Picking up on Kentish's allusion, here's an early report on the shooting.

The victim appears to have been a great kid. The one thing that catches my eye is a cryptic passage in his family's statement.

“He was always selflessly helping and protecting others in need,” his family said. “He has been studying law the last few years and was a patriot doing what he could to defend the people’s freedom and liberty in his community.”

Combine that parental characterization with the fact that he was accosted because his automobile did not have a license plate and a possible explanation comes into view.


https://www.abc4.com/news/northern-utah/family-of-25-year-old-killed-in-farmington-officer-involved-shooting-releases-statement/

Mentioned this in an earlier thread. What possible explanation could there be for drawn guns in a routine traffic stop? I have lived in the US most of my life and am still unable to understand the American mindset.

American mindset? Here’s standard police trading. You don’t pull that pistol out of the holster unless there is a justifiable threat. You don’t put the sights on target unless it’s a deadly threat.

So no you aren’t going to have an officer in America come up to you in a traffic stop with a gun in hand unless they think you are a threat of some kind.

Always best to have both hands on the steering wheel as the officer approaches. If they see that they have less to worry about and the easier you make it for them well sometimes they go easier on you.

IDK, but he sounds like a believer in the "sovereign citizen" idea

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2023/03/03/officer-involved-shooting/

"Johnsen said Allan “asserted his independence from the laws of the land” in the video and stated that he was not required to provide information to the officer or cooperate. The officer then called for backup, Johnsen said, and “continued to provide the driver with information and options, but to no avail.”

"As authorities began rendering aid to Allan, Johnsen said an empty holster can be seen on Allan’s right hip in the unreleased body camera video, and a handgun can be seen lying on the driver’s-side floorboard. Johnsen did not say whether Allan brandished the gun or fired his weapon."


"The family’s statement went on to say that Allan “was always selflessly helping and protecting others in need. He has been studying law the last few years and was a patriot doing what he could to defend the people’s freedom and liberty in his community.”

Local court records show no recent criminal history for Allan. But according to a probable cause statement, on Sept. 21, 2022, Allan “voluntarily showed up” at a Davis County justice court hearing for a woman who had been charged with a traffic violation. During the hearing, Allan became “disruptive and non-compliant” and “began to resist officers,” the document states. He “refused to comply” when told to leave the courtroom.

A Davis County Sheriff’s Office deputy wrote that “reasonable force” was used to arrest Allan, and that he was taken to the Davis County jail.

The probable cause statement goes on to say that while he was being booked, officers found Allan had “a small plastic slide credit card device that contained several lock-picking items.” According to police, Alan matched the description of an “individual with warrants,” but he refused several requests to identify himself.

“When asked to stop interrupting, [Allan] responded that deputies had no authority over him, using an expletive,” the document states.

All the markers are present for this to be a "Sovereign Citizen" issue.

Rather than pound my keyboard, here are a couple of YouTube videos:

This one says there are five quick vignettes, but only the first four need be watched,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKQNXY-9wD8


And this one is how I suspect the situation developed in the matter of the deceased's interaction with the police in the Farmington case...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sESlDIhBzPc


There are tons of much longer videos showing the cops pushed to unseemly limits by these Sovereign Citizens and then the violence that results.

Most cops are horrible at knowing laws. Here’s the reality. A cop can make you spend the night in jail if you piss them off. I’m well traveled. I’ve dealt with police all over the world. The more cooperative you are with a cop, usually the better things go. Once you get smart ass with a cop things aren’t in your favor. I used to travel with packs of American cigarettes to bribe cops with oversees. That’s how the world rolls.

I could only watch about half of the first vignette, but I have to say that the officer acted in an entirely professional way with the driver. You could tell, though, that he was completely over the "sovereign citizen" nonsense. I guess it wasn't his first rodeo.

Good grief! He didn't get out of the car. He wasn't going anywhere, and if he drove away, they had the plate number.

It seems that in several of these situations, the police simply shoot because someone didn't respect their authority immediately. Couldn't they deal with that kind of thing after the fact instead of killing them on the spot for cripes sakes? I guess we'll find out more eventually....well, maybe if they release the information and are truthful about it.

