Monday, February 13, 2012

AoW#14: Kelly Expresses Concern Over Fatal Shooting in Bronx

February 3, 2012

Kelly Expresses Concern Over Fatal Shooting in Bronx




A police officer who shot and killed an unarmed 18-year-old in the bathroom of the teenager’s Bronx apartment has been stripped of his gun and badge, the police commissioner said Friday, and both the commissioner and the mayor expressed concern about the circumstances of the shooting.
The commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, stopped short of declaring the shooting unjustified but said at a news conference: “At this juncture, we see an unarmed person being shot. That always concerns us.”
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg made a similar comment, telling reporters outside a pre-Super Bowl event on the Upper East Side, “We obviously have some real concerns, and until we know what really happened there’s not a lot else I can say.”
The commissioner’s remarks, coming less than 24 hours after the teenager, Ramarley Graham, was killed by a plainclothes narcotics officer, were a stark departure for Mr. Kelly, who rarely makes public an early assessment of a shooting.
The fatal shot came shortly after 3 p.m. Thursday. Members of the Street Narcotics Enforcement Unit, who had pursued Mr. Graham based on a report that he was armed, broke open the door to the second-floor apartment where he lived with his family on East 229th Street, Mr. Kelly said.
As the first officer came through, Mr. Graham emerged from the back of the apartment running toward them, then veered into the bathroom, the police said.
“Show me your hands! Show me your hands!” the officer yelled, said Mr. Kelly, who cited the account of a second officer who trailed the first officer into the apartment. The police did not release the names of any of the officers. Mr. Graham was black; the officer who shot him is white.
Inside the apartment, Mr. Kelly said, the first officer, who was in the hallway outside the bathroom, yelled, “Gun! Gun!” suggesting to the officers behind him that Mr. Graham was armed.
“The partner said he then heard a shot,” Mr. Kelly said. “It is at that point we believe the shooting officer fired once from his 9-millimeter service firearm.”
The bullet hit Mr. Graham in the upper chest, striking a lung and his aorta, killing him, said Ellen Borakove, a spokeswoman for the medical examiner.
Mr. Kelly added that investigators had yet to find evidence that Mr. Graham was armed. “No gun was recovered,” the commissioner said. Rather, the police said, a bag of marijuana was found in the toilet, raising the possibility that Mr. Graham bolted to the bathroom to try to dispose of it.
The shooting will be investigated by the Bronx district attorney, Robert T. Johnson, and is likely to be presented to a grand jury. A key factor will be the officers’ state of mind, and whether they had reason to believe that Mr. Graham was armed.
The officer who fired the shot — a 30-year-old who has been on the force since 2008 — has not yet been interviewed by the police because of the pending criminal investigation.
The officer’s sergeant was also stripped of his gun and badge; both are now on “modified duty,” off the streets, for the time being.
“We are still evaluating the actions here,” Mr. Kelly said.
The scene outside Mr. Graham’s home on Friday was tense at times. As the police re-entered the three-family house to execute a search warrant, one bystander on the street yelled, “You killed him because he smoked weed!” Later, dozens of people began shouting toward the officers inside. “Murderers!” many yelled.
Mr. Graham’s family did not speak to reporters, but they retained a lawyer, Jeffrey L. Emdin, who said the police should never have entered the home on Thursday. “When the police are above the law, nobody is safe,” Mr. Emdin said.
Mr. Kelly, recounting Thursday’s events, said the narcotics team had been staking out a bodega at East 228th Street and White Plains Road, after the police had received reports of drug sales out front.
With two friends, Mr. Graham went into the bodega. But they left quickly, and as they did, team members who were observing the bodega radioed their colleagues that they believed one of the three — who they later learned was Mr. Graham — “was armed,” Mr. Kelly said.
The impression that Mr. Graham had a gun was reinforced as officers tracked the three men. The group next went to a home at 728 East 229th Street, where Mr. Graham was spotted leaving with what appeared to be the butt of a gun in his waistband, according to another set of radio transmissions among the narcotics team members.
Two officers wearing raid jackets and bullet-resistant vests emerged from a van and yelled, “Police! Stop! Don’t move!” said Mr. Kelly, citing the account of a civilian witness.
But Mr. Graham made it to his home at 749 East 229th Street, and the front door locked, stymieing officers who were pursuing him with their guns drawn. Another tenant, Gene Davis, 60, said he saw the officers rushing through the outside gate before they reached the door. They yelled at him: “Don’t move! Get back!”
Eventually, a man alerted by the commotion let the sergeant in a back door and told him that Mr. Graham lived on the second floor. The officers then spread out: One stayed on the ground floor; the sergeant stayed on the stairs; and two lead officers went to the apartment and knocked. When no one answered, they “broke open” the door, Mr. Kelly said.
Precisely what happened in the bathroom seconds later is not clear. On Thursday night, the police said Mr. Graham had tussled with an officer, but on Friday, Mr. Kelly said there did not appear to be any evidence of a struggle.
“We don’t believe there was contact,” he said.
The officer yelled, “Gun! Gun!” and then fired, Mr. Kelly said.
The teenager’s grandmother Patricia Hartley was in the hallway. Paulet Minzie, the landlady, who lives on the third floor, said she heard the grandmother shouting at the police: “Why you hitting me? Why you hitting me?”
Mr. Graham’s 6-year-old brother was also screaming, Ms. Minzie said. “He said, ‘They killed my brother!’ ” she related.
Mr. Kelly repeatedly sought to solace Mr. Graham’s mother and grandmother. “Any mother, any parent is going to be terribly affected,” he said. “It is the worst thing that can happen to a parent, is to lose a child, and we certainly sympathize with the family.”
The fatal shooting comes amid an unusually violent period for the police. Officer Peter J. Figoski was fatally shot on Dec. 12 while responding to a report of a robbery in Cypress Hills, Brooklyn.
Last month, the police in Brooklyn fatally shot an armed man who they mistakenly believed was a robber but was a resident of a house where a home invasion was occurring, and, two weeks later, a carjacking suspect.
And this week, Officer Kevin Brennan was seriously wounded when he was shot in the head after chasing an armed man into a building in Brooklyn.
“These things seem to come in clumps sometimes,” Mr. Kelly said. “Sometimes you see a cluster of them. Generally speaking, I’d say there’s no connectivity.”
Option 1:  
Was the officer justified to shoot because he saw a gun?  Why or why not?   What role does race play, if any, in this case? Explain and use specific evidence to support your response.


