Crime Othal Wallace found guilty of lesser charge of manslaughter after killing cop.

[Mr Holmes]

The fact an excuse could be, I thought he would shoot me because cops are racist is the most insane shit the civilized world has scene. It is entirely baseless and a result of leftist propaganda through the MSM with 100% storytelling like the entire “Hands up don’t shoot” lie after a felon shit stain cracked a cop in the jaw and grabbed his gun. The media and their propagandists like those at CNN have karma coming their way.

Blinken once tried to call out China on their slave labor camps and they pulled the "blacks are literally being hunted in the streets" of America cnn script. He just sat there and took it.

 

[WklySportsMemes]

@WklySportsMemes @Islam Imamate @SLUG1186

First off, I have to admit that I made a mistake in this thread. It turns out that wallace was not previously a felon. He had been arrested for felonies, but the charges were dropped to misdemeanors-including one that involved a weapon and “unsafe handling of a firearm”. He has been arrested over a dozen times since 2012. There are five domestic battery arrests, including one against his pregnant girlfriend. Any of those would have prevented him from owning a gun, but All were dropped-my guess is that the victims became uncooperative and wouldn’t show for court and they are likely trashbags anyway. So, I apologize for making the mistake of thinking he was a convicted felon.

You gentleman have argued that Officer Raynor did not have reasonable articulable suspicion to approach wallace, and I strongly disagree. There are many factors that go into ras and it is purposefully kept vague by the Supreme Court so that officers can do their job and investigate and prevent crimes. It is generally defined as a suspicion that a reasonable police officer has that a crime has occurred ,will occur, or is occurring based on the totality of the circumstances. It is more than “a hunch” but less than probable cause.

What does this mean? It means that based upon the officers training and experiences(very important), information about the area (high crime), information, training, and experiences about particular suspects, their behaviors, their methods, and the way in which they conduct their crimes. And all of this is taken into consideration in whether ras exists, and if it does, that the officer can detain the subject for further investigation. I am not going to get into terry v Ohio, because pretty much everyone knows that one, but the link below has a lot of information in it regarding ras.

So, with that in mind, Raynor was specifically told
To pay attention to this apartment building and the parking lot because of crimes in the area. High crime area-check.

All officers in the area were given a bolo on a stolen gray Honda spotted in the area. wallace was driving a gray Honda crv.

It is nighttime, which is considered a factor in ras, especially in certain types of crimes.

The suspects actions-sitting in car or being in a high crime area are not crimes, nor are they alone, enough for ras. However, wallace was sitting in his car, at night, in a high crime area, in an area Raynor was told to watch. And upon being approached by a police officer, he suddenly wants to leave. One of the factors to look for when establishing ras is a change in the person’s behavior, such as nervousness, seeing an officer and immediately going the other way, running upon seeing a marked police car in a high crime area, failure to meet an officer’s gaze is actually one of them. If a person has done nothing wrong, and does not wish to speak to police, that is their right if they choose to keep walking. However, when instructed to stop, or stay in the vehicle as we have here, and a reasonable person would not believe they are free to go-it is a detention, which this was. Raynor told him multiple times to sit down in the vehicle. Why? Because it is an officer safety issue, and this incident is the perfect example of why. If a cop tells me to sit down in my car, I am going to do it. If they tell me to stop, I am going to do it. Someone that has committed a crime, in this case, a black sovereign citizen type that hates police with an illegally concealed firearm, does not stop.

One more issue that is a factor is good faith. Good faith is the notion that a police officer is doing something because it is his/her job and they are doing it without malice. The fact that Raynor activated his body camera while approaching wallace tells me that he is acting in good faith. He is trying to do the job he was hired to do, which is to try and prevent crimes and hold those that so accountable.

All of the above that I have listed, when combined with Raynor’s training and experience, knowledge of the area and types of crimes committed there, and his knowledge about criminals and how they operate-he absolutely does have ras to stop wallace and investigate what he is doing there. I don’t know how long he was sitting there watching him, or how long wallace was in the vehicle before he approaches. That is unknown.


While not a felon, wallace had a firearm concealed in his waistband and Florida law requires a permit to carry concealed. He did not have a permit, which makes this a crime.

wallace did not live there. He was there visiting his kids who live there with their mother-it’s her apartment, and he had already visited them. However, when approached by a police officer, wallace decides he needs to leave immediately and at some point, either on the stand or during an interview, he says he just wanted to go to his apartment. Wrong, he’s lying because that is not his apartment. He suddenly decided he had to leave because he knew the cop was going to find the firearm and likely arrest him.

