Here's a video montage of Zac Champommier that was made by a friend and shown at his memorial service. It pretty much captures Zac's essence: sweet, loyal, fun, devoted son and friend, inspired musician, honors student... innocent, beautiful boy. He was all those things and more. Zachary Champommier was shot and killed by law enforcement officers on June 24, 2010 in Studio City, California. He was only 18.
9 comments:
Of all people for this to happen to, why did it have to be Zac? It could have been anyone in Studio City that night, was the use of lethal force necessary that night? I don't think so.
Law Enforcement got the wrong man this time, and to make sure it doesn't happen to anyone else we need to make some noise.
We'll keep fighting, Zac.
How is it not a breach in the duty of care to the public when officers are in plainclothes and brandishing weapons, striking panic in civilian passersby like Zac Champommier?
How is it that Zac posed a threat to these officers when he showed no intention of hurting anyone? Being hit by a car in a parking lot is an accident, not a crime giving the right to use deadly force.
The officer did not have to shoot directly toward Zac, he could have just shot the tires and maybe just take him in and ask questions, but no,he had to aim for him and take a life, why use deadly force? why be trigger happy instead of reasonable and responsible?
Why exactly was it necessary for law enforcement to take such drastic actions. What harm were they in to cause them to shoot my friend? Did they make it obvious that they were in fact law enforcement, by that I mean were their badges visible? We need answers.
I wonder why they were so ready and willing to deviate from their debriefing mission and to accost that Oeters guy? It looks like they were just looking to kick someone's butt. The guy didn't even commit a crime. If there was an audience of several officers, why didn't they just start filming the latest installment of "World's Stupidest Would Be Criminals" and just let the guy commit a crime in front of an audience of several officers? It sure looks like they were hopped up on something. Maybe adrenalin, who knows?
Doesn't the justifiable use of deadly force sort of require a "it was me or him" kind of scenario? I don't see how Zac could have harmed any of the officers if they were facing the driver's door.
Most of the pictures used in this video were from the band tour. That was two weeks before Zac was killed. You can pretty much see the kind of person he was from these pictures.
JUSTICE4ZAC(9/08 4:54pm)said: "It sure looks like they were hopped up on something."
Something. That's for sure. Even the "cowboy" cop personality of aggressive behavior cannot fully account for the extreme disproportion of reaction to any rational evaluation of the scene.
The "undercover narcs" who "beared down" on Oeters and "took out" Zac Champommier can be properly described to have been experiencing a state of cognitive "hyper-reactiveness" and/or "hyper-vigilance".
This could be due in part or in whole to being under the influence of powerful narcotics/stimulants.
It could be due in part or in whole to the fear of threat perceived specific to this group.
For example: If they had been involved in a robbery of drugs/cash from someone. Now, they perceive that person is intent on confronting them and using an aggressive and ruthless method toward them.
The deputies altered state of perception might not be due to the above causes.
But it seems clear that "hyper-reactive" and/or "hyper-vigilant" is a correct description of the cognitive state of the "undercover narcs" that evening and hopefully NOT soon coming to a neighborhood or shopping mall near you.
Post a Comment