Option 2:  Reply to a classmate's post: 
  • Summarize the argument made in the previous post and agree or disagree with your classmate.  Be specific by pointing out what you agree with or disagree with.  
  • Then add your own response.  Use evidence to support your response.
  • Finally, post a meaningful question to keep the conversation going.  

Option 3:  In Twelve Angry Men we discussed the role personal bias plays in the American Judicial System.  What role does bias play in our everyday lives?  In American Society?  Give specific examples to support your response.


72 comments:

  1. No the officer was not justify to shoot because in the article it saids that "Mr. Kelly added that investigators had yet to find evidence that Mr. Graham was armed." This prove that the officers did not have prove that the victim had no gun when the officers partner yelled "Gun! Gun!”
    In this case race plays a big role because not many people understand that justbecause we live in a poor neighborhood. Does not mean we are all criminals.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you and think that they should have waited until they heard/saw a gun. Now a man is dead because of a guess and it is not fair because their family is crying and they cannot bring him back to life. So yes this is unjust.

      Delete
    2. In this case race plays a big role because not many people understand that just because we live in a poor neighborhood. Does not mean we are all criminals. In this time many people have been discriminated because of their race or their culture. In Obama's rule over the United State so far there have been no racial discrimination. In my opinion, many people discrimnate African because they think that just becauseyou are a certain color you are all the same in a bad or good way.

      Delete
    3. Your totally right race does play a big role here. Now a days officers think they the big boss and can judge people without knowing them.That was a bad move to just kill someone for assuming they had a gun on them.

      Delete
    4. I agree they were wrong to shoot right away without really seeing a gun. Though if I was a cop and I SAW that a suspect is getting ready to fire at me then I would shoot. What makes story really strong is that it's a white cop vs a black teenager. When i was told about on the news right away I thought "oh racsim again". Really I think i cant take a side because I still feel like i dont know the whole story.
      -Brian R

      Delete
    5. I also agree they were really wrong to shoot this in this form of way. In my opinion , I think the officer should have waited a few seconds too see what he was doing and after do what they had to do . Giving time to certain things are important at times like on situations on this. If I was the officer i would of have hide under something and just wait until something would of occur , not just shoot assuming they had a gun out of no where like that .
      -PAOLA

      Delete
    6. I agree with you Diana because they didn't know he had a gun so why would they shoot him.Race plays a big role in this case because a cop thought that he had a gun even though he didn't. i feel like he just killed him because he assumed that he was someone very dangerous

      Delete
    7. i agree with sally race was the reason why this happened

      Delete
  2. I believe that there was no reason for the police officer to do what he did for a lot of different reasons.One because there on of the amdement that alows people to have a gun.Secnd of all they didnt have a premission to go to his house with out a judge saying so and him showing it to the people living in the place.Also i disagree with diana about the officer not being justify because he kill a preson for a thought / believe .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with Joanna because the officer shouldn't suspect that the 18 year old kid had a weapon. I think that the officer thought he was armed because different races do things differently. I think that race takes part of the crime because it shows how the cops around that neighborhood was surrounded by other races. Inside the apartment, Mr. Kelly said, the first officer, who was in the hallway outside the bathroom, yelled, “Gun! Gun!” suggesting to the officers behind him that Mr. Graham was armed. What I wonder is why did the officer say about the gun if they didn't even see it. -channel santiago 9sm

