View Full Version : North Miami Officer Shoots Autistic Man's Caretaker
Good Lord, how do you mess this up? Just what we need, story says they fired 3 rounds, one of which struck the caretaker in the leg - when he was being cuffed and stuffed the caretaker - a black man - asked 'why'd you shoot me?' Officer say 'I don't know.'
Freaking Airborne.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442.html
Oh for God's sake....
See....you know....that was just really, really dumb.
First off, you can't ever yell at a retarded person. They don't understand all they know is someone is angry.
No effort to assess. No wherewithal to ask a general "Hey, what's going on?"
No, hell no. Real fcking hero with an AR15 shooting the minder of a special needs person.
Then saying "Oh I don't know"
Gee Officer Hotshot, will you be getting sent to Grand Jury?
Oh, I don't know.
Hey, Officer Hotshot do you think this might inspire some radical to murder other officers in other locations who don't even know you because you can't handle patrol 101 and shot an unarmed special needs caretaker?
Oh, I don't know.
That's a curious phrase, "I don't know".
It's like no freaking inbetween. People either have head up ass or are over jumpy. And that's why the public has no trust.
ETA For anyone, ANYONE out there.....remember: People Come First. Always err on the side of People Coming First and everyone being in good health unless it is absolutely impossible.
This is a thinking man's game
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-20-16, 23:06
Why don't cops ever speak out against bad shoots?!?!?
I'm a cop. This, initially, sounds pretty bad. If it turns out to be as bad as it looks, I'll speak out.
sidewaysil80
07-20-16, 23:11
Why don't cops ever speak out against bad shoots?!?!?
I'm a cop. This, initially, sounds pretty bad. If it turns out to be as bad as it looks, I'll speak out.
Ditto. I reserve judgement and comment until ALL facts and circumstances come out and investigations are completed.
Its funny, people want Police to chastise and "speak out" prior to investigations being completed...imagine if we mirrored that sentiment and simply arrested/prosecuted on emotion and initial impression.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-20-16, 23:39
Cuevas said officers received a 911 call indicating a man was in the street with a gun threatening to kill himself. They responded to Northeast 127th Street and about 14th Avenue and began barking orders. When the autistic man didn’t comply, an officer fired three times, striking Kinsey once in the leg. He was transported to Jackson Memorial Hospital.
Cuevas said he didn’t know who the officer was aiming at when he struck Kinsey. The offier’s name hasn’t been released.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442.html#storylink=cpy
So who called in a man with a gun? Book that dumbass for making a false police report. I don't care if it sticks.
You might as well have given the cop a shot gun.
accidents happen ? cops are people people have accidents ?
so how many blacks shot blacks and how many kids did blacks kill this week ?
so today 3 babies drown 11 kids died from texting how many from bad doctors and how many from presc drugs etc...
yeah its bad and it makes AWESOME NEWS !!!!! and sadly none of the above tragedies make news cause people cant make money and get power from that
Ditto. I reserve judgement and comment until ALL facts and circumstances come out and investigations are completed.
Its funny, people want Police to chastise and "speak out" prior to investigations being completed...imagine if we mirrored that sentiment and simply arrested/prosecuted on emotion and initial impression.
:rolleyes:
Gimme a break...the guy had his hands COMPLETELY UP AND EMPTY, PRONED OUT.
"I'll wait for all the facts." etc,etc, etc...PUH-LEASE...
This is Miami, on a good day they aren't shooting their own plain clothes officers responding to crime scenes. Pretty sure only LAPD, CPD, NYPD and NOPD are worse. But damn if Miami doesn't try real hard some times.
No effort to assess. No wherewithal to ask a general "Hey, what's going on?"
Kind of like immediately going for ones pistol and charging onto a bus? http://video.foxnews.com/v/5041079038001/warning-graphic-video-fatal-shooting-on-city-bus/?#sp=show-clips
:rolleyes:
Gimme a break...the guy had his hands COMPLETELY UP AND EMPTY, PRONED OUT.
"I'll wait for all the facts." etc,etc, etc...PUH-LEASE...
Well the video does skip over the actually shooting.
But I'm going to ASSUME that the guy who was being TOTALLY compliant didn't just say screw it and decide to get shot. I could see how the autistic guy MIGHT get shot since he had no clue what was going on and IF the officer mistook something for a weapon and it was a Code 3 callout on a Signal 0.
But right now it looks really, really bad. At least they didn't kill the guy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9Pqh-_TmAw
:rolleyes:
Gimme a break...the guy had his hands COMPLETELY UP AND EMPTY, PRONED OUT.
"I'll wait for all the facts." etc,etc, etc...PUH-LEASE...
Technically, he was supined out. ;)
ColtSeavers
07-21-16, 02:47
https://memecrunch.com/image/50510a6fafa96f3b60000037.jpg?w=400
Moose-Knuckle
07-21-16, 04:27
Well I hope the man and his wife have been contacted by a premier law firm by now.
WTF?!
So I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume that the officer in question had his bugger hook on the trigger and the muzzle pointed at the victim's leg at the same time when Murphy showed up, kind of why we have the four rules.
It appeared to me the officer is white, yeah that "I don't know" defense is going to go far. This incident will pick up steam in the media in the coming days . . .
Moose-Knuckle
07-21-16, 04:37
Kind of like immediately going for ones pistol and charging onto a bus? http://video.foxnews.com/v/5041079038001/warning-graphic-video-fatal-shooting-on-city-bus/?#sp=show-clips
I'm sorry but I don't see the problem here, the suspect was high as a kite, posing a danger to the people on the bus, and went for the LEO's gun. The people that just got off the bus pointed at the suspect and told the LEOs "him, him". They had no idea what they were walking into.
IMHO that was a good shoot. Props to that bus driver for telling everyone to exit, had they still been on the bus someone could have been hit.
Ditto. I reserve judgement and comment until ALL facts and circumstances come out and investigations are completed.
Its funny, people want Police to chastise and "speak out" prior to investigations being completed...imagine if we mirrored that sentiment and simply arrested/prosecuted on emotion and initial impression.
You know, I agree with you. I'm not a Cop, and wouldn't want your job for any amount of money. Having said that, I have a couple of close friends who are black. Dudes that have almost 30 years at the same employer between them. Good, family dudes. Take care of their kids. Make good money. I can't tell you why, but they ABSOLUTELY believe that it's like that, "arrested on initial impression" for them. Guilty first.
They don't hate Cops. But for whatever reason they believe you hate them. I don't understand it, but they truly believe it. And it's not a racist thing...it's a LEO thing. Like I said, I'm close with these guys and save for a good bit of Cherokee, I'm white as notebook paper.
Just wanted to put that out there, that there are in fact normal people who believe that's real. fwiw. I can't explain it, but I assure you it's the case.
Stay safe. All of you. Please.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
when he was being cuffed and stuffed the caretaker - a black man - asked 'why'd you shoot me?' Officer say 'I don't know.'
Freaking Airborne.
]
I thought most OIS incidents give the officers a period of time before being interviewed?
Also, the outcome gets based on what ever the officers say they experienced.
Eurodriver
07-21-16, 06:37
Lol "Why'd you shoot me?" "Idk fam."
In all seriousness, and not at all excusing the officers...this is Miami. It's ****ing July. It's like 3,000 degrees outside and that pavement was probably 180* at best. What were they doing in the street?
Lol "Why'd you shoot me?" "Idk fam."
In all seriousness, and not at all excusing the officers...this is Miami. It's ****ing July. It's like 3,000 degrees outside and that pavement was probably 180* at best. What were they doing in the street?
The autistic guy had reportedly walked away from a residential care center and the guy that got shot was his caretaker. He was not laying in the street by his choice, he was complying with police commands. I agree it is certainly unusual for someone to be seated in the street.
Eurodriver
07-21-16, 07:00
The autistic guy had reportedly walked away from a residential care center and the guy that got shot was his caretaker. He was not laying in the street by his choice, he was complying with police commands. I agree it is certainly unusual for someone to be seated in the street.
That would make sense, and sounds plausible.
Autistic guy walks away, goes and sits in the street. Caretaker sits alongside him to comfort him/get him to come back/do whatever caretakers do.
What doesn't make sense is getting shot in the leg now he walk with a limp (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qm8PH4xAss)
Just like there are some people who shouldn't be allowed to own guns, there are some cops who shouldn't be cops. That these are difficult days for LEOs across the country only makes that a more pressing problem.
