SFPD Claims Kenneth harding Shot Himself to Death.. The Community Says BS!

Here’s an intense breakdown of the murder of Kenneth Harding, put together by Jazmayne.. It’s composed of witness accounts of the aftermath to the daytime shooting. Featuring the poetry of the late, great Gil Scott Heron.

http://vimeo.com/26708722

Kenneth Harding

Thus far we have few bewildering things going on.. Follow this if you can..We initially heard that SFPD shot an unarmed man when he ran for not having a $2 bus transfer..

Later that night we heard from Police Chief Suhr that the man (Kenneth Harding) had shot at the police but no gun was found..No cops were injured.. By the time 10 o’clock news came on..There were reports that someone had posted a video showing a gun..The police looked at this video and said they would be tracking down a man with a hoodie shown in the video picking up the gun.. Here’s the video…You tell us if this hooded gentleman picked up a gun. You see that about 1;20 minutes into the video.. Also explain to us how police shot a man shooting at them did not secure a weapon that was less than 10ft away from them when they are facing the crowd..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTbJEy7sj_4

Mysterious hooded man picking up gun

The police later tracked down the gun, but did not catch the man who supposedly took the gun. They said they know who he is.. and they will catch him later.. It was interesting that his name was not released so concerned citizens could help bring him to the police.. Up til a couple of days ago this video containing the gun was the main proof the police were offering-showing that Kenneth Harding was armed.

SF police Chief Suhr the day after the shooting announced they had recovered the gun and thanked witnesses for coming forth to letting them know that the man they shot was armed. The next day the police posted signs around the Bayview asking for additional witnesses.

SFPD also announced that the man that they shot was a person of interest in a murder case in Seattle.. This story was put out there as if the SFPD was on the hunt for Harding in conjunction w/ Seattle PD.That was not the case.. All SFPD knew was Harding was a guy who didnt have a $2 bus transfer…By floating this story out, many would be left feeling the police were justified in shooting Harding.. To this day he is still considred a person of interest.. not a person wanted for murder..

Also on Monday July 18th a rally was held where at least half a dozen eye witnesses came forth and talked to various reporters saying they did not see Kenneth Harding shoot at police. This included parents who had kids in the park just 4-5 ft away from where Harding was gunned down. This includes a number of people who were in the plaza which is always packed..We spoke with other reporters, none of them had tracked down witnesses supporting the police version of events.. Here’s a link to our HKR radio coverage

Below is OLM video of some of this coverage…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XYXEnsnZLg

After the Monday press conference.. SFPD claimed they did tests and that gun residue was found on the hands of the Kenneth Harding.. To my knowledge this was not independently verified. Considering that as 3 months ago SFPD had to jettison 57 felony cases for falsifying evidence, one wonders why they wouldn’t be more transparent? Why not go above board to ensure public confidence in the process? We do know on Tuesday there was private closed door meeting with Mayor Ed Lee, the police and a handful of community leaders.. At that meeting there was no independent verification. SF Commissioner La Mesha Irizarry has written about what went down at this meeting.

The most recent updates have SFPD saying that according the SF medical examiner Harding shot himself and thus killed himself.. Many find that outrageous. Harding was running from police and was shot in the back..The police are saying they found gun residue on his hand, but they had to backtrack on the gun story.. The gun they found does not match the residue.. and so now police are still looking for the gun..

We’ll keep you posted as this bizarre tale continues to unfold..

Comments

  1. swaneagle harijan says:

    Thanks for stringing this together Davey D and BIG Thanks to LaMesha Irizarry for her stellar efforts to keep people updated, educated and coming out to stand against the insane, racist violence of SFPD. Thanks to all those giving voice to the truth of this story convoluted by corrupt police, media and all those who strive to silence the vulnerable.

  2. Hall Monitor says:

    You’re right swaneagle harijan!

    That Black cop that shot that Black kid is so racist.

    Brilliant analysis.

  3. e-scribblah says:

    davey, you know where i stand on the issue of police accountability. but… your analysis here is flawed.

    “You tell us if this hooded gentleman picked up a gun. You see that about 1;20 minutes into the video.. Also explain to us how police shot a man shooting at them did not secure a weapon that was less than 10ft away from them when they are facing the crowd..”

    we clearly see the gun in the video. it’s outside the yellow tape which is the crime scene. i’d estimate the distance at about 20-25 ft. from the crime scene and maybe 30 ft. from the body. all the cops are inside the yellow tape. they do not venture into the crowd, but remain within the boundary. they can’t see the gun because it’s on the ground and there are numerous people in between them and it. there’s no clear line of sight. at 1:20, the guy in the hoodie is shown picking up a cell phone about 5-10 ft, in front of where the gun was. the video doesn’t show him picking up the gun.