      Delete
  3. In my opinion, I believe that no officer should even take out their gun if they don't see something that can hurt them or kill them. I come from a family that has four police officers and they all said similar things after hearing this. After watching a video of the 18 year old entering his house and the two police officers right behind them, they had no reason as to why they should have shot and killed a young man. Just because he had two or three bags of Marijuana, they should have not taken his life away. Commissioner Kelly should not only have taken their gun and badge away but a stronger consequence because they has no reason as to kill this young man. They had permission to get in to his house because they saw him get in to the house and somewhat try to escape. However, the young man showed no sign of violence or if he had a weapon on him or not. The police officer who took away this young mans life had 5 years in duty meaning that he should know better then that and that he has plenty of experience and should have known not to take that this far. His family should stay strong, get a good lawyer and fight till the very end. I hope that other police officers such as rookies learn from this and make sure that this doesn't happen to one of them. Young men selling Marijuana in the streets should also learn from this, that they should never try to escape from the police and that they should just do whatever police officers ask them to do because something wrong can cause them their life. The police officer that was shot i the head was very lucky and stayed strong throughout his injury. I believe that if officers see that someone shows a sign of violence they should call backup and try to stay safe while keeping an eye on their offender until their back has arrived to the scene. I hope that this doesn't happen again and that commissioner Kelly should make stronger consequences.

    -Sixto Mescain 9VO

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent response Sixto! You really build credibility with your audience (ethos) considering you have officers in the family. Well done!

      Delete
    2. My opinion is that the officer made a mistake and who ever is reading this please don't lie that you have never done a mistake in your life because everybody has done a mistake in there life. This is a really big example in what marijuana leads you to because no one knows if the boy before he was shot used marijuana because the officers told him to show him his hands TWO TIMES and since when you do drugs you turn all crazy and don't even know what you are doing or saying. Another example in why I could think in why the officer shot him for accident is because if you been following the news a lot of cops have been shot and I think one or two were killed which is something is crazy going on and as the commissioner said we can't lose more police officers and as I was reading Sixto's response and that four of his family members are police officers just imagine how they will feel when they are chasing someone that thy think has a weapon. This is just darn stupid that just because the person that was shot and killed was black and the police officer was white because let's go the other way the person that killed Officer Peter Figoski was black and his other buddies which were five were robbing and of course the officer was doing his job and it ended up costing his life. So just because the person that was shot was black and the officer was white is non sense. We are judging the police officers but if we were in the shoes of the officers afraid if they end up dead or shot then in reality we will see the true.

      Delete
    3. i agree with both jason and sixto because as yuou guys said no police should shoot a guy just because they think they have a gun or drugs, if you're a police you should kno what to do and most importantly how to handdle a situation. cases like this happen all the times, if not a kid shooting a police is a polive shooting a child. in this case he had no rights to shoot that kid without knowing what he had. plus how sixto said teens should learn from this and think what they gonna do on the treets, and also learn how to face their problems.. escaping from them wont fix NOTHING!

      Delete
    4. Dear Sixto, I thought that your response was very accurate as you said that even if the killed person had 3 bags of the drug he shouldn't have taken his life away. I really agree with this statement because the police officers should have only arrested him not killed the guy. I thought that Commissioner Kelly HAD to put a much more stronger consequence. I guess you can never change the aspect of one's thought....

      Delete
    5. I agree with all the responses before mine. Sixto, I think that stating the fact that you come from a family that has 4 police officers made your response stronger. I also agree with what you said about the consequences that Commissioner Kelly made. The consequences should have been bigger because this police officer took away the life of a young man. He didn't show any type of violence or anything. The police officer should have never shot the kid because he wasn't in danger or at risk of dying. This connects to all the rookies that think they are something big because they go around checking those who look suspicious. They have checked many young men that I know, and that isn't right. They also get smart and try to go into the pockets of the kids which isn't right. This family should stay strong, and I hope justice is made. -Arlene Salcedo♥

      Delete
    6. I agree with all the responses before mine. Sixto, I think that stating the fact that you come from a family that has 4 police officers made your response stronger. I also agree with what you said about the consequences that Commissioner Kelly made. The consequences should have been bigger because this police officer took away the life of a young man. He didn't show any type of violence or anything. The police officer should have never shot the kid because he wasn't in danger or at risk of dying. This connects to all the rookies that think they are something big because they go around checking those who look suspicious. They have checked many young men that I know, and that isn't right. They also get smart and try to go into the pockets of the kids which isn't right. This family should stay strong, and I hope justice is made. -Arlene Salcedo♥

      Delete
  4. I would like to begin my response by asking where is the warrant? Also where is the gun? The cops had no good reason to shoot him because they are not allowed to pull the trigger on a civilian unless they are pointing the gun at an officer or they look as if they are withdrawing the gun to use it. To make the incident worst his a six year old boy that happened to be the victims brother was in the house with the rest of the family that included his grandmother that was taken to the police station for questioning and denied her medication. That is just obscene! I also think RACE plays a big role in this case because if it was a Caucasian male in the suburbs somewhere the officer wont even think to go past the first stoop! Also it's funny how the officer assumed that the black male from the Bronx would have a gun on him. I think they should run a background check on him and run some therapy sessions on him or something. Then they wonder why cops have a worst reputation than drug dealers these days.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with Yohan because as he said the officers had no right to shoot since Mr. Graham did not pull out or have a gun in his hand. Drugs are illegal, but that doesn't give you the right to shoot, just because you're an officer. "The officer who fired the shot — a 30-year-old who has been on the force since 2008" This was also something that bothered me. This police officer has only been in the force for three to four years. I don't think that he was supposed to be in charge of this situation because he hasn't had as much experience so he might do something useless; like taking someones life away.
      Lhia, 9LE