Averageman
07-21-16, 08:37
I'm sure that LEO's all over the Country are going to cringe when they see this.
At this time, in this political atmosphere this might be the absolute worst thing that could have happened to the whole Profession.
Take the Badge, take the gun and throw him to the mercy of a judge and jury.
I hope the Caretaker is now talking to someone from the City and being asked "Here's a number, Now how many zero's would you like me to put behind that number?" Honestly settle out of court for an undisclosed amount.
I'm sure that LEO's all over the Country are going to cringe when they see this.
Not seeing why they would. Several officers on the scene and they didn't seem to cringe based on who got cuffed and carted off.
I
diving dave
07-21-16, 09:00
I worked as a LEO for 25 yrs. This is an incident where the BLM dorks and I might actually agree....
WickedWillis
07-21-16, 11:25
Sounds like an incredibly sad deal, and a horrible mistake. I'm just glad it didn't cost the man his life.
Honest questions:
So the officer makes a mistake, deliberate or otherwise. The guy shot is clearly not a bad guy, and this thing is clearly going to be a problem. Why cuff him and leave him bleeding in the street? Why not get him off the street onto the lawn, but a trauma bandage on him and start showing empathy and regret. Is it a cultural issue? Inflexible training? Policy? At what point are cops permitted to say "you know, this guy doesn't belong in cuffs".
Also, is there a policy for when long guns are deployed? I understand that cops are nervous (with good reason), and I get that this was a "man with a gun" call, but is deploying ARs the new normal? Is pointing ARs at some dude sitting in the street playing Tonka truck and some dude lying down with his hands up, consistent with their training? Seems like a significant reaction to an insignificant threat.
Not trying to start a pissing contest. I'm actually interested in the answers.
D
Averageman
07-21-16, 12:27
I'm pretty sure there are a lot of nervous LEO's out there due to recent circumstances, that's understandable. If you can attribute any part of that, to this, then you really need to start worrying where it goes from here.
If you're that shook maybe it's time to sit behind a desk for a while or consider another career.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-21-16, 12:31
:rolleyes:
Gimme a break...the guy had his hands COMPLETELY UP AND EMPTY, PRONED OUT.
"I'll wait for all the facts." etc,etc, etc...PUH-LEASE...
Gun owners on this forum, more and more, sound like the gun grabbers we so despise. "Let's jump to conclusions based only off of one report by the media!"
"I don't wait for facts." Etc, etc, etc. PUH-LEASE....
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-21-16, 12:33
Not seeing why they would. Several officers on the scene and they didn't seem to cringe based on who got cuffed and carted off.
I
JasonB1, the suddenly unbanned troll, rears his head again.
Eurodriver
07-21-16, 12:36
Gun owners on this forum, more and more, sound like the gun grabbers we so despise. "Let's jump to conclusions bases only off of one report by the media!"
"I don't wait for facts." Etc, etc, etc. PUH-LEASE....
Yeah, just keep on pretending like LE doesn't have a public perception problem. We see how well that is working out for you guys.
White Cop shoots unarmed black caretaker sitting next to an autistic guy and when asked why says "I don't know".
You can "wait for the facts" all you want, but Micah didn't. And that didn't work out too well for some boys in Dallas did it?
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-21-16, 12:38
My post was rude and uncalled for. Edited.
Digital_Damage
07-21-16, 12:43
someone is about to get paid... alot.
Eurodriver
07-21-16, 12:44
Do people read around here anymore?
Exactly. Keep living in your bubble.
Except it's not a bubble.
So good luck.
Lol "Why'd you shoot me?" "Idk fam."
In all seriousness, and not at all excusing the officers...this is Miami. It's ****ing July. It's like 3,000 degrees outside and that pavement was probably 180* at best. What were they doing in the street?
Is suicide via asphalt and tar burns a thing in Florida?
The_War_Wagon
07-21-16, 12:45
#1 son on left (age 15) - #3 son on right (age 12). Not pictured, is #2 son, who is the identical twin to #3 son. All 3 are Autistic, as is #4 daughter.
http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc305/The_War_Wagon/Icons/100_2034_zps2uo6vzuj.jpg
They are very sweet, and after many years of therapeutic interventional services, they are high functioning, outgoing, and very pleasant-natured (this was them at church on Easter Sunday this year), but they are STILL Autistic. Prone to scripting, sensory overload, and aggressive, reactionary outbursts.
They routinely go for walks and outings with their TSS's on nice days. If you find it necessary to shoot their caretakers/support staff, prepare to shoot them, too. They will NOT understand police commands - they don't even understand that bullets hurt. They will be very defensive of their caretakers, and will likely try and attack their attackers under such circumstances - uniform or not - and sadly, that is how it will go down. :(
Thank you BLM, Occupy Wall Street, heathen mohammedans, & libtards in general, for proving that NO life matters to you, by putting ALL lives more at risk, by your galloping dumbassery. :mad:
cougar_guy04
07-21-16, 12:57
Well I hope the man and his wife have been contacted by a premier law firm by now.
Knowing Florida, John Morgan was probably beating a path to South FL before the brass hit the ground.
JasonB1, the suddenly unbanned troll, rears his head again.
Why am I a troll for pointing that out?
WickedWillis
07-21-16, 13:10
#1 son on left (age 15) - #3 son on right (age 12). Not pictured, is #2 son, who is the identical twin to #3 son. All 3 are Autistic, as is #4 daughter.
http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc305/The_War_Wagon/Icons/100_2034_zps2uo6vzuj.jpg
They are very sweet, and after many years of therapeutic interventional services, they are high functioning, outgoing, and very pleasant-natured (this was them at church on Easter Sunday this year), but they are STILL Autistic. Prone to scripting, sensory overload, and aggressive, reactionary outbursts.
They routinely go for walks and outings with their TSS's on nice days. If you find it necessary to shoot their caretakers/support staff, prepare to shoot them, too. They will NOT understand police commands - they don't even understand that bullets hurt. They will be very defensive of their caretakers, and will likely try and attack their attackers under such circumstances - uniform or not - and sadly, that is how it will go down. :(
Thank you BLM, Occupy Wall Street, heathen mohammedans, & libtards in general, for proving that NO life matters to you, by putting ALL lives more at risk, by your galloping dumbassery. :mad:
Thank you for sharing this.
I'm sorry but I don't see the problem here...
IMHO that was a good shoot.
And this is part of the problem, which Firefly spoke to. The focus shouldn't be on just the shooting. There's far too much "muzzle-forward" thinking nowadays. A firearm is not a tool with which to effect an arrest.
What led up to the shooting? Did the actions of the officer(s) serve to deescalate or escalate the situation? In this case, one officer drew her sidearm and charged onto the bus all by herself and put herself in the situation where her sidearm was able to be grabbed by the guy on the bus. She damn near shoots the driver when her pistol discharges in the melee and her partner has to jump in to save her and shoots the guy. If I were the one who had to shoot the guy, I'd be mad as hell at her for putting herself and me into a situation where I had to shoot someone. She could have gotten herself, the driver, and her partner killed. And over what? A guy causing a ruckus on a bus with a fire extinguisher.
Gun owners on this forum, more and more, sound like the gun grabbers we so despise. "Let's jump to conclusions based only off of one report by the media!"
"I don't wait for facts." Etc, etc, etc. PUH-LEASE....
Okay, I'll ask this...would YOU have shot him? Should he have been naked? Did you not watch the video and HEAR what the worker said? What he "articulated" to the officers? BANG! Oops. :rolleyes:
I'll wait for you to retort.
Thank you BLM, Occupy Wall Street, heathen mohammedans, & libtards in general, for proving that NO life matters to you, by putting ALL lives more at risk, by your galloping dumbassery. :mad:
Um, you really jumped the tracks on this one. So, the shooting in question is somehow the fault of the above mentioned groups?
Well the video does skip over the actually shooting.
But I'm going to ASSUME that the guy who was being TOTALLY compliant didn't just say screw it and decide to get shot. I could see how the autistic guy MIGHT get shot since he had no clue what was going on and IF the officer mistook something for a weapon and it was a Code 3 callout on a Signal 0.