I believe this was premeditated murder. It does not have to be planned weeks in advance, only the decision is made to kill someone. The courts do not say how long this is, but they state the decision has to be made and resonate with the killer. I believe that wallace made that decision prior to doing so and it wasn’t just a reaction to some threat that doesn’t exist. I even think when he says “ah man, don’t do this.” I believe he was thinking “don’t make me kill you” but he decided that if he couldn’t get away, he was going to kill him, and he did.

here are some additional points
Remember, he said he “will someday be proud to have pig’s blood on his hands and boots” and while he denies that “pigs” means cops, he says he said that in 2020 when cops were killing black people-so how in the fuck does “pigs” not mean cops? Every shitbag refers to cops as pigs and immediately after he stated pigs didn’t mean cops, he says he was angry that cops were killing black people.

About fifteen minutes after the shooting that eventually killed Officer Raynor, Wallace posted an Instagram story.

"I want y’all to know something man, I love y’all," Wallace says in the video. "Black power. Stay strong as a nation. Don’t let these p**** a** pigs f*** with you. I love y’all, Black power."

Again, this clearly says that he is referring to cops as pigs fifteen mins after killing a police officer.

He, and his defense, also tell officers that went to arrest him, “I could have killed you all.” He had his murder weapon and an ak with 500 rounds in the tree house with him. Instead of shooting at police, he surrenders laying on the ground with his hands in the air. His defense asks “if he hates cops so much, why didn’t he take this chance to kill more.” The answer is because he would have died in that treehouse. I think when faced with taking out more cops but dying, he chickens out and living is more important to him that going out in a blaze of glory for the cause.

And what’s really sad is this guy is being celebrated and will be a cop killing hero in prison. I got into quite a few arguments on x with people cheering this as great news and hail this as a victory. While wallace used the 2020 “as a black man, my biggest fear is getting killed by the police” defense. At no time did Raynor present any threat. He told him to sit down, blocked his path, and put his hand on his shoulder-gently. Tell me, where in any of those actions do you believe present a threat that justifies pulling out a firearm and shooting him in the head?

I wonder how many cops see this case and this video, and this case, and fear black men more now. If a shitbag like wallace can claim the 2020 black men fear cops defense, well, I guess cops can use this case as well as oodles of stats as a defense.
https://benchbook.sog.unc.edu/sites/default/files/pdf/Warrantless Stops.pdf
https://benchbook.sog.unc.edu/sites/default/files/pdf/Warrantless Stops.pdf

-Let's not conflate approach into put hands on and detain. Why not approach and run tag? That literally makes the most sense.
-I dont believe your training gives you any special powers to tell if people sitting in their cars legally are criminals. In fact that's part of the problem many of your colleagues across the country have piss poor training & judgment. This sixth sense you always refer to is simply profiling people who don't like cops in bad areas. Not a superpower.
Its weird that you still defend it, especially when HE DIDN'T STEAL THE CAR. Or there is zero proof of an actual crime prior to the slaying.

-Where an adult lives & the time of day doesn't limit the ability of that man to travel freely.

-Good Faith, are you kidding me???? You honestly want to be put on a pedestal while you assume random black man in a car is a car thief. You really think you can accuse or suspect innocent people of horrible crimes & then they should just think you're golly g swelll. Man that's a lot of hero worship getting into one's head.

-I dont know why you keep using his politics and racism in your point. It honestly dilutes your argument. Give me one scenario where you have ever used a cop being a racist POS in their personal life to determine if their conduct on the job was lawful??????

- I would love to respond more. As generally I don't agree with you. You do make some interesting threads. I enjoy your anecdotes at times. I think 90% of the time you try to address most of the valid counter points. You at times can admit when you were incorrect. However, if the typical losers continue to come in here and make up strawman assine arguments I'm going to bow out that way I don't ruin your thread.

 

[nhbbear]

Isnt a condition of ras that you have to suspect the exact person has committed, is about to commit, or is committing a crime? Simply being in a high crime area is not enough. If being in a high crime area is enough for ras it’s a green light to profile. The state doesn’t get to suspend the constitution because people are poor. None of that justifies the actions in this case.

As far as fighting in court you know as well anyone that’s much easier said than done.
Even in some egregious unlawful detentions recompense is rarely awarded due to QI. QI is simply too broad and encompassing.