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. I agree with both Lhia and Yohan, this officer that shot did not really know what he was doing at the moment. Whether he was in a moment of panic or he really thought that Mr. Graham had a gun he did not have the right to shoot straight away. The officer followed Mr. Graham all the way to his house, because he looked suspicious. I don't think he had any real motive to follow him home, and then break into his home, and kill him in front of his own family! The officer shot him because he looked suspicious, because he thought he might have had a weapon on him, but never was anything confirmed, so why did he shoot? I agree with Lhia's point on the fact that maybe this officer had too little experience to be in charge of this case anyways, and he should not have shot. He was punished right, by taking away his weapons and his badge right now, because it seems like he does not know how to control his power. Maybe this case was not necessarily based on race and tension between the officer and Mr. Graham, but why did the officer think he had the right to shoot? How does it look now that a kid got shot pretty much for looking suspicious and having marijuana?

      Delete
    4. i agree with yohan because no cop is justified to shoot a person with out the cop being 100% sure their life is endangered. this is a problem many cops have gone through. there has been so many important cases where aqa cop shoots a person for going into there pocket. i am sure that an experienced police man would have waited but now a days these rookies want to be in the spolight but little do they know that they are far from going through what an experienced cop has gone through. also just for a man having marijuana, that is certainly no reason to be shot at. of course they should be arrested but shot at and killed is just over the limit because these cops dont care about anybodies lifes they dont think that the person has a family.

      Delete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i dissagree with you alex because the offisor who shot the boy was white and the boy was black. I say that the police officer should get fired and should go to jail for murder. The police officer said gun and their was no gun, it was a lie and the police force recoverd no gun from Mr.Grahams corpse so they had no right to shoot him and so the police officer should be fired and sent to jail. If this had happened before like in the 1800s 1900s he should have been put to death.
      -Keanu Abreu

      Delete
    2. I believe the officer being charged is not totally at fault. I don't think it has anything to do with race. People are judging too quickly,one of the officer yelled out gun because he saw the man running to the bath room. This was proven he was running because it was said this man had stored drugs in his toilet. So when the officers broke in, all they saw was a man running while they yelled freeze. Now think about it would you have waited for the man to get what ever he was getting in that situation. Even though it was against the law i wouldn't have put my life in the hands of that man running to the bath room not knowing anything about that person except that he might be a criminal. I don't think the officer is totally Innocent because it could have been driven by race, but i highly doubt it. its really rare for a police officer to shoot a person and get away with it i don't think anyone in right mind would do it just because they don't like some ones race. So i cant say he should go to jail for acting out of instinct or common sense, at least not until they look into this matter a bit more
      -Alex.Mayi,9LE

      Delete
  6. In my own opinion,I think that no officer should take out his gun if they don't see anything out that can harm them in any way. Just because they claim to see that the boy had three bags of Marijuana they didn't have no right to take his life away.There should be a even bigger and stronger consequence because they had no reason as to kill this innocent young man.They did have permission to get into his house because they claim to see him get into the house and somehow try to escape,but the young man showed no type of sign of violence in anyway.the officer in charge had enough experiences to know not to take things as far to assume that he had a weapon she had to give this young man the benefit of the doubt and if he saw any sign of a weapon then he could have defended himself with his gun.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think that the police officer did not have the right to shoot the guy. I think they have the right to shoot someone if they have a gun and started shooting at another police, then they might have the rights to shoot back to defend themselfs, but if the person that has a gun puts his hands up and drops his gun and the police officers just shoot at him then i dont think that they had the right to shoot him. I dont even trust some of the police officers around New York because everywhere you see on the news, there is a police officer that broke their own laws.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you because this goes back to segregation and slavery and racist people because the police officer was white and he shot a black teenager for no correct reason. I believe the police officer should had gone up to the black teenager if he thought he was carrying anything that he wasn't suppose to. I mean would he have done the same thing if the teenager was white? No i don't think so, but thats just me assuming.

      Delete
  8. In my opinion I dont think that the officers should have shot the teenager. I think that the officer shouldn't be in a job where the people are trusting the police officers and to find out that one officer mest up in shooting an innocent teenager. I understand that its an officers job to ARREST anyone who broke into a house but to shoot one is not right and should not be working as an officer. I have friends with officers in their families and yet they wouldn't take out a gun if they feel as though the other person is threating them.
    Something like this makes me upset. Reason why because officers are giving that job they should know the critiria about uding a gun or not.Usually some of the officers want the job to feel power and respect, while others want the job to protect others. By the sounds of this officer, I thinks that he only wanted this job to show that he's tougher and he has the power and that is not right and he should be fired.
    -Rachelle 9SM

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you Rachelle because an innocent person without a gun shouldn't be shot. I don't think that the officer should of just assumed that he was caring a gun. in my opinion i think this was a little bit racist because they assumed that because he was black that he was doing something wrong. If he would of been some teenager from a rich white neighborhood he wouldn't of been shot and the officer would of checked the teen before he taking action.