Also, saying "...patriot doing what he could to defend the people’s freedom and liberty..." is exactly what anyone with any views would say.

It's heartbreaking to see promising lives taken in a moment of agitation, be it the police or citizens being overly aggressive.

Several points.

First, I am always leery of police shootings--especially in situations like this. So I will be paying attention to the investigation.

Second, some of the reports state that the young man was armed. That suggests that there may have been some danger to the police.

Third, the police appear not to have had his license number because he was driving without a license plate.

Fourth, I do not believe a normal parent would react to a police shooting by describing her son as "a patriot doing what he could to defend people's freedom and liberty." In fact, I find that statement bizarre. Are you aware of any time when the parents of a police murder victim ever said anything like that? I'm not.

If you combine that rhetoric with the fact that the young man had removed his license plate--a symbol of state power--and, if true, refused to surrender his weapon, the odds rise significantly that he viewed himself as a sovereign citizen.

There is so much at play here: guns on the streets, the predisposition of the police to shoot people for little if any reason, and the possibility that the victim was a right-wing extremist who rejected government authority in part or fully. Whatever the investigation reveals, this is a very American drama.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/2023 08:52PM by Lot's Wife.

Good points all! No more speculation from me until the facts are out.
I wonder how that kid did at UC Davis.

All one has to do is look at the statistics on violence across the USA to see that neither right-wing or left-wing can claim to be immune of having violent tendencies. So, I'm presuming you meant "any wing", not just one particular slant?

And yes I'm wary of police. For the most part they are far underpaid on an hourly basis compared to teachers and most other government workers & hardly the best/brightest are being cops & they are far outgunned by the gangs & have to deal with even much more than the Ukrainian local police do in their beats. So, here we have these cops with loaded guns often fearing unsafe and they make very regretable decisions :(

If he was in his car and being non-compliant then they should've just gotten his info, pictures, etc. and done a stakeout for days before they discharged their weapons. At the very least they should be convicted of manslaughter. They didn't have to kill the young man.

P.S. If they had solid proof that the young man had some sort of suitcase nuclear bomb then maybe it was justified for them to take action. But otherwise they should've just done a stakeout at most and at the very least do what the red light cameras do all the time around America & get a paper trail on him.

https://www.ksl.com/article/50592285/police-say-man-killed-by-farmington-officers-had-gun-victims-mom-filed-suit-over-other-traffic-stop

Excerpts:

"FARMINGTON — The man shot and killed by Farmington police on Wednesday had a gun next to him in his vehicle, police said Friday."

"In their Friday statement, police said they pulled him over on Wednesday at 3:22 p.m. near the city's post office because his vehicle had an illegitimate license plate.

Body camera footage shows Allan — whose mother sued Farmington police five months ago over an traffic stop nearly a year ago — rolled his window down only a few inches and refused to provide identification or cooperate in any way, police said.

"The driver asserted his independence from the laws of the land as well as his belief that he was not required to provide information to the officer, nor was he required to cooperate," police said."

""At that time an observing officer yelled out the words, 'Gun, gun, gun!' A struggle, which appeared to last only seconds, ensued and gunshots could be heard," police said in the statement.

Officers secured Allan and said they began rendering aid. An empty holster can be seen on Allan's right hip in the body camera footage, according to police, and a handgun can be seen lying on the driver's side floorboard of the car."

The mother here sounds like a right winger as well


"Nearly a year ago, Allan accompanied his mother to the Farmington police station to act as a witness while she argued against a traffic citation.

Chase Allan's mother, Diane Killian Allan, had been stopped several hours earlier for failure to register her vehicle. She had argued the officer didn't have probable cause to pull her over and that she has the right to travel. The officer cited her anyway for driving without registration and driving without a license."

"Allan writes that she began recording the encounter as an officer approached her car. When he asked if she had her insurance and registration information, she replied, "I'm not going to answer that," according to the lawsuit.

Instead, she said she provided her passport and a copy of the U.S. Constitution. A second officer, Johnsen, arrived and put on a bullet-proof vest, the lawsuit says"

"Several hours after the traffic stop, when the mother and son went to the police station, Diane Allan tried showing Johnsen in her passport where he is directed by the secretary of state to allow U.S. citizens to pass without hindrance, she writes in her lawsuit. She said Johnsen replied that he doesn't have jurisdiction over a passport, and "insisted" that if she didn't show up for court, a warrant would be issued for her arrest."

