seatbelt violation mentioned about 1.20 in said video.
The ‘pulling him over for a seatbelt violation’ is something which
must have happened before the start of this video. The video above begins with Jones pulled over and Groubert pulling in to the service station.
Regardless of what Groubert says or does
after he has shot Jones, he has (i) already pulled Jones over and then (ii) shot Jones.
The reports mentioned above have Groubery pulling Jones over for a ‘seatbelt violation’, with Jones then reaching into his vehicle and Jones shooting him.
These reports make no mention of Groubert's clear command to get the license, but do reference Groubert's apparent cause for pulling over Jones - a cause
not shown at the beginning of the video.
The implication of presenting the evidence in this way is to present Jones as someone who made an innocent, unfortunate but (from the officer's point of view) apparently threatening move into his vehicle; that this was an unpredictable and rash action, and that Jones in some way contributed to his own shooting.
Whereas the tape clearly shows Groubert ordering Jones to show him his license; Jones responds to this command by reaching for his license; and he is shot - for complying with the officer's command.
That the reports can state that the issue which
predicated the stop - the ‘seatbelt violation’ - when the video covering the events
before the shooting does not seem to corroborate this, yet exclude the full context of the actions of Jones (ie reaching into his vehicle for his license because the officer
expressly told him to get his license) tends to frame the whole incident in a different light.
Whether Groubert had reasonable cause for the stop - whether he believed there to be a ‘seatbelt violation’
before he stopped Jones, rather than, say, came up with it as a pretext for the stop
subsequent to the shooting - is not the issue. The issue is with the choices made by some media organisations to present some evidence but not other evidence, and how that presentation of evidence can affect public perceptions.