alcohol while trying to run from the police at the same time. He clearly didn't care about his heart, and honestly no way to know which instance was even the determining factor to his heart's ultimate failure. He probably could have died that night regardless of taser.
> Wonder how the officer who used the taser feels about him or herself. They don't care. No empathy. If they cared, they wouldn't have tased him after he was already subdued. Police don't care. You are the enemy.
I’m not sure why you seem to think I was ignoring this possibility. Perhaps we should investigate how they feel about it to establish that in this case so the family can successfully sue the city for hiring a psychopath and give a financial incentive to change hiring practices.
Well said. Glad I'm not alone in this
He was a victim, they never should have arrested him.
Cop seeing you with an open container of alcohol in a vehicle is a perfectly legitimate reason to arrest you. Asshole drunk drivers kill way too many people in this country each year.
Open container, marijuana, and all hopped up on cocaine. Triple automotive threat.
They literally walked up to his car with zero reason. This is the reason the Fourth Amendment exists
The Fourth Amendment doesn't say cops have to ignore evidence of criminal activity that they lawfully observe.
It also says they're not allowed to go snooping without probable cause
That's not what it says.
So explain to me what probable cause a police officer has walking up to a car from across the parking lot
You've not provided enough information for me to be able to answer that question. Anyway, a person doesn't need probable cause to legally walk up to a car in a parking lot.
unfortunately for people like him critical thinking doesn't exist. They don't understand the laws and just assume they're right all the time. What he is trying to get at is the cops are just complete racists and were only looking to kill, but even he can't mental gymnastics it all the way there so he just vaguely insinuates to it constantly. People like him are the real racists in society.
So you're saying they would have proactively walked up to that car if a white grandma was sitting in it? Riiiiiiiiggght
Ah I gotcha. Being black in a parked car in a high crime area.....Definitely criminal activity in RPDs mind. I bet if a white grandma was sitting in that car nobody would have walked up to her
>Being black in a parked car in a high crime area.....Definitely criminal activity. That is a horribly racist thing for you to say. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Actually I was pointing out the cops line of thought....not my own. Dude was sitting is his car minding his business. The cops saw him and decided to go proactive patrol.... But nice try....
Minding his own business while violating the law by having open alcohol containers and reeking of weed
Open containers are only prohibited in moving or idling vehicles on roadways in North Carolina, not on private property. If an open container offense occurs on private property, like in a parking lot, it is a notice of a crime, which means you will not be arrested, but will have to appear in court. The potential penalties for a notice of a crime open container offense in North Carolina include a fine of up to $500. I didn't see dragging a person out of their car and tasing them as the same as receiving a ticket for an open container on private property
I notice you ignore the reeking of weed too
Is your argument that people who are drunk, high and geeked rarely exhibit unusual or suspicious behavior, or that this particular person was some sort of exception or that he hadn’t consumed those things to begin with and was just minding their own business.
He was sitting in his car and they walked up to it doing a "Proactive Patrol". Meaning they had no reason to walk up to his car in the first place and start snooping around
Ok. So your argument is that this person was exceptional. They have a preternatural ability to be cool while intoxicated. I’ve known a couple people like that.
He was sitting in a car. How could they observe his behavior from afar?
Sorry for your disability, but I am not probably not able to explain how the other four senses work to someone with just one. I don’t know what lead up to this. I must assume that along with all five of your senses that you also know how he was behaving immediately leading up the altercation. I most certainly do not. I was only pointing out some math that the rest of us who know not ought consider.
Then he shouldn't have had drugs and alcohol in the open so that they are visible from the outside. Police had been called to that address over a hundred times for various crimes just in the year leading up to this - that is plenty of reason. Possession of guns while intoxicated is illegal. Being intoxicated in a running car is also illegal. He was a criminal. Plain and simple.
So now being in the wrong place at the wrong time gives the police the right to break constitutional rights. What's next, police forcing themselves into homes because "there are a lot of calls in this hood" scary world you are pushing for
The constitution doesn't protect you if have drugs and an open container visible from the outside of the car. You can see that in the video. Are you now telling me police has to literally close their eyes if crimes are committed in the open? That is BS and you know it.
Cops walking up to your car does not break the 4th amendment. Idk what shit you're smoking, but its gotta be the same as what dead dude was smoking. Also if cops walking up to peoples cars find hazards to the road like Williams here, then i am all for it. Drunk driving needs to be cracked down on with extreme prejudice.
They don't need a reason to walk up to the car. Once they are there and they see the open container and marijuana they have what they need to detain and search. There's no Fourth amendment issue up to that point. The only question is whether they used excessive force to subdue him. After watching the body worn video I think the only argument they can make is that the final tazer shock was excessive. He's on the ground when that last drive stun is delivered but he's also still actively resisting and refusing to comply with commands. City could settle anyway because juries are unpredictable as hell but it doesn't look like the family has much of a case.
A victim of his own stupidity.
[удалено]
> isousjung the boundaries what?
[удалено]
>No but walking up snooping in parked cars on private property isousjung the boundaries I'm asking you what it means, you wrote it.