News Ticker

The Bizarre Minnesota Case of the Philandro Castile Police Shooting

PHOTO: Daily Record

Large-scale protests in Minnesota followed the acquittal of officer Jeronimo Yanez, who allegedly shot and killed a black man Philandro Castile in 2016. Winter Watch examined the incident that occurred in Falcon Heights, Minn., and calling it a “bizarre” and “cartoon world” is an understatement. You have to watch it all to believe it. This is one to see for yourselves. The video below has survived You Tube purges at least to date.

Castile was shot seven times by a policeman. As you go through the video, you will see no blood splatter on the upholstery. The passenger, Castiles’ girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds, then said that as Castile reached for his wallet, he informed the police officer immediately that he was also carrying a firearm but had a conceal-and-carry permit for it.

The officer then panicked, she says, and emptied four shots into the man. The female passenger and her 4 year old daughter are unharmed and in fact do not have a drop of blood on them during the entire sequence.

First notice that the steering wheel is on the right side. For some reason this footage is mirrored, most curious indeed. Prior to the shooting, Castile had been stopped by the police for traffic violations at least 49 times in 13 years. Oh come on really?

After the shooting and in the video we witness Reynolds speaking unemotionally into a camera (for her Facebook) and seemingly off of a script. The live-streaming appears to begin seconds after Castile was shot. At 0:38 the police officer gives the appearance of being “out-of-control,” saying “I told him not to reach for it, I told him to get his hand off it.” This feels like an acted staged race industry scene. The girlfriend responds like she is arguing about speed limits not a fatal shooting. And hardly a peep out of Reynold’s four year old girl.


Read: The ‘Weaponized’ Smollett Hoax Crashes and Burns. What Was it All About?

Trayvon Martin Hate Hoax Created Modern Identity Politics


Apparently the girlfriend also had the forensic wherewithal during the commotion to have counted four rounds fired into Castile and states so on camera at 1:07- “You shot four bullets into him sir.” According to official reports Castile was shot an astonishing seven times.

Only after being removed from the car does Reynolds finally show emotion at 2:10. Reynolds’ daughter is heard chiming in, “Mom, please stop cussing and screaming ’cause I don’t want you to get shooted”.

The video goes blank for three minutes and finished up with Reynolds recapping what transpired.

You see the 4 year old at 5:45 in the video, and she is blank faced and not even crying. Finally as Reynolds sits in the police car handcuffed (states so at 7:34) near the end, some how she miraculously managed to turn the camera back on to film herself and make more comments.

Yes, to tell a convincing lie, you must keep all the details of your story straight. These B team operatives miss that factor all the time.

Her video was viewed nearly 2.5 million times on Facebook.

The day following the shooting, Reynolds said that police had “treated me like a criminal … like it was my fault.”

According to the Star-Tribune, several family members, including Valerie Castile, then walked to the Hennepin County medical examiner’s office in an attempt to see Philando’s body. Staffers there would not let them, said Nekima Levy-Pounds, president of the Minneapolis NAACP chapter, who accompanied them.

Nothing to see here, move along? You decide, but a very dicey scene. For one, how could any jury find that firing not one or two but seven rounds at a downed individual, with Reynolds and a four year old child in the confined vehicle, not be extreme negligence?  The only two black jurors in the case were in favor of acquitting the cop responsible for his death. Little combines about this nonsensical case.

21 Comments on The Bizarre Minnesota Case of the Philandro Castile Police Shooting

  1. You’d have to have to be simultaneously blind in one eye, barely able to see out the other, high on methamphetamines, and severely mentally retarded to believe any of this occurred as per this nauseatingly juvenile production which could never pass muster with anyone but the emotionally disaffected and the mentally incompetent.

    I am personally tired of living in a matrix like holographic program surrounded by drooling spoon fed zombified club footed sleep walkers wearing blinders who are so far gone that they’ve unanimously requested not to be awoken from their synthetic slumbers as they gladly trip, fall and wallow in their own shit at the behest of some foul puppeteers unseen hand.

    They play us all as fools because they can, and therefore have surmised that we deserve nothing more than to be treated as such. Do you like being treated like an idiot on such a grand scale? They’re laughing at you right now and they don’t give a fuck either.