It still doesn't answer the question whether the police had reason to shoot the man. But my heavens, I'd be suicidal if I had contributed to the death of my son in such a way.

Also, on a separate point, the article says that Allan was "studying law" but does not mention a law school. That sounds to me like he was holed up on his parents' basement teaching himself what the law is or, perhaps more likely, should be.

Paranoia strikes deep.

Yikes! Kook alert!

>It still doesn't answer the question whether the police had reason to shoot the man

I suspect it will come down to whether or not he had drawn the gun from his holster. The news stories do not mention that.

Agreed. And whether he waved it towards the officers.

Parenthetically, police should NOT be put in the position of judging whether a weapon is sufficiently threatening to justify their own self-protection. . .

That's one reason why this second amendment crap is so dangerous. It turns the streets of the United States into Baghdad and the cops into an occupying army.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/2023 09:12PM by Lot's Wife.

> the article says that Allan
> was "studying law" but does
> not mention a law school.

I believe it mentioned that he's either attending, or recently attended, Utah State University, which does not have a law school.  I sincerely doubt that they have any classes that teach Sovereign Citizenry.

As in any situation that escalates beyond the bounds of normalcy, we are each going to form our own opinion regarding what SHOULD have happened, and why what did happen got to that stage, and who the culprits are.  There will not be unanimity...just lawsuits.

The cynic in me says the police would say that after the fact. Where is the video from their cameras?

+1

Did you watch the videos I posted?

The cynic in me says that Sovereign Citizens are their own worst enemies in these situations.

What's wrong with complying with the investigating officer and then explaining why the system doesn't apply to Sovereign Citizens to a judge?  If two parties are in conflict and a venue exists where a third party can mediate, that seems to me the way to go.

And arguing, "Oh, the judge is always going to agree with the cop!" might be accurate...for a very good reason.  It's all about offerings of proof and the rule of law.

Does anyone in our audience believe that 'traveling' is not the same as driving, and thus as a 'traveler,' no driver's license is required?  Anyone...?

> And arguing, "Oh, the judge is always going to
> agree with the cop!" might be accurate...for a
> very good reason.  It's all about offerings of
> proof and the rule of law.

That's some rich irony there, peasant.

You posted a video of this shooting? It's the only one that counts.

There will likely be video evidence available at some point to exculpate the officers or provide a basis for their firing and perhaps prosecution. 

I posted the video links so that those not familiar with the daily interactions of police and Sovereign Citizen would have some context.

I do not advocate shooting Sovereign Citizens when they advocate for a point of view that would allow them to "travel" (they don't 'drive') America's highways and byways without driver's licenses, vehicle registration, or insurance.

some 'patriots' don't believe they need licenses or permits of any kind; Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma city bomber was apprehended bc he was driving a vehicle (fleeing the scene) without any license plates (account may still be o line)

"What possible explanation could there be for drawn guns in a routine traffic stop?"
1st, there's no such thing as a "routine traffic stop."
2nd,This was not close to "routine:" when a driver only lowers the window a small amount, and states outright he does not have motor vehicle documents and the officer has no right to them, anyway, alarm bells go off fast, loud, and clear. The fact that an unholstered firearm was found indicates he was ready to use it. Cops are not Marshal Dillons, who always wait for the bad guy to draw first.

""The family’s statement went on to say that Allan “was always selflessly helping and protecting others in need. He has been studying law the last few years and was a patriot doing what he could to defend the people’s freedom and liberty in his community.” I agree with your assessment, LW. Hard to figure this mindset. If this had been an inner-city police shooting, the mother would have been saying, "He was really a very good boy. He was going to marry the mother of his child/ren. He was just turning his life around!"

Blood, especially when spilled, is a strong tie, and families all too often defend their miscreants, even when horrific facts are staring them right in the face.

Are the right-wingers out there rioting yet?

I agree with much of your post but this sentence is shameful.

