Why did Capitol police open fire on an unarmed woman?

by:  Rick Moran

The woman who first crashed her car into barricades at the White House before leading police on a chase down Pennsylvania avenue to the Capitol and crashing through barriers was eventually shot to death despite being unarmed.

Could her death have been avoided? Probably not, say authorities:

CBS News correspondent John Miller reports there will likely be an internal investigation into the Capitol Hill car chase that ended with the driver dead.

Washington Police Chief Cathy Lanier confirms shots were fired in at least two locations during the chase.

Authorities will want to know what was going through the minds of the officers who opened fire.

Miller says once the car crashed into the barriers outside the White House, training instincts would kick in for officers and Secret Service agents.

Because the White House and Capitol building are sensitive locations, their training and reactions would be heightened.

read more:


Views: 1913

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion


It won't happen. These guys will walk free emboldened to do it again. In Ft. Worth, Texas they found the officer Hoepner not guilty for shooting the 72 year old grandpa. The gran jury behind closed doors decided this and they won't comment why. The only thing is for citizens to take up justice. But everyone is too scared to band together and do something. And whoever said the politicians go first when the revolution starts, the media also is on that list.

I checked the internet to see if the local paper, the Stamford Advocate, had any news on this, also checked Greenwich Time (they are another local paper-I live in Greenwich which is next to Stamford) Nothing published on this! They covered the initial news about the shooting, but they don't have an article about the lawsuit. Seems to me like this deserves at least a mention in the local news- but it looks like these papers (they are more liberal) are not interested. Aiding in a cover up by not publishing the story- in case the public might get the idea that there was wrongdoing by the capitol police?

In an unrelated case, I read in the NY Post's "Weird but True" section of a New Mexico driver of an ambulance who fell asleep (the ambulance was parked) While he was asleep, a couple hopped in and proceeded to drive the ambulance, slowing down just enough to let the driver hop out. They then led cops on a high speed chase all over town. The cops USED SPIKE STRIPS TO PUNCTURE THE TIRES AND CAPTURE THE THIEVES ...
This proves that the capitol police chasing Carey could have done the same thing. No need to kill her!

I found this article/opinion from the American Spectator
I Accuse the Murderers of Miriam Carey | The American Spectator

wo weeks ago Miriam Carey, with her toddler child in the back seat, was gunned down by police and security officers after a harrowing car chase. We now know more about what happened, and what we’ve learned makes the shooting look wholly unjustified.

It would have been justified to kill Miriam had she tried to kill the president or a police officer. That’s not the story that’s emerging, however. Instead, it’s as reasonable to suppose that she took a wrong turn, had a small accident, and panicked.

According to the Oct. 14 Hartford Courant, the police report describes Miriam’s driving as “erratic.” Rather than stopping at a security checkpoint near the White House, she turned around and left, knocking down a policeman in her confused effort to escape. A car chase ensued, with police firing at her moving car, and when Miriam’s car was finally blocked in so she could not move, the police fired into her car, killing her. She didn’t have a chance.

Was Miriam “a potential assassin or a confused, frightened person suffering from mental illness trying to get herself out of danger,” the Courant asks. It doesn’t answer the question, and the doubt it expresses suggests that it’s open season on people who have small accidents with a barrier near the White House. When in doubt forget the presumption of innocence, shoot to kill.

A similar note of doubt has also begun to creep into the opinions of the intellectuals and experts who had previously been certain that Miriam was a potential killer. In an October 10 Washington Post opinion piece, John Jay professor James Mulvaney suggested that if a suspect doesn’t obey an officer’s command, they should “try a different approach…..Try a request instead of an order. Shouting like an Army drill sergeant can be counterproductive…” And that doesn’t even begin to describe what happened. Instead, there was a wild police chase, with a half dozen policemen shouting at Miriam and waving military grade weapons.

So maybe Miriam wasn’t a “potential assassin.” For the police apologists, maybe she was simply suffering from a mental illness. I wasn’t aware that that was grounds for execution, but then I’m a little out of touch with modern theories of capital punishment. The problem, however, is where is the proof?

Read more by copy paste above link into your browser

I thought it was a good article- raising questions and concerns that I had

I am still troubled by this. I really feel badly about what happened to her, and I agree with her sister that it is in the public interest to find out what happened. As far as I know, there was never any news of a completed investigation. I think this is one more example that we are living in a police state.(How will police treat demonstrators who participate in Operation American Spring"? Anyway, I found this editorial by WND on the subject- glad to see Joseph Farrah is troubled, too:





Political Cartoons by AF BrancoPolitical Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

Political Cartoons by AF Branco


Angry Dem Impeachment ‘Witness’: Pam Karlan Donated Thousands To Hillary And Was On Clinton’s List For Potential SCOTUS Nomination

Image result for Pam Karlan

The House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Rep. Jerrold Nadler, kicked off its first impeachment circus Wednesday morning.

The four ‘witnesses’ testifying have never actually witnessed any of Trump’s dealings with Ukraine firsthand — the four witnesses are law professors offering legal analysis.

One of the witnesses the Dems rolled out is an angry Hillary Clinton donor who was on Crooked’s list for a potential Supreme Court nomination.

No wonder why this unhinged, dowdy woman is so pissed off!

“Professor Pam Karlan donated thousands of dollars to Democrats and was on Hillary Clinton’s list for a potential Supreme Court nomination. So she certainly has no vendetta against President Trump,” GOP Rep. Mark Walker said.

Congressman Walker also pointed out that Noah Feldman, the Dems first partisan witness in Wednesday’s hearing tweeted about impeaching Trump right after he was sworn in.

Rep. Mark Walker   RepMarkWalker

Meet Noah Feldman, House Democrats first partisan witness.

Look at the date of this tweet. He has been trying to get @realDonaldTrump impeached since 46 days into his presidency.

His reason? Trump criticized President Obama.

This is a sham impeachment with sham witnesses. https://twitter.com/NoahRFeldman/status/839185127494254592 

Noah Feldman @NoahRFeldman

Trump's wiretap tweets raise risk of impeachment http://bv.ms/2mY1ueX  via @BV

Rep. Mark Walker   RepMarkWalker

The next witness, Karlan, has donated thousands to Democrats and was on Hillary Clinton’s list for a potential Supreme Court nomination.

So she certainly has no vendetta against @realDonaldTrump.

These witnesses are as serious as House Democrats impeachment case: not at all.

The entire sham show trial is stacked with partisan hacks who have wanted to impeach Trump from the moment he won in November of 2016.

Norm Eisen, the Democrats’ counsel who is blasting Trump and questioning witnesses in Wednesday’s show trial, tweeted about impeaching Trump before Donald Trump was even sworn into office!

Infantilization of Popular Culture

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service