But right now it looks really, really bad. At least they didn't kill the guy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9Pqh-_TmAw
LowSpeed_HighDrag...let me know at what point in the video he resisted, was not compliant, and DPF was authorized.
MountainRaven
07-21-16, 13:51
Um, you really jumped the tracks on this one. So, the shooting in question is somehow the fault of the above mentioned groups?
The only person responsible for pulling the trigger is the one who pulled the trigger. Unless we're going to say that 90-years of slavery and 100-years of segregation and denial of civil rights is responsible for people shooting cops.
If I was to guess, when LE showed up on the scene, they didn't expect to see an adult sitting in the road playing with a toy. You wonder what was going on in their minds? Is this weird scene a setup for an ambush? It was a bad shoot, but I think cops are all on edge now in the US.
KalashniKEV
07-21-16, 14:02
Well the video does skip over the actually shooting.
Bingo.
We don't know what he did to precipitate being shot, although it does not matter, really.
The officer will get a free vacation, the police will investigate themselves and declare it a good shoot, and he will receive backpay for his time on the couch and an eventual retirement with benefits.
I thought most OIS incidents give the officers a period of time before being interviewed?
I'll bet that "most" do not. That's actually just plainly stupid, especially among people who are supposed to know how to investigate things.
...when he was being cuffed and stuffed the caretaker - a black man - asked 'why'd you shoot me?' Officer say 'I don't know.'
He forgot to say the magical incantation: "Gottagohomeattheendoftheshift!"
I'm thinking he must be a total n00b... he probably didn't even say "stopresisting!" while he was shooting him.
There's far too much "muzzle-forward" thinking nowadays. A firearm is not a tool with which to effect an arrest.
Yeah, but they're guaranteed to get away with it, so why not blow a dude away on a call? It's cool as hell, man.
Keep winding the spring...
If I was to guess, when LE showed up on the scene, they didn't expect to see an adult sitting in the road playing with a toy. You wonder what was going on in their minds? Is this weird scene a setup for an ambush? It was a bad shoot, but I think cops are all on edge now in the US.
Yeah but you can't let people know you are on edge.
If you're that scary; quit. .
You can lace up you boots for the last time any given day. Lots of other things can happen. Car wreck, hit by a car, etc.
Nobody will ever like you nor recognize you. Other officers will treat you like high school.
So...eff it. Either you're doing it for the right reasons or you're not. If you think everyday is the Tet Offensive, then it is time to do something else
If you are one of those Punisher skull cops, you can kiss my ass.
Nothing new under the sun. Always gonna be hard times. What matters is how you deal with it.
(I say 'you' as a general term, not like you personally)
Whiskey_Bravo
07-21-16, 14:16
If I was to guess, when LE showed up on the scene, they didn't expect to see an adult sitting in the road playing with a toy. You wonder what was going on in their minds? Is this weird scene a setup for an ambush? It was a bad shoot, but I think cops are all on edge now in the US.
Being on edge is still no excuse to shoot a guy laying on the ground with his hands up, displaying zero aggression, articulating why he is there and what he is doing. There was nothing that looked like a weapon unless that toy truck looked like a small gun or something, and then in that case shoot the autistic guy not the dude laying on the ground with his hands up asking everyone to be calm. Of course we need to make sure we have the full story but holy crap does this one not look good. The unedited video is needed but at least up until the point the video cuts there was zero aggression being shown by the caretaker.
If you think everyday is the Tet Offensive, then it is time to do something else
If you are one of those Punisher skull cops, you can kiss my ass.
Word. No more high and tight haircuts, no more looking like you just fell out of a 5.11 catalog, and FFS stop referring to other citizens as "civilians".
I'll bet that "most" do not. That's actually just plainly stupid, especially among people who are supposed to know how to investigate things.
Why call it stupid? 48 hour rule seems fairly common.
KalashniKEV
07-21-16, 14:28
Why call it stupid? 48 hour rule seems fairly common.
Because that's not how you investigate something.
I have never heard of the "48 Hour Rule" as you put it, but such a thing is anything but common.
If I punch somebody in the face, there is no "48 Hour Rule" before they authorities ask me why.
In fact, there's not even a "48 Hour Rule" if a person gets stopped with some no-no substance, a suspiciously fast shooting firearm, or a possibly commercial sex transaction.
Why on earth would there be a "48 Hour Rule" for shooting/ killing someone?
(Answer: Government Employee Unions)
It was a bad shoot, but I think cops are all on edge now in the US.
Thirty-odd years of teaching that every encounter is potentially a deadly-force encounter has led to the presumption among many that every encounter is a deadly-force encounter. Current events being what they are, police unions aren't helping, either. Wailing about a "war on cops" and winding themselves up even tighter.
Because that's not how you investigate something.
I have never heard of the "48 Hour Rule" as you put it, but such a thing is anything but common.
If I punch somebody in the face, there is no "48 Hour Rule" before they authorities ask me why.
In fact, there's not even a "48 Hour Rule" if a person gets stopped with some no-no substance, a suspiciously fast shooting firearm, or a possibly commercial sex transaction.
Why on earth would there be a "48 Hour Rule" for shooting/ killing someone?
(Answer: Government Employee Unions)
Seems to be an offshoot of various officers bill of rights benefits and not necessarily a union thing.
Because that's not how you investigate something.
I have never heard of the "48 Hour Rule" as you put it, but such a thing is anything but common.
If I punch somebody in the face, there is no "48 Hour Rule" before they authorities ask me why.
In fact, there's not even a "48 Hour Rule" if a person gets stopped with some no-no substance, a suspiciously fast shooting firearm, or a possibly commercial sex transaction.
Why on earth would there be a "48 Hour Rule" for shooting/ killing someone?
(Answer: Government Employee Unions)
Kev: If you are interested I will be glad to try to explain. The idea is to give the officer time to decompress and absorb what has happened, the thought being that after time passes there is a fuller memory of what occurred.
If the officer, or any other person, makes an initial, detailed statement soon after an emotionally charged situation, they are apt to leave out things that they saw, but were momentarily repressed. EDITED TO ADD: Later as they remember more, the veracity of their initial statement and there additional statements are often questioned as they add more detail. Let me give you an example that I see (saw - I'm retired now) all the time in the simulator room:
We had a vehicle stop scenario where the officer's partner approaches a van on a stop, suddenly the driver puts the van in reverse, the engine revs and he hits the officer. Immediately the driver gets out of the van saying 'I'm sorry, it was an accident' with his hands in the air, depending on the systems operator the driver next says '**** you your next' while reaching for a knife in his rear pocket and attacking, or while keeping one hand in the air and continuing to say 'I'm sorry..' reaches behind him and draws a handgun and shoots at the officer. This happens within a time frame of less than 3-4 seconds from feet on the ground hands up, to attacking the officer.
While all this is going on I'm watching the officer, one of the things I look for are indications they've assimilated into the scenario - hand movements, head movements, moving off line of attack, etc. when an officer has assimilated it was not unusual for them during the debrief to completely gloss over the van backing into the officer, leaving out the chunks that were not important to their immediate survival. When this happened I would make sure to ask them in several ways if anything else had occurred until I had a positive ' no nothing else occurred.'
When shown the replay the officer either goes 'oh, yeah, I remember that now' or 'Wow, I don't remember that.' I used these experiences to drive home two teaching points: 1) eyewitness statements are not always accurate; 2) it is in everyone's best interest if you give only the essentials 'yes, I shot him' and then wait to give a detailed statement. Brain guys say 24 to 48 hours.
Guess what - that isn't just a cop thing, everyone should do that. If you get involved in a use-of-force, or a serious injury accident, etc. give the minimum essentials and then tell them you want to talk to an attorney before saying anything else.
WickedWillis
07-21-16, 15:14
Kev: If you are interested I will be glad to try to explain. The idea is to give the officer time to decompress and absorb what has happened, the thought being that after time passes there is a fuller memory of what occurred.
If the officer, or any other person, makes an initial, detailed statement soon after an emotionally charged situation, they are apt to leave out things that they saw, but were momentarily repressed. EDITED TO ADD: Later as they remember more, the veracity of their initial statement and there additional statements are often questioned as they add more detail. Let me give you an example that I see (saw - I'm retired now) all the time in the simulator room:
We had a vehicle stop scenario where the officer's partner approaches a van on a stop, suddenly the driver puts the van in reverse, the engine revs and he hits the officer. Immediately the driver gets out of the van saying 'I'm sorry, it was an accident' with his hands in the air, depending on the systems operator the driver next says '**** you your next' while reaching for a knife in his rear pocket and attacking, or while keeping one hand in the air and continuing to say 'I'm sorry..' reaches behind him and draws a handgun and shoots at the officer. This happens within a time frame of less than 3-4 seconds from feet on the ground hands up, to attacking the officer.