      Delete
    2. I agree with you Rachelle. I understand that sometimes people feel threaten but for some reason like that people should know their facts before taking out a gun at someone. Polices should know that their job is to try to make the person with the gun put it down but in this situation the person did not even have a gun. This shows that the person is innocent. The police man is white and the teenager was black. This relates to segregation and racist people. You never know if the police man was racist and he just felt as if he wanted to get rid of blacks like in the Twelve Angry Men play. In my opinion people should think before they act. Also did the officer get away with the shooting? If so this situation is completely racist and the police man should get arrested. I hate situations like this and I hope our generation learns how to change and become better human beings to one another. I hope we all decide to think before we act.
      - Yesenia

      Delete
    3. I agree also because no innoncent person should be shot jus because the officer "thought" he had a weapon. That's completely involuntary.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. I agree with you Rachelle because no innoncent person should be shot just because the officer thinks or believes he had a weapon.I think the cops were being racist and they just assumed he was armed and up to no good because he was black.Here in the heights when cops see a big crowd of teens they would assume that were up to no good so they follow us without even knowing we really not.
      -Arlin Guillen

      Delete
  9. Brian Concepcion-

    In my opinion, I believe that if an officer for some reason thinks that he sees a gun should never authorize him to shoot a person at any circumstance. One reason is because for some reason you were wrong and you end up killing a person then you are going to pay no matter what. Like the issue in the article about the 18 year old who got killed by the police officer Kelly. Kelly says that some other officer said that he was armed. But basically that’s like telling someone that you got the right to shoot somebody just because someone told you that somebody else has a gun. So that really doesn’t make sense. I do think he deserved to loose his badge though and I think he should also get arrested because if you’re a police men and your excuse for taking away the life of a person is because you THINK that he has a gun then he just had something against them. And why would I believe that excuse anyways, hey he was a white cop that shot a black person. Maybe he’s just biased against people of color which offends me because I’m a person of color too. in conclusion, I think that officers don’t have the right to shoot a person for thinking they have a gun because they make a horrible mistake a end up committing a crime they should have never done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i agree with you brain because how can he just shoot like that. and also what if its possible that the that was armed had a license to even have a gun. But in my opinion they should take the guys badge away from him for EVER don't you??. and that's true people are being biased and racist just because the kid was black sheeeeshhh.i also agree with your conclusion because that's right the officers do not have the right to do that. Brian don't you think its better for the cop to get arrested or just take his badge? and for how long?

      -Raymond Carvajal

      Delete
    2. I agree with Brain and Raymond because the cop had no right to shoot a person that someone else said that they had a gun when they didn't see them with they own eyes that the victim had a gun.I also agree that the cop was bias against the victim's color to shoot him in own house and both of the cops involve were white.I think that the officer Kelly should go to jail for killing a 18 year old innocent kid.Also the cops had no right to enter the kids house with out a warrant and shooting him because it was trespassing so it illegal for them to enter the house without a warrant so I believe the cops belong in jail.

      Delete
  10. OK first I think that the cop should not have shot the person because it was a closed space, he could have easily took him down with no reason to shot him. I don't think it was justified because if they where in an open space shoot him in the leg where you have a less chance of killing him, but this was not the case here the cop and the black person was, just like the story says, they were around the bathroom and he was not to far from the black kid. He shouted "Gun,Gun" and shot. I understand the cop was doing his job but what happen was not right like I said earlier just take him down on the floor. "The bullet hit Mr. Graham in the upper chest, striking a lung and his aorta, killing him, said Ellen Borakove, a spokeswoman for the medical examiner." you should not aim anywhere where you can kill the person, I personally think that race does play a role in this because you don't normally hear of a white person around these parts, you mostly hear about Latinos and African Americans about crime on the news. So maybe because of all of the times the cop has been a cop "since 2008" so since he said he was "armed" he came in the state of mind that he had a gun. Overall it was not justified at all, especially when he was found that he was never armed during the scene. Makes me wonder could I trust the people in our Judaical system? - Sucre, Marmolejo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with sucre. The cop really didn't have to shoot him in the chest right away with out seeing a gun yet. Also the cop could have also tackled Mr.Graham because the space was small. Also there is a statement in the article,"When the police is above the law no one is safe." I 100% agree with this because there are cops out there who think just because they are a cop the think they can do whatever they want. No you can't citizens have options. I do think race plays a role in this because the cop was probably racist because if you have time to scream show me your hands twice and no gun is shown and your in a small room you don't have to shoot a black person in the chest. Also the cop has yet to comment his thoughts about the incident. Cops really need to relax now a days

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. I also agree with Sucre because the police should have not shot just because they THOUGHTT they saw a gun. Even though they did it because they were unsure, they caused for a life to be lost. Was that really necessary? I think that race plays a role in this case because I think that if the cops saw a white person, they wouldn’t have shot so quickly. I also believe that this is a bit racist and not fair. I think that there are times were the NYPD takes advantage of their jobs and does things that they are nit suppose to. I agree with Chris when he says that the police department has to relax now a day because I think that if they thought twice, this wouldn’t have happened. The text says “the bullet hit Mr. Graham in the upper chest, striking a lung and his aorta, killing him" which was said by Ellen Borakove. This shows how the killing happened and how the man was affected. It was a very young man who died. Can they give this boy his life back? How do does the police feel/ the family needs to fight back, set things straight and make a change!