    “The police later tracked down the gun, but did not catch the man who supposedly took the gun.”

    actually, the police recovered a weapon from a parolee based on an informant’s tip. the weapon recovered was a .45. police initially said they believed that to be Harding’s weapon. this was before the forensics report came back from the medical examiner which indicated Harding was shot with a .380. The two SFPD officers who gave chase and shot eight times at harding (ShotSpotter recorded ten shots) carry department-issued .40 caliber weapons. that leaves only a few possibilities:
    1) the police shot harding, but with a weapon other than the one they were issued.
    2) someone in the crowd shot harding with the .380.
    3) harding shot himself.

    “Up til a couple of days ago this video containing the gun was the main proof the police were offering-showing that Kenneth Harding was armed.”

    this is a puzzling thing to write, given that it takes time to conduct lab tests. the information released at the time was the Shotspotter record which cannot indicate which caliber weapons were used. then came the forensics report indicating gunshot residue on harding’s hand. then came the medical examiner’s report indicating a .380 bullet was found lodged in harding’s skull.

    “This story was put out there as if the SFPD was on the hunt for Harding in conjunction w/ Seattle PD.”

    Huh? Nowhere in any newspaper account does it say this. this is just disinformation.

    “By floating this story out, many would be left feeling the police were justified in shooting Harding.. To this day he is still considred a person of interest.. not a person wanted for murder..”

    well, it’s not proof of guilt, but neither is it proof of innocence. as for “floating” the story, what happened was SFPD checked with other PDs across the country on harding–this is routine in such cases– and received intel from Seattle, which they then announced to the press. that seems entirely credible to me.

    btw, the only difference between a ‘person of interest’ and a murder suspect is that formal charges are brought, based on having enough evidence. it’s a legal technicality since you can’t file charges without hard evidence,even if you receive anecdotal evidence indicating who the shooter is. theoretically, Seattle PD could have fabricated this, but that’s unlikely. what this does possibly explain is why harding was in SF, why he ran, why he fired at cops, and why he shot himself after being shot.

    “half a dozen eye witnesses came forth and talked to various reporters saying they did not see Kenneth Harding shoot at police.”

    sorry, but this proves nothing.

    “SFPD claimed they did tests and that gun residue was found on the hands of the Kenneth Harding.. To my knowledge this was not independently verified. Considering that as 3 months ago SFPD had to jettison 57 felony cases for falsifying evidence, one wonders why they wouldn’t be more transparent?’

    i agree that independent verification would have put to rest skeptics and various conspiracy theories.

    “Harding was running from police and was shot in the back..”

    according to today’s Chron, Harding was shot once in the leg and once in the neck. the second shot was the fatal shot. it lodged in his skull and was identified as a .380 round. based on the trajectory, it would have been practically impossible to shoot someone in the back and have the bullet travel upwards from the neck to the skull.

    hate to say it, but this is what happens when you jump to conclusions before the facts are in.

    as i posted in the other thread, i understand the outrage among Bayview residents. but that’s based on past history and doesn’t jibe with the apparent facts of this case.

    the allegation that SFPD let harding bleed out doesnt seem to be supported by the video either. for one thing, harding was likely killed instantly from the .380 round at point blank range which entered his skull. for another, we see the paramedic unit bringing the gurney and loading harding onto it, even though bystanders are saying he’s already dead.

    thusfar, it looks like the only thing SFPD is actually guilty of is saying they recovered the gun when in fact they haven’t. i will agree that many questions remain and that the word of SFPD in and of itself isn’t good enough for the community.

    in moving forward, SFPD needs to have full transparency and bring in outside investigators who can independently verify everything they are saying. there is certainly reason to be skeptical of their account, based on past and recent history. but the facts as we know them aren’t adding up with the initial accounts that the cops shot an unarmed man. that’s just plain hysteria.

    if SFPD did engage in any kind of cover-up, the truth will be revealed and heads will roll. there’s just too much public scrutiny for them to get away with it. when you think about it, SFPD has a lot to lose, so it hardly makes sense that Suhr would knowingly put his career and the already sketchy-credibility of his department on the line. it’s obviously in his best interest to be as transparent as possible. also, since the mayor is probably going to be running for re-election, another police scandal at this point could derail that effort. so its also in his best interest to have full transparency, full accountability, and full disclosure.

  4. “That Black cop that shot that Black kid is so racist.” REALLY, how so?
    And the “black kid” was also a pimp and rapist.. is he a racist too?