While all this is going on I'm watching the officer, one of the things I look for are indications they've assimilated into the scenario - hand movements, head movements, moving off line of attack, etc. when an officer has assimilated it was not unusual for them during the debrief to completely gloss over the van backing into the officer, leaving out the chunks that were not important to their immediate survival. When this happened I would make sure to ask them in several ways if anything else had occurred until I had a positive ' no nothing else occurred.'
When shown the replay the officer either goes 'oh, yeah, I remember that now' or 'Wow, I don't remember that.' I used these experiences to drive home two teaching points: 1) eyewitness statements are not always accurate; 2) it is in everyone's best interest if you give only the essentials 'yes, I shot him' and then wait to give a detailed statement. Brain guys say 24 to 48 hours.
Guess what - that isn't just a cop thing, everyone should do that. If you get involved in a use-of-force, or a serious injury accident, etc. give the minimum essentials and then tell them you want to talk to an attorney before saying anything else.
Wow. I learned an absolute ton in that post. All of it makes complete sense though, once it is presented to you. I would think in the spur of the moment you'd do a knowledge dump of the triggers in your mind that made you act on defending yourself. Something I had never put much thought into. I was in the camp of the most accurate claim or report would come immediately after the incident.
sidewaysil80
07-21-16, 15:18
Because that's not how you investigate something.
I have never heard of the "48 Hour Rule" as you put it, but such a thing is anything but common.
If I punch somebody in the face, there is no "48 Hour Rule" before they authorities ask me why.
In fact, there's not even a "48 Hour Rule" if a person gets stopped with some no-no substance, a suspiciously fast shooting firearm, or a possibly commercial sex transaction.
Why on earth would there be a "48 Hour Rule" for shooting/ killing someone?
(Answer: Government Employee Unions)
Both departments I've worked in (one state/one Fed) allow up to 48 hours to give your statement after a use of force incident. It's not because of unions either, its because after high stress/shock inducing incidents it can take up to 48 hours to fully recall the incident and remember all facts. It's called "memory gap" and some studies have linked it to elevated levels of cortisol that are released during said situations. Regardless, it's a widely documented phenomenon that science backs and supports.
Wow. I learned an absolute ton in that post. All of it makes complete sense though, once it is presented to you. I would think in the spur of the moment you'd do a knowledge dump of the triggers in your mind that made you act on defending yourself. Something I had never put much thought into. I was in the camp of the most accurate claim or report would come immediately after the incident.
Fun fact, thats why after taking statements from witnesses/subjects you have to follow up with them within a couple days because typically more information that was not recalled will be added by witness/subject on a supplemental report.
yeah the video part but where is the shot part and why ? that alone makes no sense and kinda makes me wonder if why it was not taken or deleted cause most folks who do these videos record the whole thing ?
looks pretty bad for sure BUT again stupidity accidents thank goodness he is alive
but again did he decided to get up and try to protect the kid which made them react ? again bad reaction but could have been since he was so worried about the kid and protecting him
and not saying that is a excuse but its what triggers other reactions
wish the press gave this much coverage to all the kids that get shot in say chicago alone by other blacks !!!!
Well the video does skip over the actually shooting.
But I'm going to ASSUME that the guy who was being TOTALLY compliant didn't just say screw it and decide to get shot. I could see how the autistic guy MIGHT get shot since he had no clue what was going on and IF the officer mistook something for a weapon and it was a Code 3 callout on a Signal 0.
But right now it looks really, really bad. At least they didn't kill the guy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9Pqh-_TmAw
Eurodriver
07-21-16, 15:44
"This is what I'm thinking. As long as I got my hands up, they ain't gonna shoot me.
Wow, was I wrong."
DAMN
Not seeing why they would. Several officers on the scene and they didn't seem to cringe based on who got cuffed and carted off.
I
And they were supposed to do what? Take a bad situation and make it worse. Start calling the cop who shot the guy a dick?
yeah agree !!!!
so far this kinda looks like it could be and just speculation for those who want to jump :)
but again accidents happen look at the DEA or whatever idiot that ND his gun in the class room he cold have easily shot a child !
need to play that again since he was black and show color of the skin of the officer does not matter !!!!
if he did not know why he is a bad cop in the sense of jumpy and paranoid and maybe bad pistol form ? finger on trigger kinda guy rather than not !
but kinda sounds like he needs a new career and is guilty needs to face charges for that
now the shot dude will be a multimillionaire :) I might say OK shoot me in the leg for that :) guess that is the silver lining
but at this point again sadly bad PR all around
"This is what I'm thinking. As long as I got my hands up, they ain't gonna shoot me.
Wow, was I wrong."
DAMN
"I was afraid subject was going to fly away like Superman and had to keep him grounded for Officer Safety"
Some serious disinfo going around about post shoot investigations. Until an officer is read his Garrity rights, he doesn't have to say or do anything and can have an attorney present. Post Garrity he must answer questions without counsel.
It is recommended that an officer has at least one sleep cycle before making a statement. Recommended but not required.
Either way, none of the cursory evidence points to reasonable nor prudent.
At the end of the day he shot an unarmed man in broad daylight with a rifle.
That's a tough sell.
Honest questions:
So the officer makes a mistake, deliberate or otherwise. The guy shot is clearly not a bad guy, and this thing is clearly going to be a problem. Why cuff him and leave him bleeding in the street? Why not get him off the street onto the lawn, but a trauma bandage on him and start showing empathy and regret. Is it a cultural issue? Inflexible training? Policy? At what point are cops permitted to say "you know, this guy doesn't belong in cuffs".
Also, is there a policy for when long guns are deployed? I understand that cops are nervous (with good reason), and I get that this was a "man with a gun" call, but is deploying ARs the new normal? Is pointing ARs at some dude sitting in the street playing Tonka truck and some dude lying down with his hands up, consistent with their training? Seems like a significant reaction to an insignificant threat.
Not trying to start a pissing contest. I'm actually interested in the answers.
D
This was Miami so...
1. Lack of adequate training in all areas.
2. Every cop was too busy thinking "Oh shit, oh shit...now what" to contemplate any big picture notion of right and wrong.
3. Protocol dictates if YOU are the one that takes the initiative and makes decisions like "remove cuffs", "render immediate aid" and such then you become the responsible person when everyone does their AAR (ie. Mike seemed to be in charge so we were just holding our position and waiting for him to tell us what to do).
It's a sad commentary on things, but guys who step up and try and fix shit become scapegoat number one. Seems to be a plan specifically designed to get rid of cops who have a sense of right and wrong and are willing to step up when the situation demands.
Today proactive policing is "hugs on facebook."
Actually, yeah.
It seems like the system is designed to accomodate lazy bums and pissant females.
God forbid you get shit done. Then some misguided soul overreacts and well...
there's your recipe for success.
I myself am ready to pull a Sam Jackson like Pulp Fiction and walk the Earth.
Search for enlightenment. Go on adventures.
f it all
Gun owners on this forum, more and more, sound like the gun grabbers we so despise. "Let's jump to conclusions based only off of one report by the media!"
"I don't wait for facts." Etc, etc, etc. PUH-LEASE....
I dunno. I we seem to be capable of figuring out "crackhead dirtbag shoots old lady for three dollars" stories based upon one report by the media.
Comparing that to misinformed gun based legislation and stories about active shooters where UBCs wouldn't have made a damn bit of difference isn't exactly apples to apples.
I am more than capable of seeing when a cop or individual was well withing the "deadly force" threshold and will defend them no matter who they shot.
I also don't need 15 camera angles and a full background check when some dirtbag opens up on cops talking about "white people" or yelling "Alli Snackbar."
So I think I can figure this one out. I don't think the caretaker suddenly executed a Mel Gibson lateral roll, drew a concealed weapon and opened up.
The one that really gets me to my personal conclusion is shot placement. If the officer in question really felt deadly force escalation had been achieved this guy shouldn't still be alive and he should have 2-3 rounds in his upper torso.
