Racine, Wisconsin – The Racine County District Attorney’s Office released body camera footage of the fatal May 20 police shooting of Da’Shontay King Sr., 37, in conjunction with a decision not to press charges against the officer involved. . . . , Zachary Brenner. Police said they stopped a car while serving a search warrant for a criminal in possession of a firearm. According to police, King ran out of the car with a gun and led a police officer in a foot chase. Officer Brenner chased King over a fence and up a small hill. In the video, King then appears to drop a gun. As King lunged toward her, Officer Brenner opened fire.
Officers provided CPR, police said, but King died in hospital. The .9mm pistol was recovered from King. An analysis at the Wisconsin State Crime Lab revealed that the gun had also been used in a shooting in Edgewood and St. Patrick on April 21st. Chief Robinson says the shooting resulted in property damage. The weapon contained King’s DNA. King family attorney William Sulton said he is requesting the final cause of death in the coroner’s report, which he believes will show the officer used unreasonable force to stop King.
Slavshit
Sandshit
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
just got shot 5 times officer comes “you okay?🥺” like WTF he could have fired warning shots or tased the guy mans unloaded a clip into bro’s back
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
He gave numerous verbal warnings and commands. Homeboy was a fleeing felon with a loaded firearm that has since been proven to be used in crimes, I'd say this cop was justified in his actions.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The cop didn’t know if the gun was used in crimes. Good job making stuff up. Not saying the cop was wrong
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It was proven after the fact, I'm not making shit up. All the cop knew was he saw a gun. Keep reaching bruv
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You said the cop knew it was loaded too apparently. This super coo that can see the future
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Exactly. Proven AFTER the fact. Your smooth brain implied that the cop was justified because he knew the gun was ALREADY proven to be used in crimes. Get a clue bruv
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I didn't imply shit, you implied it yourself when you read it. Here's some coins, buy a clue.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You literally said it was a gun used in previous crimes. What did that have to do with anything? Your smooth brain likes to point out nonsense that has nothing to do with your comment. Sorry. I didn’t realize I was dealing with a moron
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yes I am fine. You are just a buffoon. Nice edit on your original nonsense. But you should now edit the part about the gun being loaded as justification because the cop wouldn’t have known that either.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
You don’t even have proof of anything your dumbass says
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Lmfao. Loser edited his comment as if it makes his stupid statement about a gun supposedly LATER being determined to be used in crimes is justification to unilaterally killing someone for not listening. Dummy even said the gun was loaded which the cop WOULDN’T have known either. Fucking moron
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Do you understand crime scene analysis? The gun was found to have been used in crimes, and yes, it was found loaded. If cops see a gun, they presume it to be loaded. I definitely don't understand why you don't understand that these things can be found out after the fact and explained into the story... but I guess a smooth-brained idiot like you has trouble understanding many things. Yes, I did edit my post to include one word: "since"
I figured this might help clarify for any future readers that can't correlate facts. Now, politely go twist your brain elsewhere as we're done here.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I understand these can be found after the fact. Nobody is disputing that. I said you implied that mattered DURING the shooting. Unless you are a completed imbecile there would be no reason to bring that up. Nobody cares AFTER the fact. What matters is what happens DURING the interaction you buffoon. Nobody cares about AFTER the fact you moron. You brought it up to justify the shooting. And that has nothing to do with the shooting you smooth brained twit.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You are such an interesting level of retard. I’d argue with you but I don’t think I’ll get the volunteer work off on my taxes.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Maybe you're just an idiot that is misreading what I wrote? Could this be a possibility? Hmmmm?? Go take your meds and kiss my girlfriend (your mom) goodnight.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Yeah that’s true. On second thought, I agree. I just think cops now-a-days see an object that looks threatening and fire excessively. But in some cases, it’s justified in and others it’s not. This one it is, especially after a second watch.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context