Justifiable shooting video

[bigsky]

Warning! The cop's language is extremely profane.

http://m.billingsgazette.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/youtube_974b8562-e980-5d50-8b89-411fa278aedd.html?mobile_touch=true

2nd person this cop has shot dead. This was an Unarmed man sitting in a car, shot dead.

he was a suspect in an armed robbery. He
was "on meth". Backup was on its way.

This cop has a history with the brother and
family of this dead citizen.

Coroner's jury ruled "justified".

[Darrell KSR]

Tough. Very tough.

[suncat05]

What kind of history with this family? Has any of them tried to hurt or kill him previously, or made those types of threats against him with a known ability to carry out such threats? Did the subject that was shot have a history of violent assaults, with or without weapons involved, against law enforcement?
I don't know the history here. I also wonder if there was a BOLO on this vehicle or if this vehicle and its occupants were under suspicion of having committed a crime just before they were stopped by this officer?
One other small detail here that may have not been noticed by members of the board here: he was told to put his hands on the car seat in front of him, and all of the vehicle occupants were told several times to follow this lawful police directive, however, the subject that was shot was not obeying the lawful order given by the officer, as he kept moving around and dropped his left hand from the officer's view.

Based on what I observed, and without the knowledge of what may have happened with this vehicle & its occupants prior to this stop or other pertinent information, I'm inclined to agree that the shooting was justified. WHY? you ask.......the officer was alone and possibly not aware of how soon his back-up might arrive, he had four potentially dangerous subjects in front of him and we're not sure what for at that point, and one subject that refused to obey a lawful police directive and continued to keep moving around after being told where to put his hands and to stop moving around, who then made another sudden, furtive movement that made that officer fear for his safety at that moment.

I am in no way advocating shooting anyone for no good reason. But based on my training and years of experience and what I witnessed in that video, that was a justified shooting.

[suncat05]

Now, my questions beforehand are the kinds of questions that would be asked by investigators, state attorneys, and grand jury jurors.
He was a suspect in an armed robbery. Therefore, you must believe him to be armed & dangerous.
Prior history with his subject and his family? That shows previous criminal conduct that has garnered law enforcement interest.

This incident could also have been avoided if the vehicle's driver had kept driving instead of stopping where he stopped. But.......that could have led to another series of events that may or may not have ended with a police shooting. If he had kept on driving it would have pissibly allowed other officers to arrive and maybe allowed for a felony stop to have been conducted. Or it could have escalated into a vehicle pursuit through heavily populated neighborhoods. This could have ended 10 other ways, or just how it did. You never know when dealing with possibly armed & dangerous people who may be more inclined to shoot an officer than not.

[Doc]

As an officer, I'd think you would be obligated to enter the situation with professionalism. Telling them to to "all of you put your ####ing hands on top of the seats" really isn't a good way to START a stop! Then after he shoots him he tells him to get down AND get out of the car. The so discombobulated you don't know what he is tellling him to do. Justified or not, I don't know but I will say he is not a good cop. A good cop 1) doesn't start a stop like that and 2) doesn't shoot as the first option.

[jazyd]

On meth, armed robbery, told multiple times politely at first to stop doing whstever he was doing, told to stop or the officer was going to shoot him, told him more than once and kept doing it, OFFICER is getting mad and probably scared, guy reaches for something with left hand.

Officer must make split second choice.

[Doc]

On meth, armed robbery, told multiple times politely at first to stop doing whstever he was doing, told to stop or the officer was going to shoot him, told him more than once and kept doing it, OFFICER is getting mad and probably scared, guy reaches for something with left hand.

Officer must make split second choice.

From what I could see, which wasn't much but its the same amount you could see, the ones in the back did put their hands on the seat. Not sure how yelling "put your ####ing hands" is polite.

If there was concern then the officer should have waited for back up. Obviously other officers were close since they were there right after he shot the guy. I've been pulled over and had the officer sit in his car for several minutes running my plate before he approaches the car. If the officer is pulling these guys over and fears it more than just a traffic stop, why not wait for backup which is nearby?

[suncat05]

Doc, I understand your points. But a lot of other factors come into play in interactions with these kinds of people. There are two kinds of people: 1)good people, and 2)bad people.
With good people you speak with them and interact with them almost as you would with family, because they're good people. You can talk with them like normal, civilized human beings.
With known bad people, that is usually not the case and being "nice" immediately goes out the window. In many cases they do not communicate with us like we do with each other because they're bad people. They speak and act differently than we do. And in that case, you have to speak with them in a manner that they completely understand. You have to go to their level of being because they will not come up to your level of being. They live and act and interact in a sub-world of our world. And that is where most law enforcement & corrections officers have to work, in that sub-world of theirs. So, with that said, I see your point and in theory you are 100% correct. But.........they are just those people out there that you cannot be like that with. They talk and act completely different than you and have to be spoken with and dealt with in a different manner than say, how I would have to interact with you, or jazy, or CBBN, or Daryl...........
Sometimes Doc, there just isn't any playing nice with some people. I hope you understand what I'm attempting to relay to you here. Sometimes you can start out nice with those guys, but their actions dictate how the interaction proceeds. And most of the time you have to talk rough to them because that is how they talk and what they understand and respond to best.
That officer started out playing nice, but that one suspect's reaction called for a different plan of action as soon as he demonstrated that he was not going to cooperate. He chose to die by his actions.

[suncat05]

Also, they pulled into a driveway and stopped, so any plan to conduct a felony traffic stop by the officers at a different locale went out the window when they stopped there. There were four of them and just him at that particular moment, and I would have done the same thing as far as approaching them BEFORE any of them had a chance to get out of the car first. Tactical advantage. Keep them confined in a small space and occupied, if possible, until back-up arrives to help. Stay to the left or right and slightly behind them so that they have a difficult time watching you, and an even more difficult time doing something to you without telegraphing it first. Which is exactly what happened. The bad guy dropped his left hand at least a couple of times, so he's not complying with a lawful police command, he's possibly armed and a known suspect in a recent armed robbery.
What other option was available, given the totality of those circumstances at that very moment in time?

[bigsky]

Suncat, I think you laid out the case the coroner's jury bought. I don't buy it. Even what the officer yells sounds like he is making his case knowing he is going to have to make one. And this is his second fatal shooting. I tend to go with the odds.

But I put it on here to get your opinion and for all here, it affirms the coroner's jury decision. Thanks.

[Darrell KSR]

Suncat, I think you laid out the case the coroner's jury bought. I don't buy it. Even what the officer yells sounds like he is making his case knowing he is going to have to make one. And this is his second fatal shooting. I tend to go with the odds.

But I put it on here to get your opinion and for all here, it affirms the coroner's jury decision. Thanks.

I'm just totally unsure myself. I think it's tough. I do not agree that the peace officer did a good, even decent job, leading up to the situation. I think Suncat empathizes--as he should, as I do, too--with the lawman, but I would bet my bottom dollar, he would have handled it differently than this guy did leading up to the situation. I have no doubt.

Now, once you're in that situation--and you're in reasonable fear of receiving serious bodily injury or death--you have every right to protect yourself, using reasonable force, including deadly force. Suncat often refers to the "Use of Force Matrix" or a use of force continuum that they are taught; I generally refer to the more basic reasonable fear of receiving serious bodily injury or death concept that applies equally to citizens.

Interestingly--and Suncat can correct me if I am wrong--but one of the principal issues in the Use of Force Matrix is whether the threat has the opportunity to comply with the lawman's commands or instructions. In other words, you almost have to give the directions as he did first (with obvious exceptions not requiring explanation), in the manner he did. But when the threat failed to comply, that escalated the Use of Force Matrix directly to using deadly force.

The Use of Force Matrix is not law, but training. That's another reason I refer to the more direct, "reasonable fear of receiving serious bodily injury or death;" however, in practice, they're virtually identical. And maybe in some jurisdictions they have incorporated that into law.

But my bottom line is this.

Even if I disagree with the way he handled it, can I, in good conscience, suggest that he was *not* in reasonable fear of receiving serious bodily injury or death, and therefore entitled to use reasonable force, including deadly force, to defend himself?

Nope.

Tough case for me because I really don't like it. And I fear that this is not a good cop. I am troubled by this being his second killing. I am troubled that he did not wait outside harm's way for backup. The whole stop doesn't resonate well with me. But my dislike for what occurred would not send this lawman to jail.

