And remember, kids, even if it was the right guy why the fuck were they ok with killing a guy over a fucking weed-wacker? Also why do they need to raid someone’s home over a not even that expensive bit of gardening equipment? Like yea I’d like my shit back too but if I was in the states I’d call insurance about it and get a new one long before I essentially ask the cops to go kill some dude over it.

[–] jonne 51 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

Yeah, something's not right. Usually you can't get cops to even take a report for 'minor' property crimes, and these guys just go busting doors with guns blazing?

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 28 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Right?????

Something doesn’t add up.

[–] theangryseal@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

If I had to guess, either someone on the force didn’t like this guy.

Either that, or someone really cozy with the cops was mad about their weedeater being stolen.

It’s crazy to me that one of my neighbors could be doing something shady and it gets me killed. As often as my packages get delivered at the wrong place, it’s scary to think about.

[–] theangryseal@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Turns out it belonged to a county official. Go figure.

David Westerfield. The Laurel County Judge Executive.

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

There it is.

[–] Schmoo@slrpnk.net 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The weedeater belonged to a local judge. Cops will go above and beyond for their pals who take them at their word on the witness stand.

[–] jonne 3 points 7 months ago

I figured it would be something like that.

[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Not that I disagree with most of your comment, but insurance claim wouldn’t be worth it for a weed whacker as the excess would be prohibitive.

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

True enough, though I’d still rather not send a potential hit-squad over it. The chance of that is low but nowhere near low enough. Just glad to live in an at least passably civilized country where I don’t need to worry about that as bad.

[–] Malfeasant@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

Yeah, but you're not a "local judge".

[–] MintyFresh@lemmy.world 63 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Their incompetence would be hilarious if it weren't so terrifying.

[–] ReanuKeeves@lemm.ee 19 points 7 months ago

Ya this headline reads as a Reno 911 episode

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 50 points 7 months ago (2 children)

ACAB

[–] Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 7 months ago

ACAM - All cops are murderers, some are just accomplices.

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 14 points 7 months ago

And those fuckers will get away with it Scott-free, too. Maybe a slap on the wrist, at most. Legalized murder.

[–] workerONE@lemmy.world 44 points 7 months ago (1 children)

"Although police have released little details about the shooting, neighbors told local media they were searching for a stolen Weed Eater on Dec. 23 when they banged on Harless’ front door at 11:50 p.m."

Why were they going to someone's door at almost midnight for something like this?

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 24 points 7 months ago (1 children)

A lot of people are asleep at this time. Great way to catch people groggy and unawares; less likely for them to defend themselves. Also less chance for witnesses.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

On the other hand, also more likely for someone to assume home invader and defend themselves.

Which might also be part of the reason, now that I think about it. Gives them an excuse to ~~execute someone~~ defend themselves from a crazy criminal.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 34 points 7 months ago

"No word yet on whether the stolen Weed Eater has been recovered or the real culprit arrested."

Yeah, nice way to end the article. Asking the real questions.....

[–] NewWorldOverHere@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Even while trying to criticize the cops, the article language still supports them.

“…which is why they had to shoot and kill him just before midnight last week.” (emphasis mine)

No - they didn’t have to shoot him. They CHOSE to shoot him.

[–] NewWorldOverHere@lemmy.world 18 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If the cops weren’t idiots and went to the right address…

Would this have been an example of parallel construction?

Per the article, the owner of the correct house said it had been empty for months.

My head cannon is that the correct house was being used for illegal purposes (drugs?). Then, this “stolen” weed wacker was the justification they were using to go poking around this residence and “stumble” upon the other illegal activity.

Thoughts?

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 13 points 7 months ago

Seems the most likely thing. Cops don't investigate stolen cars. Since when do they do no knock raids for lawn equipment. Paying them all to drive out there is more than the cost of a weed whacker.

[–] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago

Will there be any accountability for the cops?

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Cios wouldn't do tbis over a weed whacker,, so whats really going on here?

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

A weed eater is a guy that drug dealers keep around in case the cops show up. That's why they snuck up on him.