  5. Hall Monitor,

    He very likely is a racist. You’ve never heard of a black person being racist against black people? It’s been going on since slavery, since the “house slave”. The house slave was brainwashed into believing that it was the other slaves’ fault that they were still out in the field. If they just worked harder, they too could get a cozy room in the house. The house slave grew to despise the other slaves, and would eventually call them the same names that the master called them. The history of the self hating black person goes as far back as the history of black people in America, itself.

  6. e-scribblah says:

    one point of clarification after watching the jasmyne video: harding does kick his feet a couple times while lying on the ground. so he wasn’t killed instantly. but within seconds, he is no longer moving. we see a police officer check him, and then later, a white-shirted paramedic. it’s a horrific scene, to be sure, but i don’t see any evidence that SFPD left him to die, since we now know that the fatal wound entered his skull. if there was no pulse then he didn’t ‘bleed out,’ as has been alleged.

    it is true that no gun was found on him — but the YouTube video clearly does show a shiny metallic object in the shape of a .380 caliber pistol about 10 yards away from the body. the most likely scenario is that Harding was running and possibly was in the act of shooting when he was hit in the leg. as he fell, his weapon discharged into his neck. his momentum carried him forward, and the gun skidded on the concrete. if he intentionally shot himself, the gun would have been found nearby, not 30 feet away.

    the only thing that is crystal-clear here is that without the video evidence, we would not be able to piece together what actually happened. but in this case, the video does seem to support the police version of events.

    it’s extremely unlikely that the police could have planted a .380 round in his jacket pocket and also planted the gun on the opposite side of the crime scene, given the time frame of events–the video begins within seconds of the shooting– and the fact that there was a crowd of bystanders in-between the body and the gun.

    so while i do see a dead young black man–which pains me–i don’t see a police murder, nor a cover-up involving SFPD, the Chronicle, TV News, and the SF medical examiner. The ShotSpotter information also supports the theory that harding fired first, since there was a 1.9 second period which elapsed between the first shot and the other nine. police are trained to fire in bursts, not single shots.

    we’ll probably never know what happened for sure, and i welcome an independent investigation, but this latest piece of the puzzle does appear to absolve SFPD of accountability for harding’s death. though it makes for rabble-rousing propaganda, it’s just not accurate to say he was killed for evading a $2 MUNI fare.

  7. Hall Monitor says:

    FYI – in regards to the autopsy, it wasn’t just the cops but also a civilian medical examiner who were involved.

    “Biel said Thursday that he understands there may be skepticism about the latest evidence revealed by authorities. He asked the public to keep in mind that it is the result of investigations by the ***civilian medical examiner*** and the firearms unit of the city crime lab.”

  8. Rob Thomas says:

    E-scribblah, when the cops peel your cap like that in front of everyone, Davey D is going to have your back and make sure no stone goes unturned. He’s not going to just listen to the police apologists and run with their conclusion, and tell everyone else to stop being emotional about it. He’s going to shine a light for you and make sure there’s justice in your name.

  9. e-scribblah says:

    Rob, i think i liked you better when you were singing “Smooth” with Santana. like i said, you don’t know me. FYI, Dave already has my back. i’ve known him for 20 years. i’m no police apologist, but i’m no idiot either. what’s your story? let’s see: you ignore facts, make ridiculous assumptions, then turn all punk-ass when called on your sh*t. you can’t back up a single thing you say. that’s the very definition of willful ignorance. plus you start crying when someone uses a word you don’t understand. sorry, but i can’t just regress to a 3rd grade reading comprehension level in order to spell out the plain truth for you. you’re just gonna have to take an L on this one, son. this ain’t about you. go read up on Bobby Hutton and Fred Hampton and then maybe you’ll know the difference between poetic justice/instant karma and an actual, honest to God police execution.

  10. Who says rebellion/revolution can’t be political?

  11. Rob Thomas says:

    E-scribblah, you came here and accused everyone of making “emotional” arguments before most people had even made an argument. I know your type. You’ll just sit there and say whatever you have to say to make people mad. You’ll double check your grammar and try to sound as educated as possible, to give yourself some kind of moral high ground. You act as if you’ve never been wrong, about anything, ever. your comment about whether he’d kill someone in the future was an endorsement of a police execution. By making comments like that, you’re basically telling us that even if they had executed him, so be it. How can anyone take you seriously after that? Go ahead, keep insulting me. You’re not going to make me mad. Calling me a “punk” now. Ha ha. That’s just funny.

  12. e-scribblah says:

    rob, i didnt accuse anyone of anything. i cautioned people to weigh fthe acts before making a rush to judgment. you would do well to take that advice, because otherwise you just sound stupid.

