• HeyJoe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    3 days ago

    I wanted to find out more on what happened and sadly this one doesn’t seem to be going well. Not only has the case against the officer started yet, since this has happened Erik has now been arrested 4 times since for multiple reasons. He has a gps tracker now and on probation for 8 years. My guess is the original officer will be found not guilty if they ever even have the trial that for some reason needs 5 years to start.

    https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2025/11/18/timeline-erik-cantus-multiple-arrests-since-he-was-shot-by-an-ex-sapd-officer-in-2022/

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yeah it’s funny how he suddenly became a career criminal after being shot by a police officer. It’s almost as if the rest of the police department and the prosecutor’s office are looking to punish this kid for surviving their murderous colleagues attack.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      3 days ago

      If they get a decent lawyer all that would be struck since the officer didn’t and couldn’t know that at the time.

      • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        3 days ago

        Couldn’t a decent lawyer argue that all those things only happened because of the trauma of this initial interaction as well? Or would that be counterproductive?

        • Madison420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          You wouldn’t want anything about it in. You just want what the officer knew which is basically nothing about anything so it’s just shooting a fleeing subject in the back which is illegal unless you know them to be armed and dangerous.

        • baahb@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          Why would you think the law gave a shit about extenuating circumstances? Three Strikes laws and mandatory minimums show what the law thinks about people doing what is necessary to survive.

  • Undearius
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    3 days ago

    “This was a failure for one individual police officer. It had nothing to do with our policies. Our policies do not allow that. Our training does not teach that,” San Antonio Police Chief William McManus told a news conference to announce the charges.

    Yeah, okay buddy…

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yeah and this kid has been arrested four different times since the incident. It’s like they’re following him around and grabbing him for every little thing they can possibly catch him for. And since he’s young, he hasn’t got a clue how to stay under the radar while police are actively trying to fuck him.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      So chief, you’re saying “qualified immunity” doesn’t apply here?

  • tomiant@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    3 days ago

    Brennand responded to a disturbance call on Oct. 2, at a McDonald’s fast food restaurant. Cantu was not the subject of that call and was peacefully sitting in his car eating a hamburger. Despite the fact that Cantu was sitting in his car, harming no one and eating a hamburger, Brennand decided he was going to attempt to murder the 17-year-old boy just moments after he arrived on the scene.

  • psycotica0
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    3 days ago

    Charitable reading of his thought process: “huh I wonder if this is the guy I’m here to deal with? I bet it is, I’ll go collect him. Oh shit, oh shit he’s getting away! I have to stop him from getting away!”

    But here’s the thing that I don’t think gets surfaced enough: let’s say this was the guy and let’s say he was getting away. If you had captured and arrested him “properly”, the penalty wouldn’t be death by firing squad. Even if he was charged with resisting arrest he wouldn’t be sentenced to death by firing squad. So certainly there’s no possible universe where shooting a person is an acceptable tool of arrest. People sometimes debate in situations like this about how dangerous it is for cops, and how they need guns for protection, etc etc. But in situations like this I think it’s better to reframe:

    The police are supposed to be the first step in a process. Collect bad guys, contain bad guys, then another part of the system judges and sentences. I’m not arguing this is the best way to do this, just that even the people who like police tend to feel this is how the system is meant to work. So definitely we should all be able to agree that handing out harsher sentences at the first stage of the process than the last stage would ever consider should just be impossible to justify. If you can’t collect the bad guy without killing them, then I guess they got away. Even if they’re guilty. It’s better than someone being dead.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      They could also try some of their equipment other than their gun, such as a radio

  • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 days ago

    Shit. Well theres one that’s not going to make the rounds on the police bodycam video grifters on youtube