The leg shot makes me suspect an "negligent discharge" from a low ready position where the leg was in the line of fire. I don't think it was a willful shoot on the part of the officers, and once it happened, I don't think anyone knew how to deal with the aftermath in a competent manner.
Again, this is Miami, the bar is pretty low.
Being on edge is still no excuse to shoot a guy laying on the ground with his hands up, displaying zero aggression, articulating why he is there and what he is doing. There was nothing that looked like a weapon unless that toy truck looked like a small gun or something, and then in that case shoot the autistic guy not the dude laying on the ground with his hands up asking everyone to be calm. Of course we need to make sure we have the full story but holy crap does this one not look good. The unedited video is needed but at least up until the point the video cuts there was zero aggression being shown by the caretaker.
I'm not LE but I've had to deal with rules of engagement in combat that I have regretted in hindsight. It's the kind of thing you take with you years after retirement. I agree that there was no justification to shoot the gentleman on the ground. Could this have been a negligent discharge from a nervous cop?
I was pointing out that not every cop is a top tier operator and the level of training can vary from depart to different cities and States. It's not a perfect world. Too bad innocent people get shot but it does happen. Wrong place, wrong situation and wrong time.
Actually, yeah.
It seems like the system is designed to accomodate lazy bums and pissant females.
God forbid you get shit done. Then some misguided soul overreacts and well...
there's your recipe for success.
I myself am ready to pull a Sam Jackson like Pulp Fiction and walk the Earth.
Search for enlightenment. Go on adventures.
f it all
There was a time, and God I hope it is still the case in many places, where everyone would have immediately shifted to "fix it" mode. Officers would have been designated for perimeter security and several would have gone in, cuffed the unknown autistic guy and immediately started rendering first aid to the guy who got shot once they confirmed that he and the other guy were both unarmed.
I've seen it more than a few times, where every single action shifted from "No officers get shot today" immediately to "nobody let this guy die." I remember being stuck in a bank parking lot when a bank robbery was attempted. We are talking about every single officer available from Plantation police department. And of course all the officers with guns behind cars were behind me and everyone else who were all inside the line of fire. Nothing like realizing you are a potential suspect right now.
I couldn't really see the actual bank robber, and I read later that he made a run for it, but he didn't get far and was shot several times. But despite the presence of 50-75 police officers, only 3 or 4 shots were fired (long time ago, memory is fuzzy). But what I do remember well is about 20 officers running up to disarm the robber and then immediately begin to render first aid.
I remember lots of yelling as they got police cars and bank customers to move their cars out of the way so they could immediately roll in one of the ambulances they had parked on a side street. The ambulance was leaving with the robbery suspect within 5 minutes of being shot, which to me was pretty impressive.
I saw a lot of proactive police work that day. Used to be what I considered the norm. Not sure what Plantation PD is like today, but Miami has always been kind of a disaster.
And they were supposed to do what? Take a bad situation and make it worse. Start calling the cop who shot the guy a dick?
Where did you come up with that from? If it was a bad shoot they would have taken action against the officer.
#1 son on left (age 15) - #3 son on right (age 12). Not pictured, is #2 son, who is the identical twin to #3 son. All 3 are Autistic, as is #4 daughter.
They are very sweet, and after many years of therapeutic interventional services, they are high functioning, outgoing, and very pleasant-natured (this was them at church on Easter Sunday this year), but they are STILL Autistic. Prone to scripting, sensory overload, and aggressive, reactionary outbursts.
They routinely go for walks and outings with their TSS's on nice days. If you find it necessary to shoot their caretakers/support staff, prepare to shoot them, too. They will NOT understand police commands - they don't even understand that bullets hurt. They will be very defensive of their caretakers, and will likely try and attack their attackers under such circumstances - uniform or not - and sadly, that is how it will go down. :(
Thank you BLM, Occupy Wall Street, heathen mohammedans, & libtards in general, for proving that NO life matters to you, by putting ALL lives more at risk, by your galloping dumbassery. :mad:
God Bless your family and thank you for being a father to 4 beautiful children.
Where did you come up with that from? If it was a bad shoot they would have taken action against the officer.
And all the other officers know it was a bad shoot at the time because? You have four guys from four different vantage points and suddenly one of them takes the shot and there is apparently no reliable communication.
Did the one guy see a weapon? How do the other three know what happened? They aren't 75 yard away watching it from the same vantage point as the person with the phone or the shooter. Basically every other officer at the time didn't know dick.
It is not the time to play "figure out who is an asshole." There will be plenty of time for that later.
Now just so there is no confusion, the whole "let's stand around and talk about it while this guys bleeds" isn't the correct solution either. But the other cops don't take action against the cop who fired, the DEPARTMENT is the entity that would do that based upon evidence such as this recording and the reports filed by other officers.
The last thing you do when somebody gets shot, even when a cop shoots another cop, is stand around and play "who is the asshole."
KalashniKEV
07-21-16, 17:35
Kev: If you are interested I will be glad to try to explain. The idea is to give the officer time to decompress and absorb what has happened, the thought being that after time passes there is a fuller memory of what occurred.
I do appreciate your response, as well as your experience, but I've still got to say- that's a bunch of baloney.
In the military, we don't wait 48 hours to file an AAR or a patrol debrief, nor do we wait 48 hours to collect sworn statements after a sensitive item is lost.
Fun fact, thats why after taking statements from witnesses/subjects you have to follow up with them within a couple days because typically more information that was not recalled will be added by witness/subject on a supplemental report.
Yeah, it's called cooking up a story.
He had a knife, so I shot him. See the knife? BTW, my body camera fell off or malfunctioned. Have a nice night and start my creative thinking clock.
(48 hours later)
NOW I remember- he drew the knife from his pocket and said, "It's you or me!" and then I specifically saw the knife draw back, and then he said "I am totally going to kill you right now at this moment!"
...so I took out my gun and shot him. It was me or him. Gottagohomeattheendoftheshift!
POOF! absolved.
"This is what I'm thinking. As long as I got my hands up, they ain't gonna shoot me.
Wow, was I wrong."
DAMN
I guess he never heard of "Hands up, don't shoot?" BOOM.
They always forget the BOOM.
Could this have been a negligent discharge from a nervous cop?
That's what I'm betting.
We all know someone or someone like us who was killed by a police officer who walked off scot-free.
In NoVA we had a Fairfax County SWAT do a full on raid on some guys house for playing fantasy football.
The dude was an eye doctor and he must have seen them coming, because he showed up in the doorway (off script) and they blasted him.
It looked like a sport killing to me, but after they cleared themselves the investigation determined that an SOP revision was needed because they (supposedly) no shit had an SOP that says to run around the objective with a Nighthawk 1911 in condition 0 with your finger on the 3.5 pound trigger.
Homeboy walked away golden- three weeks without pay for shooting down a good guy in his home.
Oh, and to the point... and 48 hours later he dropped a statement that said the car door hit his leg causing a sympathetic nervous response that made him kill the eye doctor.
He was over 10 feet away from his vehicle when he fired the shot.
It didn't matter. He was 100% going to be cleared anyway. There was never a chance he would get fired, or lose his pension, let alone see a jail cell or receive the death penalty.
Moose-Knuckle
07-21-16, 17:54
And this is part of the problem, which Firefly spoke to. The focus shouldn't be on just the shooting. There's far too much "muzzle-forward" thinking nowadays. A firearm is not a tool with which to effect an arrest.
What led up to the shooting? Did the actions of the officer(s) serve to deescalate or escalate the situation? In this case, one officer drew her sidearm and charged onto the bus all by herself and put herself in the situation where her sidearm was able to be grabbed by the guy on the bus. She damn near shoots the driver when her pistol discharges in the melee and her partner has to jump in to save her and shoots the guy. If I were the one who had to shoot the guy, I'd be mad as hell at her for putting herself and me into a situation where I had to shoot someone. She could have gotten herself, the driver, and her partner killed. And over what? A guy causing a ruckus on a bus with a fire extinguisher.
The subject grabbed the fire extinguisher before the LEOs got on the bus.
Have you ever tried to drive a multi-ton bus while being sprayed in the face by a fire extinguisher? Could have caused serious bodily injury and or death to multiple individuals on and off the bus.
Have you ever been hit in the head and or about the face with a steel cylinder? The subject could have caused serious bodily injury and or death by assaulting the buss driver which is where that was heading IMHO.
The subject grabbed the LEO's gun, that is a dirt nap right then and there period.
And all the other officers know it was a bad shoot at the time because? You have four guys from four different vantage points and suddenly one of them takes the shot and there is apparently no reliable communication.
Did the one guy see a weapon? How do the other three know what happened? They aren't 75 yard away watching it from the same vantage point as the person with the phone or the shooter. Basically every other officer at the time didn't know dick.
It is not the time to play "figure out who is an asshole." There will be plenty of time for that later.
Now just so there is no confusion, the whole "let's stand around and talk about it while this guys bleeds" isn't the correct solution either. But the other cops don't take action against the cop who fired, the DEPARTMENT is the entity that would do that based upon evidence such as this recording and the reports filed by other officers.
The last thing you do when somebody gets shot, even when a cop shoots another cop, is stand around and play "who is the asshole."
All the other officers knew it was a good shoot
Have you ever tried to drive a multi-ton bus while being sprayed in the face by a fire extinguisher? Could have caused serious bodily injury and or death to multiple individuals on and off the bus.
Have you ever been hit in the head and or about the face with a steel cylinder? The subject could have caused serious bodily injury and or death by assaulting the buss driver which is where that was heading IMHO. The subject grabbed the LEO's gun, that is a dirt nap right then and there period.
Per the bus incident: Could've gone better, could've gone a lot worse. I'm rather meh on it.
But shooting the caretaker guy was just a bad move.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-21-16, 19:40
I apologize for my snippy comments earlier, some were uncalled for.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-21-16, 19:45
LowSpeed_HighDrag...let me know at what point in the video he resisted, was not compliant, and DPF was authorized.
What point in the video is he shot? I watched it twice....
But Wait!! There's more!!
I thought I heard that three shots were fired so decided to try to figure how that played in.... This is what I found first....
Kinsey’s attorney, Hilton Napoleon II, claims the city is eager to settle and “resolve it relatively fast in good faith to let the community know that they take these things seriously.” Now more details are surfacing, and things aren’t looking any better. According to the Miami Herald‘s Chuck Rabin, Miami-Dade police union president John Rivera said the officer was actually aiming to shoot the autistic patient.
so I guess they are going to say this wasn't a black thing, because after all he was trying to kill the white guy........ holy cow....
http://uproxx.com/news/miami-police-shot-unarmed-man-mistake-autistic/2/
Well they do say truth is stranger than fiction. I'm pretty sure no one could make this up.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-21-16, 20:34
But Wait!! There's more!!
I thought I heard that three shots were fired so decided to try to figure how that played in.... This is what I found first....
so I guess they are going to say this wasn't a black thing, because after all he was trying to kill the white guy........ holy cow....
http://uproxx.com/news/miami-police-shot-unarmed-man-mistake-autistic/2/
Well they do say truth is stranger than fiction. I'm pretty sure no one could make this up.
Yup, racism not the problem....trigger happy and aimed at special needs man when some CIT and Verbal Judo might've solved it is.
Union spokesman essentially just labeled this cop as an idiot, and I'd have to agree. No excuse.
ColtSeavers
07-21-16, 20:39
But Wait!! There's more!!
I thought I heard that three shots were fired so decided to try to figure how that played in.... This is what I found first....
Kinsey’s attorney, Hilton Napoleon II, claims the city is eager to settle and “resolve it relatively fast in good faith to let the community know that they take these things seriously.” Now more details are surfacing, and things aren’t looking any better. According to the Miami Herald‘s Chuck Rabin,*Miami-Dade police union president John Rivera said the officer was actually aiming to shoot the autistic patient.
so I guess they are going to say this wasn't a black thing, because after all he was trying to kill the white guy........ holy cow....
http://uproxx.com/news/miami-police-shot-unarmed-man-mistake-autistic/2/
Well they do say truth is stranger than fiction. I'm pretty sure no one could make this up.
They really meant to shoot the autistic one?
http://memesvault.com/wp-content/uploads/Double-Facepalm-Picard-11.jpg
Yup, racism not the problem....trigger happy and aimed at special needs man when some CIT and Verbal Judo might've solved it is.
Union spokesman essentially just labeled this cop as an idiot, and I'd have to agree. No excuse.
Did the PBA rep do that during the Spanish part? During the English segments he provided justifications.
sidewaysil80
07-21-16, 20:56
I do appreciate your response, as well as your experience, but I've still got to say- that's a bunch of baloney.
In the military, we don't wait 48 hours to file an AAR or a patrol debrief, nor do we wait 48 hours to collect sworn statements after a sensitive item is lost.
So just because the military doesn't do it must not be real? Lets be honest and not insult each others intelligence, the military doesn't do it because logistically they don't have the luxury to pull people out of their units for 48 hours every time they get contact. If you take a moment to look into you'll see its very well documented and the science backs it. I'm sorry you think it's some conspiracy but its apparent you are set in your beliefs and it's not worth my time to try and prove otherwise.
In NoVA we had a Fairfax County SWAT do a full on raid on some guys house for playing fantasy football.
The dude was an eye doctor and he must have seen them coming, because he showed up in the doorway (off script) and they blasted him.
It looked like a sport killing to me, but after they cleared themselves the investigation determined that an SOP revision was needed because they (supposedly) no shit had an SOP that says to run around the objective with a Nighthawk 1911 in condition 0 with your finger on the 3.5 pound trigger.
Homeboy walked away golden- three weeks without pay for shooting down a good guy in his home.
First off, it wasn't fantasy football...Culosi was subject of a gambling investigation and had been orchestrating bets with an undercover detective for some time. Not a big deal but it's certainly not "a raid on his house for playing fantasy football". Also, it was a .45 H&K , not a Nighthawk with lightened trigger. The policy rewrite had more to do with sleep deprivation and duty considering Bullock had been on duty for 17 hours prior to the incident.
Right, wrong, or indifferent the statutes both federal (post civil rights inquiry) and state did not support charges being brought on the Officer. His actions (not the result of) were not negligent enough to warrant voluntary or involuntary manslaughter. The statutes and their requirements have nothing to do with the Police Department and it's frustrating to see that overlooked.
FlyingHunter
07-21-16, 20:58
3 shots. If that's the case, then the accidental discharge argument is no longer a consideration. 1 shot or 3,- it's still grossly deplorable. It's destabilizing.
Partially quoting "Jules" from Pulp Fiction:
Ezekiel 25:17. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children."
That therapist was a shepherd of the weak...
Sad.
Probably an "n.d." or justa complete snafu. Appropriate action should be taken by the dept and victim. Sometimes people accidentally **** up, but you still have to pay the piper.
The_War_Wagon
07-21-16, 21:43
Um, you really jumped the tracks on this one. So, the shooting in question is somehow the fault of the above mentioned groups?
Their antics, making our homes, our streets, our neighborhoods, our cities, and our nation UN-safe, yes. And who gets called FIRST to respond to such things? The police. And this makes their job LESS stressful how?
Or are you just being obtuse?
Until an officer is read his Garrity rights, he doesn't have to say or do anything and can have an attorney present. Post Garrity he must answer questions without counsel.
At the end of the day he shot an unarmed man in broad daylight with a rifle.
That's a tough sell.
But, the Garrity stuff can't be used in court.
Where did you come up with that from? If it was a bad shoot they would have taken action against the officer.
WTF are you talking about?
WTF are you talking about?
The other officers on scene didn't take issue with what the officer did.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-21-16, 22:03
The other officers on scene didn't take issue with what the officer did.
Again, trolling for no reason.
All the other officers knew it was a good shoot
I don't think you have any way of knowing what any of the officers thought or believed at the time of the shooting, which is kind of my point. And ONCE AGAIN, it is not the job of fellow officers to determine if it is a good shoot or a bad shoot. The investigation determines that.
On what planet do you reside on where the police conduct an on the spot investigation and determination regarding officer involved shootings? I don't think you understand the actual role of a police officer.
I don't think you have any way of knowing what any of the officers thought or believed at the time of the shooting, which is kind of my point. And ONCE AGAIN, it is not the job of fellow officers to determine if it is a good shoot or a bad shoot. The investigation determines that.