  13. e-scribblah says:

    …weigh the facts…

  14. e-scribblah, please clarify further:

    “one point of clarification after watching the jasmyne video: harding does kick his feet a couple times while lying on the ground. so he wasn’t killed instantly. but within seconds, he is no longer moving. ”

    not only that, but he actually lifted the upper half of his body off of the ground, and spat up blood. it didn’t seem like it took “seconds.” it seemed to me as though it went on for several minutes. if you have the stomach for it, watch it again.

    “but the YouTube video clearly does show a shiny metallic object in the shape of a .380 caliber pistol about 10 yards away from the body.”

    you are assuming now that the object in the video was a .380 caliber pistol. you don’t know that for sure.

    “the most likely scenario is that Harding was running and possibly was in the act of shooting when he was hit in the leg. as he fell, his weapon discharged into his neck. his momentum carried him forward, and the gun skidded on the concrete. if he intentionally shot himself, the gun would have been found nearby, not 30 feet away.”

    of those 10 shots, how many probably came from harding? if harding shot the first shot intentionally, as posed in your scenario, then he must have fired at least one more shot in the next few seconds of the chase. the spot shotter info doesn’t support your theory that he fired shot #2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, or 10. look at your comment here:

    “The ShotSpotter information also supports the theory that harding fired first, since there was a 1.9 second period which elapsed between the first shot and the other nine. police are trained to fire in bursts, not single shots.”

    shots #2-10 are all in “bursts” as you say. it sounds to me as though those shots were from the same source. if a cop fired shots #2-10, then harding’s *fatal shot* wasn’t recorded by spotshotter.

    perhaps harding fired the last two shots, and one of those was the fatal shot.

    all i know is that it’s mighty, mighty strange that the the chief hasn’t reported how many bullets each officer fired. that information could have been shared right along with the spotshotter info. that way, we would know how many shots harding supposedly fired at them, by doing some very simple math.

  15. e-scribblah says:

    look, i agree that there is much missing information. my opinion is that it’s in the best interest of SFPD-community relations for the police to have full transparency over all evidence related to this case, as requested by John Burris today.

    “you are assuming now that the object in the video was a .380 caliber pistol. you don’t know that for sure.”

    i didn’t say i knew it for sure. but by the same token, we don’t know it’s NOT a .380. i do know it wasnt a cel phone.

    “shots #2-10 are all in “bursts” as you say. it sounds to me as though those shots were from the same source.”

    it sounds to you? based on what?

    SFPD says there were two police who fired weapons so there were at least two sources.

    “if a cop fired shots #2-10, then harding’s *fatal shot* wasn’t recorded by spotshotter.”

    now you’re assuming that the cops fired shots 2-10, which you have no way of knowing. it’s certainly possible that harding fired while he was being fired upon. also the chances of the fatal shot not being recorded are practically nil.

    my theory is that he was running, gun in hand, when he was hit in the leg. the impact of being shot could have caused him to discharge his weapon into his neck. i dont know how else you can logically explain a .380 bullet when SFPD carry .40 cal.

    “perhaps harding fired the last two shots, and one of those was the fatal shot.”

    sorry, but that’s unlikely.

    i think what’s confusing you is the whole burst thing. let me explain again: police are not trained to fire single shots. they are trained to fire in groups of four shots this would be especially true when shooting at a moving target. if you do the math, 2 cops = 8 shots. 10 total shots – 8 cop shots = 2 unaccounted-for shots (harding).

    so the most likely scenario is that harding fired the first shot, which was followed by 8 shots from SFPD 1.9 seconds later. within that period harding fired a second shot. this is the conclusion the evidence leads me to. you got a better explanation, i’ll take it, but i’m going to go with what follows logic and rationality and is within the realm of plausibility, no matter how bizarre it may be.

    but as i said up top, we cannot take SFPD’s words at face value alone. even though the info about the .380 bullet came from the medical examiner and not the police, there’s lots of reason to be suspicious or skeptical about the police story. they did announce they had recovered the gun before the M.E.’s announcement, which turned out to be wrong, so we need independently verifiable proof of all evidence pertaining to the investigation–the ShotSpotter data, ballistics tests, surveillance data, call logs, etc. a cover-up will not be tolerated.

  16. e-scribblah says:

    so, rob, what’s your reaction to this report?: http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/07/18/suspect-shot-dead-by-sf-police-was-convicted-child-rapist/

    among other things, it details that harding committed statutory rape of a 13 year old while on home detention for armed robbery. i suppose you’re going to try and argue that he WASN’T a thug…again, not saying he deserved to die, but karma’s a bitch, ain’t it?