I explained ras a couple times itt, probably a better description in my last post. The Supreme Court has ruled that simply being in a high crime area by itself is not enough ras to just start stopping people. However, the cop was specifically told to keep and eye on this apartment complex because of recent crimes including one about a BOLO for a gray Honda that was stolen and seen in the complex. Guess what wallace was driving?

I’ve heard he was smoking a joint, but he claims it was only a swisher sweet, but then during trials he said he was smoking a cig. let’s say it was a joint. Not a real big dealt but still not recreational in Florida. He and defense council deny it was pot. Why would that matter-he killed a cop, the reason why they we’re desperately trying to chip away at any reason the cop had to speak with him.

That’s why I built my case not using that my last post. There are ras factors out there like high crime area, suspicious behavior (sitting in a car smoking in a high crime area) which could be completely innocent, but also, could indicate something is going on. According to Raynor’s training in experience, drug dealers are known ti do this, maybe someone waiting for a particular person to come outside so he can shoot them, who knows? But the Supreme Court allows that he could be waiting for his ex to bring out the kids, he could be waiting for a friend, and maybe he does live there -why you would smoke out in your car instead of your apartment, I don’t know. But the Supreme Court looks at whether all the other facts that have been building up would lead a trained police e officer ti think “maybe there’s something up with this guy.” And that is ras











Z

 

[nhbbear]

-Let's not conflate approach into put hands on and detain. Why not approach and run tag? That literally makes the most sense.
-I dont believe your training gives you any special powers to tell if people sitting in their cars legally are criminals. In fact that's part of the problem many of your colleagues across the country have piss poor training & judgment. This sixth sense you always refer to is simply profiling people who don't like cops in bad areas. Not a superpower.
Its weird that you still defend it, especially when HE DIDN'T STEAL THE CAR. Or there is zero proof of an actual crime prior to the slaying.

-Where an adult lives & the time of day doesn't limit the ability of that man to travel freely.

-Good Faith, are you kidding me???? You honestly want to be put on a pedestal while you assume random black man in a car is a car thief. You really think you can accuse or suspect innocent people of horrible crimes & then they should just think you're golly g swelll. Man that's a lot of hero worship getting into one's head.

-I dont know why you keep using his politics and racism in your point. It honestly dilutes your argument. Give me one scenario where you have ever used a cop being a racist POS in their personal life to determine if their conduct on the job was lawful??????

- I would love to respond more. As generally I don't agree with you. You do make some interesting threads. I enjoy your anecdotes at times. I think 90% of the time you try to address most of the valid counter points. You at times can admit when you were incorrect. However, if the typical losers continue to come in here and make up strawman assine arguments I'm going to bow out that way I don't ruin your thread.

Then ignore them.

It’s not a sixth sense or a spidey sense, as I have heard it called, but it is a deduction made from taking the information available and comparing it with your training and experience. I don’t know why he didn’t run the plate, or maybe he did and saw that the vehicle wasn’t registered to that building. Maybe that was what led them to wallace-because it was the last plate he ran. But, also in my training, I know that car thieves will often switch plates with a vehicle that matches the vehicle they have stolen.

And good faith refers to an officer attempting to do his job with good intentions(stopping and preventing crime and investigating suspicious situations) especially in light of the information he had been given about that apartment. And obviously, he found a guy that had an illegally concealed gun that was quick to use it-so I would say his suspicion was spot on.

Since you’re taking up for wallace, on what planet is this justifiable self defense in which a police officer talks to you, blocks you way, and then puts his hand on your shoulder? Where is the deadly force threat in that?

Oh, and I can’t remember any specific instances I commented on where a racist pos cop personal feelings affect his ability to do the job, but I am sure it’s come up, and when it did, I said then they can’t be cops because there is no way that a racist cop could possibly do the job fairly and without bias and without trying to fuck over every black person out there. And I know they exist and that makes me angry and sad.

 

[WklySportsMemes]

Then ignore them.

It’s not a sixth sense or a spidey sense, as I have heard it called, but it is a deduction made from taking the information available and comparing it with your training and experience. I don’t know why he didn’t run the plate, or maybe he did and saw that the vehicle wasn’t registered to that building. Maybe that was what led them to wallace-because it was the last plate he ran. But, also in my training, I know that car thieves will often switch plates with a vehicle that matches the vehicle they have stolen.

And good faith refers to an officer attempting to do his job with good intentions(stopping and preventing crime and investigating suspicious situations) especially in light of the information he had been given about that apartment. And obviously, he found a guy that had an illegally concealed gun that was quick to use it-so I would say his suspicion was spot on.

Since you’re taking up for wallace, on what planet is this justifiable self defense in which a police officer talks to you, blocks you way, and then puts his hand on your shoulder? Where is the deadly force threat in that?

Oh, and I can’t remember any specific instances I commented on where a racist pos cop personal feelings affect his ability to do the job, but I am sure it’s come up, and when it did, I said then they can’t be cops because there is no way that a racist cop could possibly do the job fairly and without bias and without trying to fuck over every black person out there. And I know they exist and that makes me angry and sad.

-The deduction was dead wrong in the case at hand though. You can try to validate it in theory if you want, but in the field many times and in this particular example it was wrong.
Man may have been a lot of bad legal things before. He became a murder after. However, he was not a car thief. Those are just the facts. Not random facts that have no clear boundaries or borders in order to profile a group of people.

-Glad we are finally addressing the plate. Isn't that provable????? Especially if he called it in. Or the database has no history search, or searched database. You should know that better than me. So I would be absolutely shocked if this could not be proven.
If he ran the tag he would have known the vehicle was not stolen or reported stolen correct????
Thats why I dont buy the whole trained guru gimmick. I'm not a cop. I have 0 LEO training. Yet the 1st most logical thing in my mind is, hey let's not jump to a deadly conclusion or extreme escalation. Sounds like you are even saying running the tag was the best option too.

-The shooting and the gun part I would have to read again and watch the video on a better screen. Would also have to see what the state law is. Forgive me for not just jumping on that accusation as you have made a decent amount of false claims about his legal status above that were not true.

-I don't look at you or your colleagues as above the law or being able to physically touch anybody who isn't breaking the law. I feel any person should be able to physically defend themselves against anybody making unwanted physical contact against them.
You feel cops should have unlimited authority all the time. I don't. That's literally a police state. Cops should have authority when enforcing the law for people breaking the law or actual proof somebody is about to commit or engage in a crime. Or during a crisis/emergency situation I could give them more broad authority.

If I don't get good faith as a law abiding citizen, that same energy will be given back for assuming im a POS criminal. I will assume said cop is racist profiling POS cop. As I know I have broken 0 laws and can choose who to have a conversation with & my schedule for the day.

- Quickly shooting somebody in cold blood, (with an alleged illegally concealed weapon) is an escalation into an entirely new horrible scenario. So its dishonest to say I'm defending him simply because you identify more with your colleague.
Hell I'll even say you probably identify as a cop over anything else. Nothing wrong with that. Just recognize its always going to make you lean on the officer was always right in most scenarios.

 

[nhbbear]

-The deduction was dead wrong in the case at hand though. You can try to validate it in theory if you want, but in the field many times and in this particular example it was wrong.
Man may have been a lot of bad legal things before. He became a murder after. However, he was not a car thief. Those are just the facts. Not random facts that have no clear boundaries or borders in order to profile a group of people.

-Glad we are finally addressing the plate. Isn't that provable????? Especially if he called it in. Or the database has no history search, or searched database. You should know that better than me. So I would be absolutely shocked if this could not be proven.
If he ran the tag he would have known the vehicle was not stolen or reported stolen correct????
Thats why I dont buy the whole trained guru gimmick. I'm not a cop. I have 0 LEO training. Yet the 1st most logical thing in my mind is, hey let's not jump to a deadly conclusion or extreme escalation. Sounds like you are even saying running the tag was the best option too.

-The shooting and the gun part I would have to read again and watch the video on a better screen. Would also have to see what the state law is. Forgive me for not just jumping on that accusation as you have made a decent amount of false claims about his legal status above that were not true.

-I don't look at you or your colleagues as above the law or being able to physically touch anybody who isn't breaking the law. I feel any person should be able to physically defend themselves against anybody making unwanted physical contact against them.
You feel cops should have unlimited authority all the time. I don't. That's literally a police state. Cops should have authority when enforcing the law for people breaking the law or actual proof somebody is about to commit or engage in a crime. Or during a crisis/emergency situation I could give them more broad authority.

If I don't get good faith as a law abiding citizen, that same energy will be given back for assuming im a POS criminal. I will assume said cop is racist profiling POS cop. As I know I have broken 0 laws and can choose who to have a conversation with & my schedule for the day.

