Philando Castile

Crips criminal (86 misdemeanors) is pulled over as an armed robbery suspect, he's shot when he reaches for his gun.

Armed robbery suspect (and repeat criminal) is pulled over, and he reaches for his gun when he was shot. His girlfriend hams it up for social media, and the family started 3 different "Go Fund Me" campaigns before he was buried. Later we find out there were drugs in his system, and the officers were exonerated.

ℹ️ Info

~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2016-07-05

Alt-People

Left	Right
Philando Castile - Diamond "Lavish" Reynolds (girlfriend of Philando Castile) posts a Facebook Video Stream of herself claiming her boyfriend was pulled over for a broken tail light, had a license to carry a gun, and then the cop told him to get his ID, and when he reached for it, the cop unloaded on him. The media plays up this poor innocent cafeteria-worker murdered by a cop by a heartless white cop for following directions.	Latino cop (Jeronimo Yanez) pulled over suspected robbery subject (Philandro) who had drugs in his system and 86 prior pull-overs. Video shows that Yanez tells Philando to stop reaching for the weapon, before he fires. It was prosecuted for political reasons, and Yanez was exonerated by 12 Jurors (including 2 blacks).

Facts[edit | edit source]

Officers Jeronimo Yanez (Latino) and Joseph Kauser pulled over Philando because he fit the description and looked like someone who had committed a July 2nd armed robbery of a liquor store, stealing the cash in the register and a carton of Newports, and a BOLO had gone out.
The officer pulling them over said as much on radio dispatch. (Basically, Philando and the suspect were both tall, skinny, black guys, with dreadlocks, a mustache and wispy beard). When the Family listened to the recording, they implied that it was just racial profiling and pushed the "all blacks look alike" hotbutton.
Philando had a long list of driving offenses (over 86 misdemeanors on over 50 pull overs), most of them minor traffic violations like driving on a suspended license. Again, instead of owning any of it, the family claims that was all because he was DWB (driving while black), and pushing racial hot-buttons again. As if Black folks are racially incapable of following the laws.
The cop clearly says, “I told him not to reach for it! I told him to get his head up!” -- but bigots don't want to consider what both sides are saying, or which is more plausible, they assume that an armed robbery suspect is more credible than the police, even when the evidence contradicts it.
SOP (Standard Operating Procedures) for cops, when someone has a license to carry (and the cop has any concerns), is to tell them to NOT move, and then to disarm them before ID (or doing anything else), or having them get out of the car and then disarming before going through the rest of the routine: all to avoid accidents or worse. According to Lavish the cop didn't do that, told him to get his ID, then shot him for reaching for it. That stretches Lavish's credibility as much as the, "hands up, don't shoot" meme that's long been proven bogus.
Video shows the gun resting on Philando's leg (a gun that looks like the one used in the robbery). That's not where you usually keep a gun when you have a license to carry (that's not how you're trained). It's also not where you'd keep one when a cop is coming to your window after pulling you over. It stretches Lavish's version a bit more.
The family started a few Go-Fund-Me Donation sites (https://www.gofundme.com/2d8ryf34 1], 2, 3), so far totaling about $250K, and has done everything they can to sensationalize the story and their plight. Lavish can be seen smoking her favorite brand of Newports.
There's also strong suspicion he was a Crips gang member (either past or present). While it's not proof, and I don't leap to conclusions based on one post from a secondary news site, there's reason to think a guy dressed in blue wearing a blue bandana, flashing gang signs, with facebook and twitter liking Crips and referencing them often, and his girlfriend (Lavish) claiming to love her crips man, might be a member. Even if not, the fact that the media has played up the innocent cafeteria worker angle, and ignored the rest of the backstory and the thugs life references, tells you a lot about their interest in getting to the whole truth.
He was acquitted of all charges (including 2 black jurors).

Occam's Razor[edit | edit source]

What is more likely (the simpler answer)?

(A) a jumpy white cop shot a black guy for driving while black or reaching for his ID that the cop told him to get.
(B) a stoned armed robbery suspects (with a long rap sheet) was not following the directions of a latino officer, and stupidly reached for his gun (or ID, which was behind the gun), and his girlfriend turns on her cell phone to get her academy award in a movie called, "bad shooting lawsuit".

I don't assume cops are always right, but Occam's Razor: the simplest explanation is most likely true. And a secret racist cop, that managed to not get a single racist charge until he siezes the opportunity to shoot an innocent guy for being black, seems a bit implausible. While a stupid repeat thug on drugs, who unwisely fails to follow directions, and gets shot while being stupid? As the Jury saw it, that was far more liekly.

Conclusion[edit | edit source]

Yanez might have been wrong, but it wasn't criminal, and that doesn't make Castille innocent, or it a racist incident.

The far left and their media took the word of a Girlfriend (looking to cash in on Internet fame?), and presumed the worst/guilt guilt about a cop (Jeronimo Yanez), and presumed the innocence of Philando Castile, then fanned the flames of racial animosity based on what a worst was a bad shoot on someone acting stupid. There was never a civil rights violence based on white on black hate.

Either way, the media, and all reasonable humans have a responsibility to consider both sides of the story. The media and left didn't do that for Officer Jeronimo Yanez, while extending absurd degrees of trust in Philando and Diamond.

Rap Sheet Summary[edit | edit source]

Violate instr permit: dismissed
No proof of insurance: guilty
Basic speed: guilty
Driving after suspension: dismissed
No proof of insurance: guilty
No seat belt use: dismissed
No proof of insurance: guilty
Impede traffic: dismissed
No Minnesota driver’s license: amended charge guilty
Driving after suspension of driver’s license: Convicted
No proof of insurance: dismissed
No proof of insurance: convicted
Driving after revocation: Dismissed
Driving after suspension: Dismissed
No proof of insurance: guilty
Speeding: dismissed
Driver’s license: failure to obtain new: dismissed
Muffler required: dismissed
Driving after revocation: guilty
Operation of motor vehicle after loss of license prohibited: dismissed
Dangerous public road/water: convicted
Driving after revocation: convicted
No proof of insurance: dismissed
Driving after revocation: convicted
Seat belt violation: dismissed
Driving after revocation: convicted
Proof on insurance: Dismissed
Driving after revocation: convicted
Driving after revocation: convicted
Driving after revocation: convicted
Seat belt required: convicted
Seat belt required: convicted
Driving after revocation: convicted
Driving after revocation: convicted
Driving after revocation: convicted
Driving after revocation: convicted
Driving after revocation: convicted
Driving after revocation: convicted
Stop/stand/park vehicle at any place where official signs prohibit stopping: convicted
Expired registration: dismissed
Snow emergency parking restrictions: convicted
Stop/stand/park vehicle on any street/ally, at the same location, for more than #consecutive hours: convicted
Abandon motor vehicle on any public/private property without consent: convicted
Stop/stand/park vehicle on any street/ally, at the same location, for more than #consecutive hours: convicted
Driving after suspension: guilty
Driving after revocation: convicted
Display altered/fictitious insurance card: dismissed
Driving after revocation: convicted
Seat belt required: dismissed
Uninsured vehicle: convicted
Driving after revocation: dismissed
Seat belt required: dismissed
Impromper display original plate: convicted
Seat belt required: convicted
Possess marijuana in motor vehicle: dismissed
Drugs: possess over 1.4 grams of marijuana in motor vehicle: dismissed
public nuisance – interfere/obstruct/render: convicted