  17. Dude was a sex-offender…..nuff said!

  18. Everyone should be asking themselves right now, what do I hope to accomplish by taking up this guy as my new crusade?

    If your agenda is to get upset and yell at the cops for some previous wrong, real or perceived, and project those emotions onto this case, then by all means, knock yourselves out.

    But if you’re serious about social change or representing repressed people to see that maybe a little more of justice is to be had then you’re doing far more harm than good by crusading a child rapist.

    As a Jordan Miles supporter I’m kind of pissed that you’re lumping this scum into the same category as his case and it dilutes the credibility of his case and any future police abuse situation you might bring up. If your goal is to win the hearts and minds (and that’s part of any social change, getting people that initially disagree with you to see your side of things) you’ve instantly lost the debate because all the other side has to say is “Yeah, but the poster child of your last crusade was a child molester.”

    Boom.

    Your entire argument, no matter how valid or just, has just been destroyed in the eyes of most people.

  19. e-scribblah says:

    i think there’s a huge difference with being a “police apologist” and pointing out that harding was no boy scout.

    and i hate to say it but i agree with Hawk that campaigning for this guy dilutes actual, clear-cut cases of police abuse. it reeks of agent provacateurism (look it up, rob) and rabble-rousing to make a big deal of a so-called police murder which may well turn out to be self-inflicted and lamenting all kinds of socioeconomic woes while completely overlooking the violent sexual predator angle, which isn’t just hearsay or speculation, but documented. dude had accumulated several felonies before his 18th birthday, not including the woman who was shot and killed in seattle.

    “if you’re serious about social change or representing repressed people to see that maybe a little more of justice is to be had then you’re doing far more harm than good by crusading a child rapist.”

    this is what i’ve been saying all along, although i would substitute “oppressed” for “repressed.”

  20. e-scribblah says:

    this just in: http://www.komonews.com/news/local/126086823.html

    “SEATTLE – The brother of a man shot dead during a shootout with San Francisco police last week is now the focus of a manhunt himself, wanted for questioning in connection with a homicide in Seattle, according to reports.

    The name of the brother was not released, but police have issued an “all-points bulletin,” warning that he may be headed there, officials told KGO-TV in San Francisco.

    They say the man being sought is the brother of Kenneth Harding, 19, who was identified as a person of interest in the July 13 shooting of 19-year-old Tanaya Gilbert in South Seattle. Harding was fatally shot last weekend during a confrontation with officers in San Francisco.”

    sure, it’s possible Seattle PD is making the whole thing up–but what do they have to gain from it? the political fallout from screwing up a high-profile case with lots of media and community scrutiny would be immense.

  21. thanks or clarifying, e-scribblah.

    you said: “now you’re assuming that the cops fired shots 2-10, which you have no way of knowing.”

    true, it was my assumption. i heard the chief police (or perhaps the commander) say at a press conference that harding fired the first shot, and officers returned fire after that. this was said before the M.E.’s report was announced. the conference is on vimeo at the( 8:32 mark) if you want to view it.

    you also said: “they are trained to fire in groups of four shots this would be especially true when shooting at a moving target. if you do the math, 2 cops = 8 shots. 10 total shots – 8 cop shots = 2 unaccounted-for shots (harding). so the most likely scenario is that harding fired the first shot, which was followed by 8 shots from SFPD 1.9 seconds later. within that period harding fired a second shot.”

    i did not know that cops were trained to fire in four bursts. i did not hear the chief or any other rep from the police explain this either. your explanation makes sense, if indeed the officers fired in four bursts. when i listen to the audio of the shots, it sounds like some shots are in bursts while other shots were not. it also appears that way on the shotspotter map. shots #2-8 seemed to be fired as a group, and shots #9-10 seem to be together, but with a delay between them as well. it’s true though – i don’t know which shots came from which gun. it actually sounds like 8 shots to me, not 10, but on the map it looks like some of those shots were overlapping (fired at the same instant). i’m a lay person just trying to make sense of it all.

  22. e-scribblah says:

    cutie, i’m with you. i want to make sense of it all too. the reason i know about police procedure is not because i’m a cop, but because i’m a journalist who has covered issues of police accountability. ironically, the thing about firing in bursts came out of the johannes mehserle trial. it was a defense contention that since mehserle only fired one shot, it proved he was reaching for his taser. the defense argued that had he been going for his gun as the prosecution alleged, he would have fired a burst of shots.

    what makes this whole thing about harding hard to grasp is that the police story has changed several times. that’s certainly cause for skepticism. but the assertion that harding fired the first shot seems to explain the sequence of events and why there was a gap between the first shot and subsequent shots. the ShotSpotter info was released before the M.E.’s report came back. i don’t see a contradiction there. prior to the M.E’.s report, the police did not have an explanation of who fired the fatal shot and were under the assumption that they had killed harding.

    the community pressure and outrage forced them to address the issue before all the information was out, so subsequent information is (probably) more accurate. however, the inconsistencies in the police account, as well as past history, call their version of events into question–which is why i support full transparency and an independent investigation.

    “shots #2-8 seemed to be fired as a group, and shots #9-10 seem to be together, but with a delay between them as well. it’s true though – i don’t know which shots came from which gun. it actually sounds like 8 shots to me, not 10, but on the map it looks like some of those shots were overlapping (fired at the same instant).”

    it’s hard to rely solely on audio to tell us what happened in any kind of conclusive way. it’s just one piece of the puzzle. we dont have the actual shooting on video, but we do have the video evidence which begins just after the shooting. btw, a .40-cal pistol is not a fully-automatic weapon, meaning that the trigger has to be pulled before each shot; therefore a ‘burst’ is merely continuous shots in sequence, as opposed to single shots. so any slight delay between shots isn’t conclusive in and of itself, especially when you factor in a moving target and moving shooters. the fact that less than two seconds elapsed between all 10 shots is probably the most salient fact in the entire sequence. but as i said, that’s only one piece of the puzzle. you have to match that up with video evidence as well as ballistic and forensic reports to give a more complete picture. and even then, there are gaps in what can be conclusively stated and what can be reasonably assumed, based on evidence.

    the video evidence is powerful because it tells us several things: the direction the shots came from; the location of harding; the speed with which bystanders converged on the scene; the time which elapsed following the shooting; and, apparently, not only does it appear to show the presence of a .380-like gun approx. 30 feet from the body and outside the yellow tape, but also a second object in the shape of a cell phone. i can’t say for sure it was a gun and a cell phone, but what can be seen is consistent with that. in any event, if harding was unarmed, then how can one explain the presence of gunshot residue on his hand, not to mention the fatal bullet being of a different caliber than the police weapons.

    that shot would have had to be fired at extremely close range, since it entered his neck on the right side and traveled upward before lodging in his skull. it doesn’t seem possible that either of the two SFPD officers could have fired that shot, since they weren’t close enough.

    i know some folks have insisted that a plainclothes officer on the scene could have fired that shot, but that explanation doesn’t wash when you factor in where the gun apparently lay in relation to the body and the time elapsed before the crowd swarmed the crime scene, which doesn’t seem long enough to a) shoot harding; b) put the gun in his hand in order to get GSR on it; c) put a .380 bullet in his pocket; and d) toss the gun some ways away. and, if there was a non-uniform cop who did all this, why wouldn’t he place the gun in harding’s hand or near the body?

    so, in recreating the likely sequence of events, we follow the evidence to what it tells us — and what it doesn’t tell us.

  23. e-scribblah, i’m glad you’re on this and i’m glad you’re interested in this. i’ve read quite a few accounts (from bloggers and news reporters) and i would have to say your reasoning is the most thorough and balanced i’ve seen so far. there are still other questions i have about the story. i will admit that i am very, very skeptical that the police have revealed the whole story. i don’t think that they are covering anything up, but i do think that they don’t know some things and have been scrambling to be on top of it for the public.

  24. Phoenixx says:

    Im not sure if anyone else heard what I heard but I played the video back a few times where the “mysterious hooded man” points at the object on the ground and say “Phone…somebody phone” to the camera man. He picks it up and asks the boy in the black shirt “this your phone?” or “this HIS phone” Also he isnt really mysterious bcs it was HIS video that I watched the victim lift himself up. In the video he turns his phone around on himself right here >>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=036nLcVZLE0&feature=related … Just wondering if anyone else heard what I heard.

  25. phoenixx, i noticed that the grey hoodie man was in a different video also. it does seem like he is saying the word “phone.” i can’t hear the other words he might have said, though. i don’t know if i’d go as far to say that he was the one who filmed one of the videos….maybe he is turning it back on himself. i don’t know. but i definitely noticed that he was shown twice in that video.

  26. e-scribblah says:

    phoenixx, there are two objects on the ground in the video taken from the other angle. i didnt see either the cel phone or the gun in the link you provided. but you can clearly see them both in the other one. in this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTbJEy7sj_4&feature=related) you can see what appears to be the gun at :04-:15 and the cel phone at 1:25.