  2. One doesn’t need ‘irrefutable evidence’ for every particular problem or event in question. Do I need evidence to know that the moon is not made of cheese? Or, can I utilize other means by which to draw firm and solid conclusions?

    Here are some of the things one can utilize or appeal to in drawing conclusions that lack direct evidence. Because most people are over reliant on visual evidence, these techniques are usually under utilized.

    1- Deduction
    2- Intuition
    3- Causes
    4- Theories
    5- Models
    6- Similarities
    7- Experts
    8- Experience

    • One doesn’t need ‘irrefutable evidence’ …

      It’s clear; it’s also not reasonable to demand it — about 9/11 I have more than reasonable doubt (in fact the official story cannot be true); about Sandy Hook I also have reasonable doubt — in both cases the presumed motive is also clear.

      But what would have been the motive here? — to sow disaffection?

  3. Here’s the result of a video search (using duckduckgo.com) for the phrase “police officer shot during traffic stop” –> link check out the literally dozens of results — at random I picked a fairly recent incident (Oct 2019) in Denton, TX — here’s a follow-up story about that:

    Denton police officer remains in critical condition after shooting

    The suspect is black — I expect that, similar to other violent crime stats, Blacks are also significantly over-represented in that kind of shooting.

    So a cop who is not more wary of a black male during a traffic stop could pay for that kind of “negligence” with his life.

  4. What I see is a not too bright black guy continuing to make threatening moves after getting a clear signal that the cop was panicking. Then the panicked cop. Seven shots, really? Do you think maybe the guy needs a little more training? Or maybe his personality type makes him unsuitable for law enforcement? I am wondering if there are any adults in the Minnesota government. And the black broad comes across as the only adult in the whole thing. Is this a slice of America or what?

      • For me the big issue here is: How do we open normie eyes to all these crass and blatant hoaxes?

        It so obvious, from the Holohoax to the Liberty to Tonkin to Building 7 to the Las Vegas Harvest festival to this fake “pandemic” to the current riots with pre-positioned piles of bricks and LSD laced water bottles. The normies seem unable to accept reality. No logic can break through their mental swamp of cognitive dissonance.

        I can’t believe that it is flouride or GMO or even atmospheric spraying because it is global, and every country across the planet has its own particular characteristics. I am certain the symptoms in Czechia are different from Germany and Poland, and likely far different from the symptoms in Spain or Italy, let alone what is going on in Singapore, Japan or Korea.

        Even Judaism and their satanic Talmud does not explain the worldwide Zombie pandemic.

        In the end I think all roads lead to Freemasonry and their sundry flavors of secret societies. Somehow they are all united in some secret cause that transcends even Greater Israel.

        How can you wake some one up who has sold their soul to Satan?

      • … this incident was staged, a hoax.

        If you believe that, then why not say it just as directly in your article? — Nothing to see here, move along? You decide, but a very dicey scene.

        And what exactly do you mean by “hoax” — e.g. do you think someone was shot and killed in this incident?

        • Castile was not shot seven times and killed in this bloodless no splatter scene with the deadpan emotionless girl friend and child. Girl friend had the magical ability to turn her camera back on and film again while hand cuffed in the squad car. How does that work? This incident is full tilt cartoon world. The motive is race industry demonization and agitation.

          • no splatter

            I’m no expert, but I would normally expect any resulting splatter to happen via the exit wound, whereas the entry would be cleaner, with bleeding later and no splatter (JFK’s throat wound would be an example) — in this case, I assume the bullets exited his back, so you wouldn’t necessarily have seen any splatter; I think a screenshot shows the front of his shirt is bloody.

            I (still) haven’t watched the video, so I cannot comment on the emotions part; but there is precedent for that sort of thing, e.g. Robbie Parker — if she was able to use her handy to film/stream while handcuffed in a police car, I agree that is weird and I do not see how that could normally happen — as I said before, I think the streaming aspect is suspect — who does that kind of thing? — she’s not a Kardashian.

            So what is the end game for “race industry demonization and agitation”? — I agree racial hostility is increasing.

