You have to make a Hell of a lot of assumptions to come to that conclusion. 1) that he has no camera. 2) that the victim/witness wouldn't be believed. 3) that physical evidence wouldn't prove it was a good shooting. 4) that there weren't other cameras.
It's possible, but not the most likely outcome. Abandoning a black woman leaving her to be murdered on camera is FAR more likely to spark riots and accusations that he would have stayed and protected a white woman.

Edit:police scanner traffic does provide some information. A dispatcher indicates that a man “pointed the gun at (a) mother and (a) father multiple times” and was in the stairwell when police were called.
It should not have been a surprise when the responding officer encountered a man with a gun.

3 people are killed by police every single day. There aren't riots every single day over it. It's not an honest position to claim every time a black man is shot by police it's cause for a riot. That's total nonsense intended to delegitimize a legitimate movement against inappropriate police violence...that's not ALL police violence. Sometimes police violence is necessary...just not >half the times it's used, and usually not to the extent (like shooting someone 142 times).

There's a middle ground between swat teams going in shooting over a nonviolent mental health call and a cop abandoning a victim to run like a coward from an armed attacker.

Maybe if he shot, but not to kill, outcomes could be better....or tried non lethal methods first. Maybe if he followed policy and didn't go to a domestic violence call alone. The one thing certain to not work is turning his back (probably making his vest useless) and running away from the victim and armed attacker. That put him at the most danger of being shot in the back and her being murdered, and it violated his oath, and it indicates black victims won't be protected.

For these to be called even less lethal, the entire system must be used, including MANDITORY safety gear including at a minimum Kevlar helmets, face shields, groin shields, and a neck protector. If the victim doesn't have each piece of the mandatory gear, these rounds can cause permanent injury and death.

Directly from the manufacturer of simunition.

In order to reduce the risk of injury during these highly dynamic scenarios, Simunition® has developed a full line of protective equipment for both men and women. This equipment is an integral part of the FX® training system.
The FX® line of protective equipment consists of three MANDATORY protective items: the helmet or the facemask for use with Kevlar helmets, the neck protector and the groin protector. The arm protectors, vest, gloves, pants and sleeves are optional. FX® protective equipment, which is Simunition® tested and approved, is comfortable, breathable and lightweight, allowing the user to move freely and naturally.

Another *doublepromote to keep it front and center, police in gangs fully armored with military backing are using live rounds (yes, they are) on unarmed unshielded citizens who are committing no crime peacefully stationary on their own porches. Might as well have been bullets, at that range with no protection these rounds can kill easily. Attempted murder charges for every cop there.
I can't wait until someone shoots a cop in the eye with one and it dies. Suddenly they won't be calling them non lethal ammunition that's safe.

Not a paintball.

Whatever it was, it used explosive propulsion, not gas, you can clearly see the flash just after 21 seconds. Paintball guns give a little puff of gas sometimes, but it wouldn't light up like that. Paintball guns also don't sound like that.

I hope it was some form of "non lethal" ammunition, but remember a reporter lost an eye just the other day to something similar.

The #1 job of the police is, and always has been, to enforce the divide between rich and poor. Most pretend or believe they are there to "protect" law-abiding citizens, but times like these their true colors shine through. If there weren't such a stark divide between rich and poor, 90% of the work police do would vanish. Maybe if they actually enforced the law when it came to rich people, laws on tax evasion and wage theft, I might believe otherwise.

Of all financially-motivated crimes in the US (theft, robbery, fraud, all that rolled together) the biggest sector, outweighing ALL OTHERS COMBINED by a 2:1 factor, is wage theft. Employers not giving vacation days, or breaks they're obliged to, forcing employees to work extra hours without pay, docking pay for illegal reasons, or simply not paying what they owe. This is a criminal enterprise that steals 15 BILLION dollars a year from working-class Americans for the benefit of people who already have more money than they can use.

If you steal money from the rich and get caught, you go to jail Period.

The penalty for wage theft, literally stealing from those who cannot afford to lose more? First offense, if you're convicted (which is rare) a $10,000 fine.

I wonder what the heck it was? Paintball? More like...chalkball?
Their idea of a non-lethal (less lethal?) round?

I sort of doubt they have any authorization for that...

From Wikipedia's Man catcher page's section on China:

"A type of locking man catcher is available for staff at train stations and airports in China to capture and restrain individuals in a non-lethal manner.

"In some junior and middle schools, security guards are equipped with non-locking variants designed to seize a person's waist or prevent them from advancing. It is essentially a two-pronged fork, a U-shape projecting from a pole."

Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited in 1985 to non-lethal force in most cases by Tennessee v. Garner.

You can't shoot a fleeing suspect in the back unless the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect "poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm".