  27. Phoenixx says:

    E-scribblah. I only posted the that link bcs it looks like it cld be his video. I guess I cld always just comment on the video and just ask though… but I dnt want to seem all suspect and scare anyone lol.

  28. e-scribblah says:

    this just in: according to the SF Chronicle, police have recovered the .380 and have conducted ballistics tests confirming a match to the bullet found in harding’s skull: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/28/BANJ1KGBGV.DTL&tsp=1.

    for transparency’s sake, i would still like to see an independent investigator review the evidence, but if this report is accurate, it does appear to confirm that harding was not unarmed, as witnesses initially claimed, and that he did shoot himself. i’m not sure how much more info if any would be necessary to confirm the SFPD version of events.

    again, i understand the skepticism over this case. but as events have unfolded and evidence has come to the forefront, a clearer picture of what actually happened has emerged.

    i think there are a few take-away messages here: for community activists, not to make a rush to judgment based on initial reports and perception of injustice. also that trying to make a martyr out of a guy who is a convicted sexual predator and possible murderer undermines the accountability meme in the first place. it’s absurd, for instance, to get on the high horse about police executions if no execution actually took place. the apparent fact that harding shot himself is irony on a sublime level. good luck arguing that suspects have a right to shoot first at police and that police should not fire back in such instances. it’s just as possible to unfairly judge cops as it is people of color. let’s save the fire and brimstone for actual cases of police abuse, ok?

    for police, the take-home message is to uphold accountability by making evidence public and/or subject to independent review as soon as it is available. also, that opening up a dialogue with a community who feels wronged and has historical reasons for doing so is going to take more than just one effort. if SFPD is serious about building a better relationship with Bayview residents, it needs to open up lines of communication BEFORE the next incident.

  29. Hall Monitor says:

    To his credit, the current SFPD police chief, forget his name but the big bald guy, already took measures to better relationship with Bayview residents ages ago by having regular basketball games with cops and Bayview locals.

    Funny thing about playing basketball, if you’re doing it right you actually end up communicating with the other person by the end of the day.

    If you just stand there on the court and yell at the other person like in a town hall meeting that’s a technicality and all you’re going to do is get disqualified.

  30. e-scribblah says:

    Suhr was actually Bayview precinct captain before he became chief. i dont want to give the police too much credit here–there’s a report in the guardian that the M.E. isn’t finished with their investigation and the ballistics info on the fatal bullet’s caliber came from SFPD–but at the same time, if their version of events holds up, i don’t see any misconduct in this particular case.

  31. e-scribblah says:

    saw the alleged .380 on the tv news last night… it appears to be exactly the same shape/size as the silver metallic object briefly seen in the YouTube video.

    also read with interest the article in the Chron (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/28/BANJ1KGBGV.DTL) about the Hunters Point activist who protested yesterday. he’s no longer talking about a police cover-up.

    “Debray Carpenter, 22, a Bayview resident and founder of the Black Star Liner Coalition, an advocacy group, said Thursday that the issue goes beyond Harding’s death.

    “Why did they even harass Kenneth Harding in the first place, over a transfer?” he said. “The issue is them criminalizing black youths over transfers.”

    Interesting spin, considering that harding’s felony convictions for armed robbery, rape of a minor, and attempted pimping before he turned 18 are what made him a criminal. fare evasion was just the icing on the cake. complaining after the fact while overlooking those facts kind of misses the point.

    it would be nice to see young activists like Carpenter take a stand against black on black crime. referencing Marcus Garvey’s Black Star Line is kind of ironic without also referencing self-determination and self-reliance, to say nothing of self-healing of the black community.

    it would be one thing if all violence against African Americans in Bayview-Hunters Point could be directly attributed to SFPD. obviously, that is not the case.

  32. “it would be nice to see young activists like Carpenter take a stand against black on black crime.”

    Amen to that.

    The Black kids that assaulted Huan Chen near a MUNI platform where he later died are still at large. You can’t tell me that not a single person in the Bayview knows you did this and can’t come forward.

    I heard a quote a while ago that that still sticks with me today “Black people are afraid of Black people for the same reasons that White people are afraid of Black people. If I’m living next to a mugger, rapist, or thief do you really think he’s not gong to assault me too just because we have the same skin color.”

    Maybe that compounded by the anti-snitch factor that seems to be imbedded into the Bayview culture is the reason why Bayview behaves this way. You see Black folks assaulting other Black folks or Asian folks or what have you all the time but you repress those emotions. But as soon as there’s a situation where a cop is involved (doesn’t even have to be white, could be a Black and Hispanic cop let’s say) then it’s OK to voice your anger (just so long as it’s directed towards the cops). The floodgates are opened and all those pent up emotions come flowing out like a backed up menstrual cycle.