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  11. I don’t think the officer had the right to shoot. If he claimed he saw him armed he should have pursued him and called back up. Not try to act like the hero and do it on his own. If I was him I would have pursued him until he was in distance that was viewable call back up and bust him. I really don’t think this has to do with race but something hidden beneath this tragic death. They probably knew each other or something. Also the cop should have been arrested for not shooting correctly cause he could of shoot in the leg which means he was going without thinking or going for a kill which is why I believe these two must have had history.
    -Alexis, jimenez

    ReplyDelete
  12. In my opinion I think that the officer that shot the guy was not justified. Even though they screamed that the man had a gun he should of waited until he actually saw the gun just so he could aim not shoot. If the officer saw him make a move that would make him think that he would shoot then he would be justified to shoot back at him. In this case i do think that race does play a role in this case. Event though they screamed "gun gun" and he didn't see a gun he still shot at him. It makes me think that there was racism here because the officer might of shot because he came from the teen came from a bad neighborhood. So I do think there was racism in this case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with Fernando for several reasons. I agree with the fact that the police officer should've waited until he could clearly see that the man had a gun. Also the police officer shouldn't have shot the man because of the people who screamed "gun, gun". Anyone could scream that without there being a gun so it's not right for him to the that. Additionally about the racial thing, I believe it did that place in this situation. The police officer most likely had a bias opinion about the man because of his race and that is VERY unjust. I agree all the way with what Fernando thinks, and that is that the police officer shooting the guy was not justified. -Kathy Tavarez, 9LE

      Delete
  13. in my opinion, i believe the officer should even take out their gun because it should hurt someone and kill someone else. i think the officer shouldn't done that because of the young boy has marijuana that doesn't mean you have to kill someone. this case is really important even a police officer that doesn't have the permission to kill someone like that. also the young boy should not scape even though you have a bag of marijuana. i think the officer is guilty because who's going to kill someone for this reason that happens everyday for this situation and the officer done do that, i think that's suspicious because what officer want to do that? what was the reason that he those that? his guilty he should front the responsibility of what he did, and also to take somebody's life. those young people that are in the street should learn about this because i bet the anyone's want to die then go to jail. that most curious thing about this situation is the young boy was black and the officer is white, that's a good point of this. maybe he was race and he want to shoot him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with all of the points that you make. I've noticed that many people also agree that this may have been a race issue and that the police officer should not have taken action against the boy if he wasn't positive he was armed. Although I also understand the police officer's point of view because he may have felt his life was in danger, I also don't think that he was just in the decision he made and it affected many people's lives not only the cop or the boy because they both have families who would suffer from the events that occurred.

      Delete
  14. In our discussions of Twelve Angry Men we learned that bias is common in American society. What happens when the members of our society in positions of power hold biases? Should people in positions of power (elected officials, executives, police officers, even teachers!) be made aware of their own biases? Is it important that one is aware of one's own biases? Why or why not?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What happens is that the people who the member has a biased towards end up getting offended or mistreated in one way or another. People of power should be made aware of their own biases because it will not only make them a better person but also a better leader and give a great example for the future generations to come. I think that is very important to be aware of one's biases because that way you won't offend someone and you can work towards not having that bias.

      Delete
  15. In this case the officer had no authority to shoot at the boy. In my opinion a officer should only take their weapon out when there life is in danger and when theres another man pointing a weapon at him. The officer "thought" he had a weapon which means he made a involuntary action, because of this action a life was lost. This officer should be charged because of his inference of him having a gun his thoughts weren't positive if the boy had a weapon. These police officers think they could do whatever they want just because they have a badge on them.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I believe, that the police officer Mr. Kelly had no right to shoot the 18 year old kid name Ramarly Graham. What Mr. Kelly did was wrong and I think he should probably go to jail for this or have a bigger consequence for what he did because he didn’t just injure the kid instead he actually KILLED him. Mr. Kelly thought Graham was armed with a gun when he actually wasn’t. In fact other police officers assume the kid had a gun and decided to yell “Gun! Gun!” and suddenly officer Kelly decided to shoot him. Nor did Mr. Kelly see the gun he was just assuming. For me this is a serious topic for many different reasons. For example, a young man life was taken away without the cops even being 100% sure if Graham was guilty or innocent. Graham had a bag of marijuana and that’s all, which I think is something very common in between society now a days. This case doesn’t just sounds unfair to me but it also, makes me think of biases. One reason is because the police office, Mr. Kelly he was white and the young boy was black. Furthermore, it was in a Bronx community and maybe the police officer thought that since Graham was black he was armed, and had a bad reputation. This is negative because it shows racism yet discrimination towards black people or it can be towards any other race as well. Therefore Graham was found innocent and Kelly should have a more serious punishment!

