My first reaction was, I guess the cop lost his gun to the suspect before he fired upon him. Rookie move… lucky he didn’t lose his life from it.
I, too, was still surprised by the headline. Especially since it came from The Daily Caller. But once I found the article, it became clear as to why it was phrased the way it was.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dailycaller.com/2017/06/29/cop-shot-in-face-by-unarmed-black-man
The author of the article apparently found it necessary to put in some social commentary in addition to the facts. The intent was to call out the media for daring to include whether or not a person shot by a cop was “unarmed”. He is accusing the media of overusing this term, thinking irrelevant, implies the suspect was not dangerous, or undeserving of being shot.
However, after doing a quick search on the story of Deputy Alex Ladwig by Nicory Marquis Spann; no such article used the phrase “unarmed” in either title or story as the author had predicted. Which seems to indicate his alarmist rhetoric to be entirely without any merit.
So, this is simply a case of disgruntled journalism. Written by a cop, no less, who refuses to give his real name and only goes by Deputy Matt when spinning his own little narratives.
So, I’m sure there is no conflict of interest there in his commentary.