    In a lot of ways, Bayview seems to be suffering something similar to battered wives syndrome.

    It’s something to think about….

  33. e-scribblah says:

    Hawk, some interesting points. i can’t really disagree with anything said in your last post. comparing bayview to a battered wife is certainly a compelling analogy.

    my .02 is that Bayview is suffering from a myriad of problems. i think it’s a lot easier for residents to blame one entity for their woes than look at the larger issues with regard to perpetuation of unhealthy cycles. at the same time, there are some very well-intentioned and well-informed activists in the bayview who have taken on serious issues like redevelopment/gentrification, toxic environmental poisoning, and asthma/cancer. for whatever reason these same activists are silent when it comes to black on black crime.

    if you look at the SFBayview’s coverage of this, you can see that they’re sticking to the police execution theory, even when evidence, logic and rational belief is pointing in the other direction. we havent heard from John Burris since the gun was found, and at this point, a lawsuit against SFPD looks like it would get thrown out of court.

    Folks can argue that Harding’s criminal record is irrelevant, but i disagree. His past history guided his actions, and had he not been a fugitive from a murder in Seattle, he might not have attempted to evade fare in the first place. In any event, being a felon in possession of a gun who chooses to fire at officers isn’t the same as being an unarmed person shot in the back for no good reason. Harding’s choice led to his death, and we can romanticize it all we want, but it appears to be more of a case of suicide by stupidity than revolutionary suicide (to paraphrase Huey P. Newton). what would have been revolutionary would have been if Harding had sought counseling for his pattern of abusive behavior toward women.

  34. Where is all the Hip Hop news gone?

  35. Yeah, I’m curious to hear Davey’s take, if any, on the race riots at the Wisconsin State Fair in Milwaukee or Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter’s “You have damaged your own race.” speech

  36. http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshhfLtwpmurc08n8WB3

    who do we blame for this?!? we need to get serious about our lives and our future…

  37. Another sign of the coming race riots –

  38. RobThomas says:

    Ramsacking convenience stores is nothing new. When I lived in Modesto in the early ’90s, there was this Am/PM across the street from a club that got hit every Saturday night. It was on the news and everything. It was mostly young Latinos and blacks, so of course the race fear mongers were out in force then, too…albeit not as many of them. Which leads me to my next point, all that’s changed today is that you have more white racists running around, which started in response to Obama’s election. We’ve always had poverty and crime. But we haven’t seen this racist sub culture of whites (i.e., tea party, minutemen), since the Klan. If there is an ensuing race war, and I don’t think there will be, but if there is one, history will clearly show that whites started it.

  39. Polcelink.com is racist says:

    Jim Bragg, retired police officer, is a member of the policelink.com website under the profile name Robocop33. He posts these, in my opinion, very racist comments about black people and flash mobs on the policelink.com website

    I have not seen anything posted about this problem and very little is even appearing in the news! Why?
    Suddenly there have been numerous incidents of “Flash Mobs” suddenly turning up and they do one of three things.
    1. They either suddenly trash businesses or other places that are either owned by or used by mainly White people.
    2. They suddenly appear in stores and then start taking goods and walking out with them, (stealing), without paying.
    3. They suddenly apear as a large group and physically assault and brutally beat any and all White People in the area.
    Thes “Flash Mobs” consist of a large number of Blacks who seem to delight in doing this. They attack ONLY Whites and these Mobs are made up of ONLY Blacks. THIS is nothing more than bigoted attacks from one race of individuals against another.and cannot be allowed! We would not allow this to happen if it were White mobs attacking Blacks or any other minority group. I do not care who is doing this to whom, it is not only illegal but immoral and dispicable.
    The NAACP and other prominant Black groups and Black Leaders also need to be speaking out against this. So far the only Black Leader to do this has been the Mayor of either Chicago or Detroit, not sure which one. Come on folks, this is wrong no matter who the victims are.

    http://policelink.monster.com/topics/82918-flash-mobs/posts

  40. Polcelink.com is racist says:

    Let policelink know how you feel about Robocop33’s racist comments at info@policelink.com

Trackbacks

  1. […] SFPD Claims Kenneth harding Shot Himself to Death.. The Community Says BS! (hiphopandpolitics.wordpress.com) […]

  2. […] said it was justified because Harding had shot first, so they’d fired in self-defense.  But as journalist Davey D has pointed out, all eye-witnesses that have spoken to the media have said Harding was […]

Leave a Reply