I do not trust him, however.

[suncat05]

That's how I saw it from the facts given and the video evidence. I also understand that there is additional "history" between this officer and the deceased suspect's family. That usually means there's some bad blood between the two parties. And I'm not taking up for the officer, given that you are well aware of my occupation, but sometimes, after you've dealt with the same crew over and over and over again, then yeah, the possibility for bad blood between both sides certainly does exist, and it usually does begin with the bad guys because they feel like the po-lice are pickin' on them. And that is most usually NOT the case. You keep getting called to the same places over and over again and you keep seeing the same players, it becomes pretty evident who is who and what's up. Sometimes it is the police, but more often than not it's the people that the police keep getting "calls for service" about.
I know you probably know more than you're saying, so I take your statement about not totally buying what the coroner's jury concluded as there being a possibility that this officer may also be a problem child.
If this officer's personnel jacket is full of IA investigations or complaints of using excessive force continually then there may be some validity to your suspicions.
And thank you for trusting my assessment, as you gave it and as I saw it.

[suncat05]

As I alluded to earlier, this could have gone in any number of different directions had the bad guys not pulled into that driveway as they did. Once they did that, it is either drive on down the road and live to fight another day, or do exactly what that officer did, which was confront them immediately. However, if the officer did indeed have knowledge that an armed robbery suspect was present and available for possible capture, then I have to agree with his move to try to capture him.
This is some of the stuff that makes policing so very difficult, along with all of these bungholes out here with cameras wanting to post on YouTube and all of the Monday morning quarterbacking that every officer gets from the damn press, their own supervisors, and the public that they're trying to protect from these vermin. Trust me, I have certainly experienced my share of it over the many years I have been on the job. But I still suit up and go to work every day because I love my job. Now, are there some bad and marginal cops out there fouling it up for everybody? YES, ABSOLUTELY. But at the end of the day, this all boils down to 'did you do the best possible job that you could do?" And that answer is always resoundingly going to be YES from me. Another thing that frosts my cookies, if you will indulge me here, is hearing some untrained, undisciplined, unworthy individual tell me that "if it'd been me, I'd a done it this-a-way". Yeah, right, you jackass, you couldn't carry my flashlight on a bright summer day. And I am not talking about any of you guys here, as almost all of you here are intelligent, thoughtful, reasonable people who usually ask all of the right questions and raise valid points. And that is the biggest reason I like this board so much, there are no dummies here.
And then there is this: many people wonder why a lot of cops are the way they are? Take a look at New York, Ferguson, Los Angeles, St. Louis, and what the morons in D.C. are doing.........any questions?

[suncat05]

Damn, I kinda got off on a rant there, didn't I? Apologies to all here. I am sure most of you know what I was talking about though. I re-read my last post and am a little perturbed at myself for going off the reservation there for a minute. Again, apologies if I offended anyone.

[Darrell KSR]

Lol. Rant away, Suncat. You've earned that. And you're not wrong.

[Doc]

I understand the extreme dangers that law enforcement officers encounter daily, or at least think I do. There is no way that one could fully understand without experiencing it. Probably 99% of the people they encounter are law abiding people who just screwed up however 1% are not, 1% are just fine killing them. That means 1 out of every 100 folks is willing to kill them. Thats a scary thought so I have EXTREME sympathy for their position. Because of that I'll give them every benefit of the doubt.

However I also expect them to be the professional in a situation. They are the ones who initiate the stop and they are the one trained to run the stop. They are in control. Their job is what it is and as a citizen I would expect a few things. First and foremost is a certain degree of professionalism. Cursing and swearing is not one of them under any circumstances. Maintaining your composure is another. Shooting should be a second to last resort and killing the last resort. His actions may have been justified however the outcome is still that somebody who was unarmed is dead. In my book that is wrong 100% of the time. One can say the officer fear for his safety, maybe he did however he still ended up killing an unarmed person who was NOT endangering the officer at that time. The victim might have been a scum bag loser, meth head, dope dealing POS but its not the officers job to kill him for that. All that is irrelevant.