    -Edelin Contreras, 9SM

    ReplyDelete
  17. I actually don't think the officer wasn't offericed to shoot because like in the text, officers still didn't find any evidence that the boy had a gun or was about to shoot. Through this statement, I actually do think racism was actually involved into this horrifying scene. I think this because from my opinion, I actually think that the officer actually thought that the boy had a gun because of his colors history or maybe the boy put his hand in his pants like most criminals do when they are about to shoot someone from surprise so maybe thats why cop shot the boy, because he felt threatened.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think that he wasn’t justified because he didn’t know that he has a gun so it makes the officer to think that he has gun he shot him. The race affects part of the shooting because a lot people don’t like each for someone do or they don’t like the race. It is happening for Latin people that they getting treated like African American in days were they were segregation. So a lot people think different about the race from what they experience or what they felt from it. There are a lot people that have hate on the race what the race did so it makes them have them to kill each other for something or to get attention. Also depends on which place that race lives if there was crimes been happening so it makes the officers to have more stress on people that are living near that place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you because the cop uses "Force Continum" The continuem basically states that a police officer is permitted to escalate his force to the level necessary to effect an arrest. If he wasn't trying to arrest him and assumed he had a a gun is breaking certain rules which should get him suspend from duty stripped from his or her equipment and trialed for this crime just like this cop! The failure of cops is the fail of our government! To fix it fix or gov.

      Delete
  19. I understand that Mr. Kelly was in a type of situation, but what I don't like is that if he has been in that job for 30 years, he would know how to handle the situation that wouldn't hurt anyone if no one is in danger. Now here comes the part where I become mutual, I don't know if he had the right to shoot Graham. I wasn't there. But from what I believe if Graham really was armed and was in the point to shoot (no hesitation)then he was protecting himself, but if Graham was not armed, then Kelly had no right. If this was a mistake then Kelly needs to find a way to apologize to the family, in some kind of breath taking way; because that mistake hurts a lot of people. Racism does play a big part here because I believe that the police officers do go with more caution when they visit the poorer areas that a lot of crimes occur. It is a good thing that they keep careful but just because they see that many of the African-American race are included in many crimes, does not mean that ALL of them are dangerous people. Many times the people end up bring criminals due to something in their childhood. So it is not their fault and it is not fair to them that they are given a name because of the different childhood they had. Overall, Kelly might have made a mistake or done it on purpose, but we won't know the full truth but either way Grahams family is hurt bad.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I think that the officer is not justified because if he said that he saw a gun and then shot Graham on the chest. If Graham never pointed at the officer with a gun, the officer for sure shouldn't shot him in the chest. But if for some how Graham had a gun and pointed at the officer, then he had to shoot him as self defense. It means that he is not justified. But i don't think there is a race problem here. Because the same thing would had happened if Graham was white. I think the real problem is the officers justification of seeing a gun.-Victor Liz 9SM

    ReplyDelete
  21. The same thing has happened many times when a officer shoots someone because they assumed the person had a weapon on them.This relates to 4 years back when police officers shot Seam Bell a day before his wedding because the police thought he had a gun when he tried leaving in his car.In my opinion I think the police meant to shoot him because how would he suddenly have a weapon as soon as he entered his house?The police department should do something about the cops they out out there because at the end the boy didn't have a gun after the investigation. Cops do this daily they assume someone has drugs,weapons,and arrest people for no reason.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Officers need to make sure of what they do, is not fair that they kill some one because they think they're strapping a gun.I heard of a case where a cop shot a teen because he had a water gun that from far looked like a real gun.Now if the officer is being pointed at or assaulted with a gun that's something different.All I'm saying cops need to be more careful with their actions.Is this issue becoming bigger every year ? It certainly is.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Bias plays a major role in our everyday society. One example of bias playing its role in our lives is when a kid walk in to a store and all the owners and employees look at like he is wanted. I know because I have been that kid and I have been the one that felt untrusted. Bias playing its role in American society is when i kid like this one loses his life. However, this could have not been bias because coincidence happens and I feel that the author of this article placed and emphasis when describing that the victim was black and the officer is white. In our lives today people are taking advantage of the term 'bias' because when a case like this one comes up that two distinct races are against each other it is because they are 'racist.' It could have been a racial case but, we live on Earth so we can never find out unless the officer admits it. What does bias means to the people of today's society?
    -Ronald Alvarado 9LE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bias is pretty much how the majority of the people look at the world nowadays. I disagree with you and say that this is definitely a bias case. As Yohan said, "Where is the warrant? Also where is the gun?" Yohan brings an excellent point to the table. This just supports the argument of the police officers just being more prejudice towards the minority of blacks and hispanics in New York City. We all know that if Mr. Ramarley Graham was a white teenager, this would of never occurred. Also, to shoot someone because you THINK they have a gun is just unbelievable and unacceptable. I'm pretty sure that the majority of the officers think the same of all of us, that all of the minority teenagers have guns. That's why you always see the rookies giving minority teenagers a hard time, but not the white teenagers. If this is the case, than none of us minority should feel safe. Additionally, one of the residents heard the grandmother yelling "Why you hitting me? Why you hitting me?" This just goes to show how prejudice is really at play when white police officers and hitting a black elderly woman.

      Delete
  24. Miriam
    I think that the officer wasn't jutified for shooting at the 18 year old young man. If think that the officer is investigating these things based on his background. Probably the officer's mistake was doing things too fast. Besides isn't it illegal to down this since it is prívate property entering ind where her lives?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think this is wrong for the police to do this because they thought he had a gun now polices are taking advantage of people and there jobs and i dont go with that because you a police doesnt mean that yu have to go around killing people because you thought they had a gun thats just not right if i was to protest i would do the protest against the police because what they are doing right know it just not right and very unfair. ASHLEY MOREL 9SM

    ReplyDelete
  26. Rafael-
    No the officer wasn't justified to shoot the 18 year old man because the cops became corrupted for some good reasons and for some bad reason. I also think that he wasn't justified because how can you think that the boy Ramarly Graham acually had a gun,even if he had the bags of weed, they should of at least peper prayed him or atleast shot him in the leg or something, how do you think that the guy had a gun if he didnt even had a chance to acually show it of take it out?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Rafael-
    No the officer wasn't justified to shoot the 18 year old man because the cops became corrupted for some good reasons and for some bad reason. I also think that he wasn't justified because how can you think that the boy Ramarly Graham acually had a gun,even if he had the bags of weed, they should of at least peper prayed him or atleast shot him in the leg or something, how do you think that the guy had a gun if he didnt even had a chance to acually show it of take it out?

    ReplyDelete
  28. The police officers were not justified in shooting this 18 year old kid just because he looked suspicious, or because the officer thought he saw something. It is not fair that this 18 year old died because an officer thought he had a gun. Also so what if he had a gun? Aren't some people licensed to have guns, what if he was and this officer wasn't aware? The point is, this so called officer should have been a 100% sure that this 18 year old did have a gun, take it away from him and arrested him. Not assume he had a gun,kill him and then feel bad about what he did. I mean come on the officer kills someone and all he gets is his job half-taken away from him. Shouldn't he have a bigger consequence or is that fact that he's a police officer to big of a deal to give him a bigger punishment? That is, a police man who made a huge mistake a killing an innocent teenager.If policemen are allowed to have guns and start randomly shooting at people I think that rules should become more strict towards when they are allowed to shoot and why, fact and opinion make a big difference weather people get to live or painfully die. Do you think that maybe the police man could have also assumed because this 18 year old kid was black? Here we go again, fact, opinions, and assumptions.

    ReplyDelete
  29. no that officer was not justified to take the shot, because the person might have had a gun but the point is not that he has a gun but whats he going to do with the gun that is what is important. in some way it was based on race that this event occurred because we do not know the true intentions of the officer so he might have been a racist or not but that does not change the fact that he needed to clarify if the suspect had a gun or not.

    sean

    ReplyDelete
  30. THE POLICE OFFICER HAD NO RIGHT IN SHOOTING THIS 18 YEAR OLD.THE OFFICER HAD TO BE POSITIVE THAT HE SAW A GUN. IF HE WASNT 100% SURE THAT THE TEEN HAD A GUN THEN THE OFFICER SHOULDVE DONE WHAT A DECENT OFFICER WILL DO. STOP AND FRISK. THAT WOULDVE BEEN BETTER THAN SHOOTING HIS GUN.POLICE OFFICERS THINK THAT JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE A BADGE, FLASHLIGHT, AND A GUN THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, ASSUME WHAT THEY WANT BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT WILL HAVE THEIR BACK. NO THAT ISNT HOW IT WORKS. FOR EVERY ACTION YOU NEED TO HAVE A REASON, FOR EVERY REASON YOU NEED TO HAVE EVIDENCE.~BRIAN TORRES, 9VO

    ReplyDelete
  31. I agree with everybody in our opinions that the police officer was not justified to shoot eighteen year old Graham. The reason for this is because he wasn't positively sure he saw what he thought he saw or maybe even what he wanted to see which was a gun. He suspected something that wasnt even true in the end and this has been his job for around thirty years and he couldn't even at least kindly knock on the door and aproach the eighteen year old. I am not sure if he hesitated or what not but in my opinion, he shouldn't have killed him. This might be racist in a way because why would he find him suspicious in the first place? I hope his family is alright and I dont judge the officer because I didn't know the point of view from the officers perspective but I don't think the action commited was correct.

    ReplyDelete
  32. The police was not jusstified to shoot.They say they might have saw a gun and when they arrived at remarleys house they saw no gun only weed. This is pathetic, these cops were baised. Especially the cop that shot down Remarley. The fact that he was 18 and was unarmed is more the reason that the cop was not justified, he might have mistaken something else for the gun.IT kind of makes me wonder? Did he shoot graham on purpose because of his race and not becuase of the false statement that graham was armed? This cop was not justified, what would anyone feel like doing if a group of cops were chasing you? Maybe graham fled because of that same reason.A cop cant just go around shooting out of false accusations.

    ReplyDelete
  33. In this situation ,I think it was an act of defense to shoot against the teenager. I've learned recently that when you are in danger your body goes into fight or flight mode as a way of defense. In this case the officer felt like it was right to shoot since his body or concious told him it was needed. Maybe the officer did feel like he was going to be attacked especially since they yelled out "armed " like as to say he had a gun. I honestly would of done the same thing. His parents are mortified but in the first place if they're son smoked, would'nt he be careless and more of a relaxed person? He probably would of just tried to hide it more productively but the fact that he probably rushed to the bathroom was maybe because he had an additional thing to hide. I personally think that race has nothing to do. jasmine 9Le

    ReplyDelete