> If
> this had been an inner-city police shooting, the
> mother would have been saying, "He was really a
> very good boy. He was going to marry the mother of
> his child/ren. He was just turning his life
> around!"

You know full well that many of the those killed by cops in recent years were good citizens as well as innocent.

But this time, the offender was a right-wing white man, so we'll give the cops the benefit of the doubt.

Have I not given the cops the benefit of the doubt in this thread?

Or are you arguing with some woke libtard in your imagination?

You did--here--give the Farmington cops the benefit of the doubt. The "...we'll give the cops..." was a generic first person plural, the "universal." (Perhaps I'm not up-to-date on proper pronoun practices.)

This must be difficult for you, having to choose between two groups with which you identify so completely.

It’s easier for me to adopt whichever position I think factually correct since I have no need to fit in with anyone. I hope one day you manage to develop some moral independence.

Freedom of thought really isn’t that terrifying.

Have I not just yesterday told anybody she was wrong to attribute the Vermont Christian school’s refusal to play a girl’s basketball game against a trans woman to religious prejudice?

In fact, have I not told her on several occasions that I think she jumps to unfair conclusions about right wingers? I am assuredly closer to her general views than yours, but I have no problem criticizing Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, calling Carter a failed president and Obama a foreign policy disaster, and praising those GOP presidents who I think were good leaders.

If there is a thoughtless team player incapable of countenancing anyone but his own cult brethren, perhaps you will find him closer to home.

And since we haven't crossed swords on those issues, I never felt it necessary to meet you outside the city gate at dawn.

It would be nice if you were capable of seeing nuance rather than insisting on a binary vision of the world. If you did, you might understand why I think a probable sovereign citizen with a gun and an anti-cop attitude might well be a threat to the police.

And why I think the availability of firearms puts cops in an untenable position for them and the rest of us.

caffiend, it may also be worth noting that I have since the outset of the pandemic argued that China's behavior makes it impossible to write off the lab leak theory, which puts me on the right side of the aisle. A quick search of the database would readily show that.

If I were some sort of liberal activist, I would have hewed to the liberal line. But I did not think that was where the evidence led.

I have a great deal of respect for you, and no small affection. (Or do I mean affliction?). But we're wandering into different subject matter now.

It's time to sheathe the scabbard in my time zone.
Tootle-oo, Tootsie!

Presuming you are retiring rather than arising, I bid you a good night.

I guess only in America do "alarms go off" in such a situation. I have to keep reminding myself despite constant reminders on the news

Washington state has no state income tax, so other taxes & fees are higher...

That gives license cheaters a plausible excuse to cheat & brag that they're the real heroes,,,

Me: Accurate & Current licenses (drivers & vehicle) are officer safety necessities, an officer making a contact should know what & who Before s/he lights them up (former ISP officer me)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/2023 10:29PM by GNPE.

The mischaracterization of so-called sovereign citizens as right wing is laughable.

Having interned in the prosecutor's office of a big city that was ridden with crime, and a traditionally (D) city at that, I saw my fair share of these people. They believe that by phrasing things a certain way, they can escape prosecution. For example, if you say you are traveling instead of driving, the police cannot give you a ticket no matter what you do on the road.

What they fail to grasp is that whether you are driving or traveling on a road, the police can stop you and they have total authority over the traffic stop. How do we know this? Because foreigners who drive in the US are subject to US law. If you drive on a Utah state road, you are subject to the laws of Utah. That's all there is to it.

Once again, it's not a right wing or a left wing issue. The sovereign citizen movement is a mind virus that does no discriminate, and it has gained traction in jails, where jailhouse lawyers (inmates who read an outdated law book in the jail library) who have no legal education and very low literacy rates misinterpret laws and come up with laughable ideas on how to avoid responsibility. That's what people do when they have way too much free time on their hands and they can't accept responsibility for what they've done.

There are also people who got their law degree on YouTube (sarcasm) and think they can outsmart police. Though it's not that difficult to do, police have discretion in traffic stops. They also have guns and radios. So you comply and if you're right, you prove it in court.

There are a lot of right-wingers, including caffiend above, who think sovereign citizens are on the right.

And empirically I think he is correct: although there are a significant number of libertarian sovereign citizens on the left, the vast majority identify as (very) conservative.