- Quickly shooting somebody in cold blood, (with an alleged illegally concealed weapon) is an escalation into an entirely new horrible scenario. So its dishonest to say I'm defending him simply because you identify more with your colleague.
Hell I'll even say you probably identify as a cop over anything else. Nothing wrong with that. Just recognize its always going to make you lean on the officer was always right in most scenarios.

I don’t think we are going to agree on these last few points. I spent a very long time honing my skills developing ras and then refined them even further getting my masters.

Just because you don’t want to accept that there are factors in law enforcement, how they are allowed to do their job via scotus cases while adhering to the 4th amendment while investigating potential criminal activity-I don’t know what to tell you. Change the laws, then.

Based on what you are basically saying, that unless a cop knows specifically what crime you have committed, if you don’t want to stop-you don’t have to. That is 100% false and incorrect. If that were the case, no one would stop or be forced to stop ever. This man was not free to go and that was clear by the officer’s words or actions, and he was absolutely right that something was not right with this guy and he was in fact committing a crime, hence his behavior and rush to get out of there after sitting in his car for who knows how long. Believe it or not, but that reaction to law enforcement presence alone is ras.

And back to the right to self defense. No, you don’t get to shoot someone for putting a hand on your shoulder. That’s absurdly ridiculous. And when you factor in Raynor being a uniformed police officer carrying out his duties in an official capacity, it’s even worse.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

Sorry, no weird conspiracy theory for you to vomit out here. This was in response to the article linked. Go elsewhere adults are talking.

Just laughing at you moving the goalposts. Calm down weirdo.

 

[DiddlyDoodly]

This happened a couple years ago in Philly.



Now why am I posting this you may ask, and what does it have to do with the subject of this topic? Well the person who pulled the trigger was Savion Perez, and even though he was arrested, after a bunch of bullshit involving witnesses not showing up for court, instead of the DA recharging Perez, he ended up getting released back on to the streets and then went on to murder 2 more people.

D.A. Enables Murder Suspect To Become Triple Murder Suspect

 

[WklySportsMemes]

Just laughing at you moving the goalposts. Calm down weirdo.

Laugh at your life and loser conspiracy mentality.
Derail elsewhere dpsht.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

Laugh at your life and loser conspiracy mentality.
Derail elsewhere dpsht.

Nah. It isn't against forum rules to point out when someone is moving the goal posts.

 

[nhbbear]

This happened a couple years ago in Philly.



Now why am I posting this you may ask, and what does it have to do with the subject of this topic? Well the person who pulled the trigger was Savion Perez, and even though he was arrested, after a bunch of bullshit involving witnesses not showing up for court, instead of the DA recharging Perez, he ended up getting released back on to the streets and then went on to murder 2 more people.

D.A. Enables Murder Suspect To Become Triple Murder Suspect

I did a complete thread on progressive DAs and I think I did one specifically on krasner and the show Philly da. I detailed each episode and concluded that his policies do exactly what that article accuses him of-going extremely soft on criminals, especially criminals that are minorities. He is very quick to charge police officers, though, but not life long felons who violate time and time again. He is destroying an already dying city crime wise. He, and every progressive da need removed-from alvin bragg in nyc to george gascon in la and kim foxx in Chicago.

 

[Source]

I explained ras a couple times itt, probably a better description in my last post. The Supreme Court has ruled that simply being in a high crime area by itself is not enough ras to just start stopping people. However, the cop was specifically told to keep and eye on this apartment complex because of recent crimes including one about a BOLO for a gray Honda that was stolen and seen in the complex. Guess what wallace was driving?

I’ve heard he was smoking a joint, but he claims it was only a swisher sweet, but then during trials he said he was smoking a cig. let’s say it was a joint. Not a real big dealt but still not recreational in Florida. He and defense council deny it was pot. Why would that matter-he killed a cop, the reason why they we’re desperately trying to chip away at any reason the cop had to speak with him.

That’s why I built my case not using that my last post. There are ras factors out there like high crime area, suspicious behavior (sitting in a car smoking in a high crime area) which could be completely innocent, but also, could indicate something is going on. According to Raynor’s training in experience, drug dealers are known ti do this, maybe someone waiting for a particular person to come outside so he can shoot them, who knows? But the Supreme Court allows that he could be waiting for his ex to bring out the kids, he could be waiting for a friend, and maybe he does live there -why you would smoke out in your car instead of your apartment, I don’t know. But the Supreme Court looks at whether all the other facts that have been building up would lead a trained police e officer ti think “maybe there’s something up with this guy.” And that is ras











Z

I don’t believe officers need ras to as you said “see what’s up”. I don’t think that gives them a right to detain someone. I am surprised you didn’t mention Illinois v Warlow. I think the suspect’s attempt to get away could constitute flight and would provide the ras necessary in this case.


Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119, 124-25 (2000). - A person's flight in a high crime area after seeing police was sufficient for reasonable suspicion to stop and frisk.

 

[WklySportsMemes]

I don’t think we are going to agree on these last few points. I spent a very long time honing my skills developing ras and then refined them even further getting my masters.

Just because you don’t want to accept that there are factors in law enforcement, how they are allowed to do their job via scotus cases while adhering to the 4th amendment while investigating potential criminal activity-I don’t know what to tell you. Change the laws, then.

Based on what you are basically saying, that unless a cop knows specifically what crime you have committed, if you don’t want to stop-you don’t have to. That is 100% false and incorrect. If that were the case, no one would stop or be forced to stop ever. This man was not free to go and that was clear by the officer’s words or actions, and he was absolutely right that something was not right with this guy and he was in fact committing a crime, hence his behavior and rush to get out of there after sitting in his car for who knows how long. Believe it or not, but that reaction to law enforcement presence alone is ras.

And back to the right to self defense. No, you don’t get to shoot someone for putting a hand on your shoulder. That’s absurdly ridiculous. And when you factor in Raynor being a uniformed police officer carrying out his duties in an official capacity, it’s even worse.

-I will read later & respond.

Nah. It isn't against forum rules to point out when someone is moving the goal posts.

You have nothing offer the conversation.
Instead of being a dork, let the people who disagree but who can have a normal conversation talk. Act like a human for 1 thread.

 

[nhbbear]

I don’t believe officers need ras to as you said “see what’s up”. I don’t think that gives them a right to detain someone. I am surprised you didn’t mention Illinois v Warlow. I think the suspect’s attempt to get away could constitute flight and would provide the ras necessary in this case.


Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119, 124-25 (2000). - A person's flight in a high crime area after seeing police was sufficient for reasonable suspicion to stop and frisk.

The link I provided earlier had quite a bit on wardlow. I mentioned several times that the change in his behavior upon encountering a cop definitely raises suspicions

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

-I will read later & respond.

You have nothing offer the conversation.
Instead of being a dork, let the people who disagree but who can have a normal conversation talk. Act like a human for 1 thread.

Yeah I must be a bad poster. That must be why I have more likes than posts and you have more posts than likes.

 

[Protectandserve]

Shit like this why I want to get off the streets. Hoping to get an inside position

 

[Hog-train]

Seems 2nd degree fits the bill.

"Second degree is considered a “crime of passion” in which there is a heated argument or the decision to kill is made up on the spot."

I don't know how anyone can argue he didn't intend to kill when he took the gun and shot him.

 

[Clifford_Harris]

Since they were both armed.... Based on "The good guy with a gun" theory, gotta assume this was self-defense and a righteous kill

 

[SummerStriker]

I don't understand why cops simultaneously think their job is dangerous and then also walk up to bother people who are minding their own business. "Who the fuck are you? Why are you in a car? Do you live here? Do you want to get physical? I'm your boss." Then gets shot. Obviously. I'd expect to be shot dead for bothering only 50-75 people like that. Who knows how many times the cop has skated by after starting conflict with someone for no reason. Cops should learn to respect the public and take their own lives a little more seriously by not starting shit with strangers for no reason.

 

[mkess101]

Since they were both armed.... Based on "The good guy with a gun" theory, gotta assume this was self-defense and a righteous kill

Absolutely. When people talk about a "good guy" with a gun, they are absolutely talking about someone like Wallace...

Wallace has had at least a dozen arrests in four different counties — Broward, Seminole, Volusia and Brevard — convictions for aggravated assault in 2014, which resulted in 180 days in jail, drug possession and criminal driving while license suspended. Wallace also has five domestic violence arrests, but in each case, the charges were dropped.

On Valentine's Day in 2017, Wallace was arrested at an apartment in Sanford for allegedly beating his pregnant girlfriend. That charge was dropped.

For sure it's a righteous kill since the cop was armed even though...it's part of the cop's job to BE armed. But hey, let's just get rid of all cops and have anarchy and nobody to enforce any laws at all. Sounds awesome.