No apparent weapon. At the time of the shooting, fleeing teen was merely in a vehicle matching the description of a vehicle seen in a shooting. Officer is white, is part time, and has been through 4 police departments in 7 years (http://www.wtae.com/article/east-pittsburgh-police-officer-identified-in-antwon-rose-shooting/21754207).

As someone who has relatives in the police force, I can tell you that officers don't change jobs that often unless they are having issues or are moving to a completely different area. All 4 of the dept. were in Pittsburgh, so I am willing to bet this officer kept getting cited or failing evals.

That is the problem. We don't have a system in place to PREVENT these unfit officers from simply playing musical chairs with different departments. We have a national criminal database, it is beyond time that we have a national unfit officer database to prevent these assholes from being rehired by an unsuspecting department.

4 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

"Non-lethal"?

What is a lethal car immobilizer? Grenade launcher?

Cops shouldn't be considered a threat because they have been appointed by the government to uphold the law. The success of that is definitely up for debate, but to suggest that citizens should be fighting cops is absurd. That will only lead to more deaths.
(The solution is for the system to weed out the bad cops, the incompetent ones, the corrupt ones, the power tripping, racist, trigger happy etc).

Most cops do the right thing, most of the time. The millions of police encounters each day where nothing has gone wrong don't make the news.

I think it's worth considering what the any country would be like without law enforcement. We know what it would be like - hurricane Katrina - complete chaos on the streets, far worse than these shootings. Assuming your goal is to have fewer people shot and murdered, then having a police force is the best way we know of. However for that to work we need a competent police force that is there to serve and protect.

There definitely needs to be a system were police are made accountable to make sure stuff like this video does happen, or even non-lethal situations where citizens are being harassed. There are number of ways to do this. But my suggestions is that if you want to argue with someone, don't do it while they're holding a gun at you. Wait until you get to the station and call your lawyer. It's not perfect, but at your chances of getting shot will drop dramatically.

Yeah, I hear you. The worst thing in this case is that sometimes you can chalk it up to the cop possibly being under trained in how to handle someone who is struggling, but here we have a military instructor/trainer for non-lethal force using a brutal slam on a 12 year old girl.

I mean, this guy has years of experience in how to do things right and has trained countless others during that time, but he couldn't find an easier way to take down a child? If anyone did that move, that wasn't a cop, they would be in jail so fast their head would spin and if it was their child it would be taken away from them. To use your example, if I saw a guy hip toss a 12 year old girl onto their face, I would have to do something to that guy. We refrain from doing it because they are police and can hurt us, or the legal system will, but a day is coming when the excrement is going to hit the impeller and someone is going to end up killing the cop or being killed over something like this.

I understand your point, but you should have used a different game as an example. HR lets you choose how to play the game using lethal or non lethal means. It's entirely up to the player to make that choice.

Yes, because online videos of policing practices are representative of the whole. Excellent comparison, your degree in statistics serves you well. If the civilian standing in his doorway at 0:15 becomes the target for some reason, and this lunatic goes after him with his knife, then is it ok to shoot him? If this lunatic was in the middle of a mall or on a busy street and pulled this shit, I would hope that they would shoot him instead of trying to wrangle him to the ground with shields and batons... to serve and protect and all that. If he sliced up a civilian during this kinder gentler policing, the populace would be screaming for heads and at the police for more assertive action. Give them a taser, give them some non lethal rounds, give them a fine Calvary Sabre but control the situation immediately and remove the threat. The fact is the cops weren't in control at all.

I can't defend anything the suspect was doing, but I also can't believe that the officer didn't consider a single non-lethal alternative.

Here's a instance of police showing amazing RESTRAINT before being forced to shoot a civilian for good cause.
3 officers are violently gang attacked by a family of 7+ in a Walmart parking lot. Multiple times the officers are taken to the ground by multiple assailants, but they continue to try only non-lethal means of control for over 3 minutes of getting beaten down, at one point one cop actually kicks another in the head in the scuffle. They only resort to using lethal force when one assailant manages to take a cop's gun and shoots repeatedly, hitting the cop. Only then does another officer use lethal force against that single attacker, with a SINGLE controlled shot, then goes back to non-lethal methods of restraint on the remaining crowd. These officers acted the way I want all officers to act.

There's fairly graphic death, so it's snuff, so I won't sift it, but it can be found here....Warning, violent graphic death.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zv5Cbgn4TOU

--- While also stating that it is non-addictive, non-toxic, non-lethal, profound & potentially "healing" but that it isn't like smoking a joint or drinking a 6-pack aka "non-recreational". They probably didn't go into enough depth that taking this compound is potent & active in the 5mg range when you come across it from some of the synthetic RC sites. Which actually is quite dangerous. But, as with any substance that isn't really "recreational" - research must be done well in advance.

I definitely do see the popularity as a concern to nature as people kill trees, capture toads etc to have at it.