Like many polygamists who create and cherry-pick religious texts, "sovereign citizens" play loose with the Constitution, "natural law," English Common Law, and Christian scriptures to cobble a legal philosophy to accommodate a perversely radical individualism.

Polygamists may overlap Christian doctrine, but I hold they are a far outside the Christian fold. Similarly, "sovereign citizens" may share minor commonality with the US political right, but basically they have disavowed the concept and practice of responsible citizenship, sort of like the "Democratic Republic of CHAZ" ("CHOP") radicals of Seattle, 2020.

I am not aware of any responsible Establishment or Populist conservatives who endorse or include the "sovereign citizen" concept.

> I am not aware of any responsible Establishment or
> Populist conservatives who endorse or include the
> "sovereign citizen" concept.

I love your use of the word "responsible" since it allows you to abjure MTG, Lauren Bohbert, Jim Jordan, the Former Guy, and a host of other "irresponsible" Republicans who are at least partially sympathetic to the sovereign citizens.

No one would be happier than I to see the once great party denounce these irresponsible activists.

I used a few different search machines and queried, "What conservatives approve "sovereign citizens?" and came up with zilch. SPLCenter articles and a few others. The most I got was guilt by association, such as "Trump supporters who identify as 'sovereign citizens'..."

Yes, search hard enough and you'll find somebody who identifies as both, but by and large the "sovereign citizens" disavow electoral politics. Respectfully put, I believe you're painting with a very broad brush.

Trump used those people, yes, which is why I said that some GOP luminaries are "at least partially sympathetic" to sovereign citizens. He assuredly never disavowed their support.

The others? Well, I do think MTG's and Ms. Bohbert's actions speak quite clearly. And I read Jordan as defending anyone on the right who fights against the "deep state," which again implicates some degree of sympathy for sovereign citizens.

On a different topic, I just noticed for the first time the title of the posts under which we have been conversing. No, I did not accuse you of "endorsing" or "sympathizing with" sovereign citizens. What I said was that you have in this thread described the victim here, Mr. Allan, as "right wing." I interpret that as meaning you think a man who appears to be a sovereign citizen is likely on the right of the spectrum.

Not all of my replies to your posts are critical. Just 95% or so of them.

I get so tired of people referring to the “deep state”. Exactly what is the deep state? Come on be specific. Give us the who and where.

Did you notice the scare quotes, which express my view that the term "deep state" is meaningless?

You ask me to define my terms. Here is what I have said about that term one of several times on this board:

"Deep state this, deep state that. The jargon is just a way of evoking emotion as a substitute for reason."

https://www.exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,2358408,2358887#msg-2358887

Clear?

If you go far enough left or far enough right you end up in the same place. It’s called screwball.

The whole left/right thing is a long running psyop used in a very successful divide and conquer strategy. It makes the country weak and easier to take over. We need to dump that shit and start being Americans again. One way to fix it is have no media for a year. People just parrot all the shit they watch.

Actually, you're making an anecdotal argument but calling it empirical.

You might have seen an article in a mainstream publication or on mainstream TV that labels sovereign citizens as far right QAnon Christian fundamentalists.

But before QAnon, there were the Moorish Sovereign Society, founded in 1913.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/moorish-sovereign-citizens



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/2023 11:54PM by T-Bone.

T-Bone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, you're making an anecdotal argument but
> calling it empirical.

You did the same thing. Where did you offer empirical evidence?


----------------
> You might have seen an article in a mainstream
> publication or on mainstream TV that labels
> sovereign citizens as far right QAnon Christian
> fundamentalists.

And you might be some random pundit on some TV channel spouting your unfounded views.


------------------
> But before QAnon, there were the Moorish Sovereign
> Society, founded in 1913.

Seriously?

If you find the Southern Poverty Law Clinic persuasive enough to cite as a source, why don't you send us to an article that truly represents their views?