            • The end game is order out of chaos, which has to be cultivated incrementally. Also continually, because people are ignorant (or smart) and will forget (or not give a damn in the 1st place). I have a question for you, eah: Firstly before I ask, you stated in another comment that you had reasonable doubt about sandy hook, then in this comment you said robby parker set some sort of “precedent” for being unemotional after his daughter’s death (at least that’s what I’m getting from your comments). So my question for you is this: How do you have reasonable doubt that sandy hook even happened, but still believe robby parker? Also, if we’re believing both stories for a second- robbie parker didn’t see his daughter blown away in front of him and get interviewed right after it. He didn’t even see the event. So there’s a false equivalency you’re drawing between the two. But please do enlighten me as to how one believes robby parker and doubts sandy hook because that’s a new one for me.

  5. link

    The president said that blacks are more likely to be arrested and shot by police, and said, “When incidents like this occur, there’s a big chunk of our fellow citizenry that feels as if, because of the color of their skin, they are not being treated the same,” he said. “And that hurts. That should trouble all of us,” according to The Times.

    Actually, given their arrest/’police encounter’ rates, Blacks are actually under-represented in police shootings, as analysis of UCR data submitted to the FBI shows –> link.

    And given the hugely disproportionate criminality of Blacks, anyone with intellectual integrity should curtly dismiss whining about ‘racial profiling’ — “If New York City were all white, the murder rate would drop by 91 percent, the robbery rate by 81 percent, and the shootings rate by 97 percent.” (link) — and probably many Puerto Ricans who commit robbery in NYC are counted as white.

    Obama should have kept his mouth shut.

  6. I did not follow this case at the time and have never seen the video — already back then I was not interested in delving into the details of yet another episode of America’s racial agony — but from the general outline of events, I found it very odd that she would just happen to be streaming live on FB at the time, or decided to do so during what seemed to/started out as just a traffic stop — who does that? — did the woman have an internet ‘presence’ prior to this incident?.

    For one, how could any jury find that firing not one or two but seven rounds at a downed individual, with Reynolds and a four year old child in the confined vehicle, not be extreme negligence?

    Was the child in the back seat? — seems likely — if so, I don’t see shooting at close range someone in the front seat whom the cop deemed (rightly or wrongly) to be a mortal threat as “negligence” — and what is the magic number of allowed shots? — 6? — 5? — etc — I’m sure they’re taught to shoot until certain the threat is neutralized.

    Bottom line: a jury (which included two Blacks) heard/saw all the evidence/testimony, and decided to acquit the cop involved, Jeronimo Yanez, who was fired immediately after the trial — perhaps best seen as another police affirmative action hire gone wrong, like the Somali cop who shot the Australian woman in her pajamas.

    • Dude, it was a hoax. Look at the video again. People don’t react like that in real life. No one is going to fire seven shots into a vehicle occupied by a woman and a child. If they did, those two would be absolutely hysterical with fear, not mention deafened by the muzzle blast, which would be extraordinarily loud in the confined space of a car.

      • “Dude”, I don’t know if it was a hoax or not — neither do you, really — you believe it was — but for me, I do not see evidence (I don’t speak of absolute proof) sufficient to convince me “beyond a reasonable doubt” that it was a hoax — it appears what you have seen has convinced you that it was a hoax — fine — not me, I’m not sure.

        The stuff you mention is entirely subjective (not that it is of no value).

        • Great, eah, you’re not sure if it’s a hoax, because you don’t see sufficient evidence to convince you. Of course, you admitted that you haven’t even seen the video in your earlier comment. So pray tell, why are you nitpicking this event at all when you haven’t seen the video? You seem to be a contrarian, apparently just for kicks. And I’m still waiting for you to enlighten me as to how you doubt sandy hook, but believe robby parker.

          • And I’m still waiting for you to enlighten me as to how you doubt sandy hook, but believe but believe robby parker.

            I never said I ‘believed’ Robbie Parker (note the spelling) — I used him as an example, a “precedent”, for phony and/or odd/inappropriate emotion, since it’s claimed here the woman’s emotions are phony/inappropriate.

            Here is exactly what I wrote:

            I (still) haven’t watched the video, so I cannot comment on the emotions part; but there is precedent for that sort of thing, e.g. Robbie Parker …

            So you are now ‘enlightened’, and can stop waiting.

            You should also stop dumbly misconstruing comments.

Post a Comment

%d bloggers like this: