Politically Motivated Violence Thread PART 2

[rvb]

And....no obvious badging to show that he was "Security".

these places are a tough world to be in.... rioters been attacking press, and “security” likely to get you on the wrong side of a mob, too. I can see why they maybe went plainclothes. But that should also direct their behavior to be more standoffish....

 

[Kutnupe14]

So, everyone agrees that this killing was politically motivated violence?
Or rather, does anyone think it wasn't?

I think it was “slap me, eat a bullet” violence.

 

[OakRiver]

I apologize if this has been discussed before, in Denver it appears that armed security needs to have an armed license endorsement. As part of this the letter request must:
- be documented on the private security employer's company letterhead (that should assist in resolving whether he was a Pinkerton employee, or sub-contractor)
- include an explanation for the necessity of armed license endorsement
- include a statement from the private security employer stating that they are not aware of any disqualifying mental, physical, or emotional condition
- include a statement from the private security employer releasing the City & County of Denver from liability

If the security guard wishes to be in plainclothes then they need to provide a copy of their concealed handgun permit

Regarding the visibility of ID:
"Security guards who have been granted an armed license endorsement must wear their Department issued identification on the outermost part of their uniform in a clearly visible manner at all times during which the security guard is working. A plainclothes endorsement does not exempt any security guard from this requirement."

From the images we have seen, Dolloff does not appear to have displayed any of the required identification.

https://www.denvergov.org/content/d...ity Guards and Private Security Employers.pdf

 

[chipbennett]

Looks to me like the shooter drew his gun as a reaction to getting slapped and the guy with the pepper spray deployed it as a reaction to the shooter drawing his gun in an attempt to keep from getting shot. That attempt was unfortunately futile.

The shooter instigated, and initiated. The shooter used force unlawfully (i.e. committed battery) against the deceased, by touching his person and possibly reaching for the gun carried by the deceased. In either case, the slap constituted justified use of force in self-defense.

In all cases, I struggle to find, based on the currently available details/evidence, any basis to claim that the use of deadly force (i.e. the gun shot) could possibly be justified.

 

[NKBJ]

The shooter made a grab for the victim's pistol.

 

[chipbennett]

Where are go getting this “reach into his vest” stuff? What, you think he was trying to pickpocket the guy?

It is perhaps merely coincidental that where the shooter was reaching was (based on photographic evidence) exactly the location of the holstered firearm on the deceased. Regardless, the mere act of reaching at/toward/into the vest of the deceased constitutes unlawful use of force (battery). That act thus constitutes initial aggression and the initial use of (unjustified) force.

I looks like given the body language (deceased leaning in) that Doloff is trying maintain distance by raising his hand, and is subsequently slapped.

We seem to be using different evidence to come to our conclusions. Doloff was approaching and reaching toward the deceased.

And based on the unlawful use of force by Doloff, the slap was a perfectly lawful, justified use of force in self-defense.

Doloff then begins to draw down on the deceased...

...an act that, since Doloff was the aggressor, was further unlawful - and would have been unlawful, regardless, in response to being slapped...

and the deceased begins to deploy spray.

Again, it seems that we are using different evidence to come to our conclusions. Based on photographic and video evidence, the attempt to use pepper spray was a) combined with moving backward/away from Doloff, and b) in response to the unlawful threat of deadly force (Doloff drawing his gun). Further, it appears that no pepper spray was actually deployed until Doloff actually fired.

At that point he gets smoked. Other those who are obviously sympathetic to a person who they see as being representative of “their side,” I don’t see how anyone can say that this shooting was over the top. Shot by shot, it seems good.

1. Doloff was the initial aggressor - the first (and only) one to use unlawful force
2. The deceased only ever used force in self-defense, in response to Doloff's use of unlawful force against him
3. Doloff's use of deadly force was a) not legally justifiable since he was the initial aggressor (I assume CO self-defense law is similar to most) and never disengaged as the aggressor, and b) not legally justifiable even if he weren't the initial aggressor, because a slap does not represent reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm (and Doloff both threatened and deployed deadly force before the bear spray was deployed, so the question of whether being maced represents reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm is moot).

 

[chipbennett]

Based on the little we know so far; deceased is prevented from moving towards someone by Dolloff. Deceased slaps Doloff in the face with an open palm. Deceased takes several steps back. Dolloff appears to reach for his concealed firearm while the deceased has the mace in a neutral position, arm by his side and not pointed at anyone.

Assuming that those are the facts, and that those facts stand, I am interested in seeing how Dolloff manages to claim that he used his firearm to defend himself or others. I'm also interested to see how he explains being a plain clothes private security detail, without having completed the requisite training.

Based on what we know now: no, not at all. Doloff just jumped into an ongoing disagreement and accosted/assaulted the deceased. His "security guard" status is more or less completely irrelevant, because he was not acting as law enforcement. He was literally a hired gun.

 

[Route 45]

So, everyone agrees that this killing was politically motivated violence?
Or rather, does anyone think it wasn't?

It doesn't have to be wholly one or the other. This fake "security" guy had a history of left wing plasturbating on social media, but he was also likely pissed that he just got ***** slapped in the face.

The thing is, it is probably much easier to pull the trigger on someone who you have predetermined is your ideological enemy when things get sporty in real life.

https://editorial.dailywire.com/new...e-security-guard-license-in-denver-city-says/

 

[Alpo]

these places are a tough world to be in.... rioters been attacking press, and “security” likely to get you on the wrong side of a mob, too. I can see why they maybe went plainclothes. But that should also direct their behavior to be more standoffish....

This isn't Bosnia during the Balkan crisis. This is Denver. And, as far as I know, I haven't seen the Proud Boys or any right-wing group attacking the "press"...and I use that term loosely.

This appears to be a staged event by the press for their evening news cycle.

What I wonder is why Keltner went over toward the "press" in the first place. What did the press say? Why did he walk over there? Was he upset because he knew they were staging this?

 

[KG1]

The shooter instigated, and initiated. The shooter used force unlawfully (i.e. committed battery) against the deceased, by touching his person and possibly reaching for the gun carried by the deceased. In either case, the slap constituted justified use of force in self-defense.

In all cases, I struggle to find, based on the currently available details/evidence, any basis to claim that the use of deadly force (i.e. the gun shot) could possibly be justified.

Oh I agree that it appears Doloff was the one to initiate the actual physical contact and IMO the slap was justified to rebuff that contact. It is also my opinion that Doloff escalated the situation by drawing his firearm once there was a separation. Not Keltner.

 

[NKBJ]

Finding out that whether the perp took opportunistic advantage of a situation to do what he had previously written about or if the situation was created for the perp to use, that's going to be interesting. And oh my it's going to be interesting to learn how he was cleared for access to Friday's senate debate. Whoever was giving him a pay check needs to be held very accountable.

 

[NKBJ]

This isn't Bosnia during the Balkan crisis. This is Denver. And, as far as I know, I haven't seen the Proud Boys or any right-wing group attacking the "press"...and I use that term loosely.

This appears to be a staged event by the press for their evening news cycle.

What I wonder is why Keltner went over toward the "press" in the first place. What did the press say? Why did he walk over there? Was he upset because he knew they were staging this?

Yep, it very much appears to be a staged event.

 

[BugI02]

I can't help but notice that history is rhyming.

First time tragedy, second time farce

 

[Alpo]

Yep, it very much appears to be a staged event.

If so, I hope Keltner's family ends up owning the television station.

 

[NKBJ]

Maybe the station news reporter (already forgot his name) was in on it, maybe not.
Might have just been the perp and a buddy.
But it definitely does appear that the perp had previously worked it out and wrote about it.
Oh well. Maybe it really will all come out.

 

[NKBJ]

I don't know if linking to what I was linking to would really be prohibited or not.
So I'm delinking.
It was an article on zerohedge about a Democratic Party revolutionary operative talking about killing people.

 

[Route 45]

This isn't Bosnia during the Balkan crisis.

Yet.

 

[jamil]

The shooter instigated, and initiated. The shooter used force unlawfully (i.e. committed battery) against the deceased, by touching his person and possibly reaching for the gun carried by the deceased. In either case, the slap constituted justified use of force in self-defense.

In all cases, I struggle to find, based on the currently available details/evidence, any basis to claim that the use of deadly force (i.e. the gun shot) could possibly be justified.

The shooter made a grab for the victim's pistol.

Wait. So is it confirmed that the second gun that was recovered belonged to the victim?

 

[rvb]

This isn't Bosnia during the Balkan crisis. This is Denver. And, as far as I know, I haven't seen the Proud Boys or any right-wing group attacking the "press"...and I use that term loosely.

This appears to be a staged event by the press for their evening news cycle.

What I wonder is why Keltner went over toward the "press" in the first place. What did the press say? Why did he walk over there? Was he upset because he knew they were staging this?

I haven’t followed this specific event enough to get the idea it was staged, but anywhere in the country can turn ugly very fast. Who would have thought Kenosha wi would have a running gun fight in the streets. There is LOTs of evidence out there where people who identified as “press” or who just had their camera/phone out where attacked. The availability of live-streams from the riots has dropped dramatically the last couple weeks. While I agree that most of the threats and nearly all the violence against “press” has been left wing, where one group exists the other will be close by, so just saying you’re going to film a right wing group doesn’t make the situation any less risky to “press” imo. (And there is video out there of armed right wing folks getting in the face of people filming and, well, expressing their disapproval... there’s just way more evidence of threats and actual attacks from the left)

the mob has become very much opposed to being filmed. Recent federal pursuit of demonstrators and arrests after the fact is driving them to enforce a no video/photo rule at protests.

recent article linked by Andy NGO (independent “press” who was attacked And seriously injured for filming at a “peaceful protest”)

https://www.oregonlive.com/news/202...protest-destruction-pushed-for-anonymity.html

[FONT=&amp]During the demonstration, people in the crowd repeatedly admonished others suspected of filming or taking pictures.
Passersby who happened upon the group were ordered by demonstrators to stop shooting video or to delete photographs, including an apartment resident who had lasers shined at his eyes and a liquid thrown in his face as he appeared to film the scene from his terrace. [/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]A woman with a child was later threatened for taking a photograph of the crowd as it marched along Southwest Fifth Avenue.[/FONT]

 

[chipbennett]

Wait. So is it confirmed that the second gun that was recovered belonged to the victim?

I'm not sure that detail has been confirmed. But, photographs confirm that the deceased was carrying a holstered firearm. We can speculate that the second, recovered firearm reported by police is this firearm, but I don't think it has been verified?