Not to worry: I'll do it for you. Here are well over a hundred SPLC articles on sovereign citizens, the overwhelming majority of which identify the movement as right-wing and predominantly Caucasian.

https://www.splcenter.org/search?keyword=sovereign+citizens+movement


---------------
Your argument is unsound.

back to the reason for the contact (informally a traffic stop):

the report is that the vehicle had bogus plates;

I worked with the WSP when some on the internet were selling ' Turks & Caicos' ( a geographic place but not a legal jurisdiction)license plates with the same letter-number combination + an application for an international driver's license; this was when Washington had a Motor Vehicle Excise Tax which voters voted against in a initiative yrs ago.

It's odd that the man's gun was out of his holster and on the floor of the car. I don't see someone traveling that way, so to me the likely scenario is that he either unholstered his gun and then dropped it, or unholstered it in anticipation of the traffic stop. But time will tell.

The man was sitting in his car with any view of him only from the shoulders up (and this in a car with blacked windows). The bullet holes in the car were at window height. How would the police have seen a gun either on the seat or the floor of the car? If he did have a gun did he really think his position inside a car was strong enough to out gun five armed officers? It does not make sense.
.

There are multiple officer-cam videos. They have not been released yet because there is an ongoing investigation that just barely started. This just happened Wednesday.

Y'all seem to have short memories re sovereign citizen movement. They use paperwork as their primary weapon, like filing liens on the property of anyone they don't like. Or paying fines with $250,000 c"comptrollers warrants", and then demanding $249,900 in change. Cute.

I believe there was a dust-up with a group in Idaho a year or two ago, but the famous standoff was with Leroy Schweitzer and the Montana Freemen, a fair number of whom were Utahns. Here's about two hours of info on that, if you have lots of free time:
https://www.montanapbs.org/programs/rise-of-the-freemen/

The deceased's mother said the stop was premeditated because backup was called and had already arrived when her son stopped. What I heard, though I haven't seen a mainstream news account claiming this yet, is that he refused to pull over when told to, and kept driving for a number of blocks. That was when backup was called.

The guy had to be forcibly removed from the courthouse last year, I assume at the hearing about his mother's traffic citation. so he had a history with the department, though I doubt they knew that at the time of the stop.

But refusal to pull over, refusal to supply license and registration of car, refusal to identify himself, refusal to get out of the car, and having an unholstered weapon at his disposal seems like plenty of justification for the officers to draw their weapons, whether he had pointed his weapon at them or not. . Apparently one officer negotiated with him for several minutes in an effort to identify him and get him to come out of the car.

The body-cam video will hopefully be dispositive.

I personally do not believe that having a firearm on the floor or on his seat or even in an unfastened holster is sufficient to justify the use of deadly force.

I don't like the country's gun laws at all; they let toddlers kill people; aggrieved mail careers slaughter innocents; and police interactions descend into war zone confrontations. But as long as we are stuck with what we have, I think there must be a threatening movement of some sort--reaching for the weapon, lunging towards the floor, etc. You simply can't kill a man for being angry and having a legal weapon alone.

Given the man's record as you summarize it, I won't be surprised if he gave the police reason to shoot. These guys are almost as much of a threat to the community as they are to themselves.

And that's just it. He may have dropped it in the process of grabbing for it, or made a lunge for it.

"I personally do not believe that having a firearm on the floor or on his seat or even in an unfastened holster is sufficient to justify the use of deadly force."

I agree but it's also a very good reason to make a police officer very nervous.

Yes, especially since the driver was both hostile and noncompliant.

> I agree but it's also a very good reason to make a
> police officer very nervous.

And as I've said above, I think it is entirely unreasonable of society to put police in that situation.

regardless of the names/titles/ group ID, we now have lots of people (Bundy, etc.) who don’t want to be governed; ironically some/ many of them wish to hold elective and administrative offices.

I had a 1:1 experience with one many yrs ago when I briefly lived in Utah.

Trump is/was the poster child for this phenom



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/04/2023 10:28AM by GNPE.

Those very same people like to have paved roads to drive on, along with fire/ambulance and other services. They seem to be very choosy about which government services they will tolerate, and which they will not.

and which taxes they agree with to fund infrastructure & services; I’m ‘mature enough’ to remember anti-war, anti- Vietnam activists telling that ‘war taxes’ shouldn’t be paid.

Now the shoe is on the other foot, Ja ja

Comments from gun-rights crowd & other Right wing-nuts: (silence, occasionally interupped by crickets)