When the police wonder why they are getting slack from the public, all they need to do is objectively view tapes like this. To an untrained individual like myself, what do you see? You see a guy with an attitude come up and start throwing F-bombs, pull out his gun, yell at them to do 3 different things at the same time, panic and start blasting away, killing somebody. That is what I see. Might it be what happened? I don't know but its what it looks like. There was no chase, there was no attempt to allude the police, the car stopped when the lights came on, the occupants appreared to comply as best they could. Keep in mind most folks are confused and paniced when pulled over. Its natural. Hell, I panic when somebody else gets pulled over. And here you have a guy barking, cussing and adding to the confusion.

I'll say again, it likely WAS justifiable, if the guy was not complying however I strongly believe the officer did not approach this in the correct manner.

[Doc]

As I alluded to earlier, this could have gone in any number of different directions had the bad guys not pulled into that driveway as they did. Once they did that, it is either drive on down the road and live to fight another day, or do exactly what that officer did, which was confront them immediately. However, if the officer did indeed have knowledge that an armed robbery suspect was present and available for possible capture, then I have to agree with his move to try to capture him.
This is some of the stuff that makes policing so very difficult, along with all of these bungholes out here with cameras wanting to post on YouTube and all of the Monday morning quarterbacking that every officer gets from the damn press, their own supervisors, and the public that they're trying to protect from these vermin. Trust me, I have certainly experienced my share of it over the many years I have been on the job. But I still suit up and go to work every day because I love my job. Now, are there some bad and marginal cops out there fouling it up for everybody? YES, ABSOLUTELY. But at the end of the day, this all boils down to 'did you do the best possible job that you could do?" And that answer is always resoundingly going to be YES from me. Another thing that frosts my cookies, if you will indulge me here, is hearing some untrained, undisciplined, unworthy individual tell me that "if it'd been me, I'd a done it this-a-way". Yeah, right, you jackass, you couldn't carry my flashlight on a bright summer day. And I am not talking about any of you guys here, as almost all of you here are intelligent, thoughtful, reasonable people who usually ask all of the right questions and raise valid points. And that is the biggest reason I like this board so much, there are no dummies here.
And then there is this: many people wonder why a lot of cops are the way they are? Take a look at New York, Ferguson, Los Angeles, St. Louis, and what the morons in D.C. are doing.........any questions?

Let me ask a simple question, you ever F-bomb somebody you pulled over?

[suncat05]

A few times over the years, yes. Not many times, but yes. When you reach that point where you've used every verbal judo tactic that you know and then you have to go hands on or point a weapon at them, then you have to start talking to them and treating them in the only way they understand.
Where I am at now, I don't have to do that stuff anymore. But it's another tool in the bag to use when necessary. I deal with these types of people every single day. And the supply is endless. You probably only encounter the types of people that I have to deal with multiple times a day much, much more infrequently. Another thing, with you they aren't worried about going to jail because you don't have the authority of the state to arrest them. I do, and they are well aware of that. Different game. Apples to oranges.
Again Doc, in most instances it's a matter of simple communication. we do not talk to each other like that because we're civilized human beings that have grown up and were taught to be that way. Many of these people did not have that same advantage, for whatever reason, but mostly socio-economic based. I get that, I understand that. But sometimes the only form of communication these people understand is that gutter language, so that's what you have to use on them. This is the way they talk. So, sometimes in critical situations, this is what you have to use on them because it is simply what they understand. They understand the "f" bomb, they understand being cursed at, they understand gutter slang because that is how they talk to each other.
Yes, by all means a police officer should be as professional and courteous and polite as possible. I can be that way with you because that is how you'll interact with me. There are many, many people that live in these low income, poor neighborhoods that are just like you and I, they are civilized human beings that communicate on the same level that we do. They haven't done as well as you and I have, but they're mostly very nice people that deserve to be treated with respect and courtesy and receive professional police services. And they are in the majority. The folks we're talking about are in the minority, but they're very visible and gets LOTS of attention, and for all of the wrong reasons.
In dealing with people, you almost always get what you give. But when you don't get what you give, then you give what you get. If that makes any sense to you guys in relation to this. I don't know how else to explain this.

[KeithKSR]

The guy in the car was warned repeatedly, he gave the officer no choice.

[jazyd]

Officer started out calmly and polite, they refused fis requests, kept. Those hands moving

Now what was the situation in the other shooting?