On what planet do you reside on where the police conduct an on the spot investigation and determination regarding officer involved shootings? I don't think you understand the actual role of a police officer.
Are you saying police will do nothing and/or assist while a fellow officer commits crimes? Pass the buck along and leave it to chance?
But Wait!! There's more!!
I thought I heard that three shots were fired so decided to try to figure how that played in.... This is what I found first....
so I guess they are going to say this wasn't a black thing, because after all he was trying to kill the white guy........ holy cow....
http://uproxx.com/news/miami-police-shot-unarmed-man-mistake-autistic/2/
Well they do say truth is stranger than fiction. I'm pretty sure no one could make this up.
That actually makes as much sense as anything.
Again, trolling for no reason.
He asked a question and I answered. If you can direct me to anything indicating the other officers attempted to intervene on the civilians' behalves I would be interested in seeing it.
sidewaysil80
07-21-16, 22:09
Are you saying police will do nothing and/or assist while a fellow officer commits crimes.
Any use of force incident regardless of outcome and severity is reviewed an investigated. The officer is placed on admin leave until conclusion of investigation and a course of action is prescribed.
Fellow officers cannot simply detain the officer and take him into custody because they THINK it was a bad shoot. It the same principal that prevents us from automatically sentencing criminals even if they are caught red handed. Their still has to be an investigation and subsequent trial.
Are you saying police will do nothing and/or assist while a fellow officer commits crimes? Pass the buck along and leave it to chance?
No, I'm saying they had NO WAY of knowing the motivations of the officer at the time. Also I don't think crappy shooting is a crime yet.
What do you imagine they should have done? Were they supposed to use their magical powers of preconception to determine the officer was going to make a "bad shoot" and then take action in order to prevent the officer from making the shot?
Or once the shot has been made, and everybody is wondering why the officer fired his weapon and everyone is still worrying about the scene in general and other potential threats, were they supposed to use their law enforcement powers of mental telepathy to figure out somebody screwed up and then go start kicking that officer in the nuts?
He asked a question and I answered. If you can direct me to anything indicating the other officers attempted to intervene on the civilians' behalves I would be interested in seeing it.
Ya know. I think that was a 100% bad shoot, especially since it seems they missed the guy they were going after. But clearly, you don't understand how any of this stuff works.
Now if the cop ran over and began to go Rodney King on him, THEN that is an ongoing attack that should be prevented. But once the shooting is done, officers don't start taking other officers into custody because they "think" he did something.
No, I'm saying they had NO WAY of knowing the motivations of the officer at the time. Also I don't think crappy shooting is a crime yet.
What do you imagine they should have done? Were they supposed to use their magical powers of preconception to determine the officer was going to make a "bad shoot" and then take action in order to prevent the officer from making the shot?
Or once the shot has been made, and everybody is wondering why the officer fired his weapon and everyone is still worrying about the scene in general and other potential threats, were they supposed to use their law enforcement powers of mental telepathy to figure out somebody screwed up and then go start kicking that officer in the nuts?
Well no, why would they take any action against him since they supported what he did?
Ya know. I think that was a 100% bad shoot, especially since it seems they missed the guy they were going after. But clearly, you don't understand how any of this stuff works.
Now if the cop ran over and began to go Rodney King on him, THEN that is an ongoing attack that should be prevented. But once the shooting is done, officers don't start taking other officers into custody because they "think" he did something.
I don't recall any officers interfering when king was apprehended either.
Any use of force incident regardless of outcome and severity is reviewed an investigated. The officer is placed on admin leave until conclusion of investigation and a course of action is prescribed.
Fellow officers cannot simply detain the officer and take him into custody because they THINK it was a bad shoot. It the same principal that prevents us from automatically sentencing criminals even if they are caught red handed. Their still has to be an investigation and subsequent trial.
So arresting a police officer for using force against someone is equivalent to a civilian being convicted without a trial. That is interesting.
But, the Garrity stuff can't be used in court.
Very true.
Honestly, thats the meat and potatoes of a post shoot. The statements are not what make the case.
The evidence is.
The 48 hours "rule" is more recommendation than anything and would not be done under Garrity. If an officer tries to "game" his statements, enough physical evidence will come out. Garrity is best applied to his non-actor back up.
What they will do is take any and all weapons involved, collect blood/urine, and photograph you. You can request medical attention too, but if you're going to lie; it will be found out pretty quick.
It isn't like Training Day like some would believe.
How you will be judged will be if a Reasonable and Prudent officer would have done the same thing.
A lot of this is covered in Graham v. Connor.
To say they were aiming at the Special Needs person, while that seems bad, was them mitigating the scenario.
For all they knew it was a crazy guy gonna shoot himself and they were attempting cover/contact. Looking okay.
Where it went TU was the mistreatment of the caregiver and the negligent discharge.
It looks bad, and is bad, but I think this is more towards incompetence than malice.
The Dept. will likely settle but I would not retain that officer.
I think that, while not ideal at all, had Officer Hotshot not had a brainfart with the AR; we likely wouldn't be reading about this.
ETA Look up the Geer Shooting in Fairfax County. An interview post shoot is on youtube somewhere. Officer jumps the gun during negotiation. I'm not the biggest fan of FCPD, but they do perform a lot of thoroughness in their interview and investigation. That's near Kev's AO. I'm sure he heard of it.
Basic domestic squabble, armed homeowner, basic dispute, female left, officer puts a .40 in Geer's chest while a trained officer is talking to him, so during the golden time they all stage and call SWAT instead of treating Geer, Geer dies. Officer that shot was declared wrong.
Geer was potentially viable as he died of blood loss.
It was an interesting case.
I do appreciate your response, as well as your experience, but I've still got to say- that's a bunch of baloney.
In the military, we don't wait 48 hours to file an AAR or a patrol debrief, nor do we wait 48 hours to collect sworn statements after a sensitive item is lost.
Okay let me run it down from the top -
1) Everyone in the United States has the right to avoid self-incrimination, it's called the 5th Amendment - nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself - it works for anyone in the Estados Unidos, including criminals and police officers. Damn, it seems to me one dark evening I stood on yellow footprints staring at a wall that had something called 'Article 31 of the UCMJ' stenciled on it - it is just a dim memory, but, fvck, I'm pretty sure it went something like this....ARTICLE 31. COMPULSORY SELF-INCRIMINATION PROHIBITED (a) No person subject to this chapter may compel any person to incriminate himself or to answer any questions the answer to which may tend to incriminate him. (b) No person subject to this chapter may interrogate, or request any statement from an accused or a person suspected of an offense without first informing him of the nature of the accusation and advising him that he does not have to make any statement regarding the offense of which he is accused or suspected and that any statement made by him may be used as evidence against him in a trial by court-martial. (c) No person subject to this chapter may compel any person to make a statement or produce evidence before any military tribunal if the statement or evidence in not material to the issue and may tend to degrade him. (d) No statement obtained from any person in violation of this article, or through the use of coercion, unlawful influence, or unlawful inducement may be received in evidence against him in a trial by court-martial.
Additionally, there is a difference between an AAR, and a criminal investigation. If you were a leader, as distasteful as it might seem, you probably should have made sure your troops were reminded of Article 31 before breaking out the thumbscrews to find the missing NVG's.
2) Because officers are usually taking action as an agent of a governmental entity, their employer (the department), in order to conduct an investigation, can compel them to make a statement as part of the job. Used to be talk or be fired and then you are on your own. However, this went against the officer's 5th Amendment rights, so the SCOTUS decided in the case of Garrity vs. NJ that agencies can compel an officer to make statements under threat of termination, but those statements can't be used in a criminal proceeding.
3) So, if the agency wants a more detailed statement they give the guy the Garrity warning and they can learn enough to go on until the officer has spoke to an attorney and had a sleep cycle.
4) Long story short, officers waiting to make statements for the criminal investigation are simply exercising the Constitutional Rights available to all.
5) In regards to this - I've still got to say- that's a bunch of baloney - you are not up on the science, or the techniques of interview and interrogation, so your response is understandable, but incorrect.
Tac-Teams have been doing dumb shit on warrant service for many years. In some cases it does seem like officers get a pass, but, and I'm not being trite when I say this, you need to understand that an officer's actions don't have to be right, they just have to be reasonable in the totality of circumstances. In the case you noted, what was the payout to the family? I bet it was substantial, and still, inadequate to compensate for the loss of a loved one.
I don't recall any officers interfering when king was apprehended either.
They didn't, but that was a different scenario. He wasn't shot and in handcuffs. Granted "I" believe they went too far, but King was still trying to get up so the officers deemed him an ongoing threat.
I'd explain more but clearly I'm wasting my time and you are trying very, very hard to not get it.
ETA Look up the Geer Shooting in Fairfax County.
Geer was potentially viable as he died of blood loss.
It was an interesting case.
I remember that one because the delay in rendering aid was kind of similar to the point of issue in the first case in which I testified before a Grand Jury. In this case the shooting was completely legit, but through several slip ups, the nearest EMS units weren't dispatched, and none of the officers on scene attempted to render aid. Oh, boy.
They didn't, but that was a different scenario. He wasn't shot and in handcuffs. Granted "I" believe they went too far, but King was still trying to get up so the officers deemed him an ongoing threat.
I'd explain more but clearly I'm wasting my time and you are trying very, very hard to not get it.
You brought up king to show me how it worked so not sure why you are saying I am not getting something.
I remember that one because the delay in rendering aid was kind of similar to the point of issue in the first case in which I testified before a Grand Jury. In this case the shooting was completely legit, but through several slip ups, the nearest EMS units weren't dispatched, and none of the officers on scene attempted to render aid. Oh, boy.
Every squad should have one, if not two, trained medics. I have Medic/First Responder, but most people don't want to do that because it's "more work". Just get by on a CPR class they had in Academy years back.
My Golden Rule in life is that People Come First.
sidewaysil80
07-21-16, 23:05
So arresting a police officer for using force against someone is equivalent to a civilian being convicted without a trial. That is interesting.
Who said anything about that being the equivalent of? I said its the same principal. By your logic every time a use of force occurred, other officers on scene would have to decide whether or not it was a good shoot and decide whether or not to take the officer into custody. It doesn't work that way, there has to be an investigation first before any action is brought against that officer.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-21-16, 23:12
So arresting a police officer for using force against someone is equivalent to a civilian being convicted without a trial. That is interesting.
Go find a dictionary and look up hind sight and reasonable. Then go read Graham V Connor. Either educate yourself, or stop playing your stupid games.
Go find a dictionary and look up hind sight and reasonable. Then go read Graham V Connor. Either educate yourself, or stop playing your stupid games.
Ignore the Blahino. He is gathering intel for his crappy YouTube channel.
I also wouldn't expect too many people to read case law dispositions in order to understand standards of review. It is like people who cite studies to back their argument, but with cherry picked information.
black22rifle
07-22-16, 00:06
Ignore the Blahino. He is gathering intel for his crappy YouTube channel.
I also wouldn't expect too many people to read case law dispositions in order to understand standards of review. It is like people who cite studies to back their argument, but with cherry picked information.
Blahino? Don't tell me jasonb1 is Jason blaha from YouTube.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-22-16, 00:08
Blahino? Don't tell me jasonb1 is Jason blaha from YouTube.
He is.
Someone want to fill the rest of us in?
Someone want to fill the rest of us in?
The guy claimed he trained at the "farm," then back tracked and claimed he was a mercenary. He claimed to have conducted snatch & grab ops in the middle east, then back tracked and claimed to have worked in Mexico and South America during the "powder wars." He has some of the most outlandish delusions of grandeur I have ever seen. He contradicts himself left and right, and when caught outright in his lies he refuses to acknowledge anything and indirectly pleads the fifth. He also steals Will Brink's whole demeanor for his videos. Watch Will (Will check this guy out if you have not) and then watch the great Blahino. If he would just admit he lied, he would probably regain some followers.
sidewaysil80
07-22-16, 00:31
Someone want to fill the rest of us in?
I don't know if thats him or not and I'm not going to assume it is. However, google "Jason Blaha fake" and start down the rabbit hole of bullshit. The link from the Sherdog forums is a good read and really sums it up.
Every squad should have one, if not two, trained medics. I have Medic/First Responder, but most people don't want to do that because it's "more work". Just get by on a CPR class they had in Academy years back.
My Golden Rule in life is that People Come First.
And how you do it Firefly is how it should be. I come from a small farm community, and back in the day the State Police officers and Sheriffs all knew everyone in the county mostly by name. As areas have grown, it seems only the Sheriff's don't yet have the "Billy Bad Ass" syndrome that the a few of the State and now City police seem to have. It's been kind of weird for me seeing people I went to college with, and were in a fraternity with twenty-some years ago now thinking, acting, and believing the part they've created for themselves.
Most of the State Troopers I see nowdays do look like they came from a 5.11 photo shoot. Yes, IMHO, it seems like the young bucks are the worst. The old school, old timer officers to me are the ones who seem to "get it". What gets me is that more and more it seems that by picking that profession, it makes some (young bucks especially) think they're better than the people they're supposed to be serving
I agree it's a hard as hell job, and I normally side with police officers, but dang it if some of them out there are making it hard to "keep the faith". My hat goes off to anyone that serves in the military, is a police officer, or some type of first responder for picking the profession. I wouldn't want to walk a foot, much less a mile in your or any other officers shoes. I couldn't fill them. Firefly, and others, I do appreciate your candid opinions about the job.
This shoot in question really really really looks like something out of the "Keystone Cops" to me. It doesn't help that they're responding to a call of someone armed, but they still have to use not only their sense of sight, but hearing, etc... to come to a logical conclusion.
I have a kid in a wheel chair, and there's no way in hell if he were approached by an officer even giving instructions politely could he comply with them. He has leukodrystrophy, and just doesn't have the motor skills. One would hope that the officer(s) interacting with him (if it would ever happen) would be able to figure out by what they see that this person is handicapped, has a physical problem, won't be able to comply like most other people, and that things are going to have to be handled a little differently.
I don't know if thats him or not and I'm not going to assume it is. However, google "Jason Blaha fake" and start down the rabbit hole of bullshit. The link from the Sherdog forums is a good read and really sums it up.
The great Blahino --> http://genovapedia.org/blahapedia.html
You brought up king to show me how it worked so not sure why you are saying I am not getting something.
Actually go back and reread what I wrote. I used it as an example. The shooting was already OVER, but IF AT THAT POINT one of the officers ran up and began beating the suspect THEN you would have a situation where the other officers would have to stop him.
But that didn't happen. I was simply giving you an example where Officer A would be expected and required to stop Officer B.
The guy claimed he trained at the "farm," then back tracked and claimed he was a mercenary. He claimed to have conducted snatch & grab ops in the middle east, then back tracked and claimed to have worked in Mexico and South America during the "powder wars." He has some of the most outlandish delusions of grandeur I have ever seen. He contradicts himself left and right, and when caught outright in his lies he refuses to acknowledge anything and indirectly pleads the fifth. He also steals Will Brink's whole demeanor for his videos. Watch Will (Will check this guy out if you have not) and then watch the great Blahino. If he would just admit he lied, he would probably regain some followers.
And now things start to make sense. Obvious lie. Everyone knows retired CIA guys go directly into the gun show circuit, it's the only acceptable cover. Saying you went from CIA to Mercing around is a basic rookie mistake.
I know I'm not supposed to really post this in the open but there is also a ranking structure.
CIA - Gun Show SALES. This way you can discuss "real world" merits of a given firearm even though most actual CIA guys don't get much trigger time.
Special Forces - Bodyguards / Firearms instructors. Even though their primary skill is training indigenous personnel as force multipliers once retired they usually become bullet catchers for low level cretins and teach CCW classes and such because that is sort of like teaching a Montagnard how a weapon works.
Navy SEALs - Drifter. Due to their extensive training SEALs aren't allowed to actually have an occupation after retirement. This makes it easy to disappear them and relocate when they have to smoke random gang bangers at gas stations. Some eventually settle down to write fiction once they have wandered the land like David Carradine from "Kung Fu" for an acceptable amount of time.
Delta - Video game consultant. Sure they could probably do other jobs, but the moment they retire out the lucrative gaming market is as attractive to them as a porn apprenticeship would be to a kid in middle school. This is why live action video games have become so amazingly accurate and cool. Delta guys did it, and if you are really a sharp gamer you can find all the secret SOCCOM "easter eggs" they wrote into the code.
NSA- Gunshow beef jerky salesmen. It's mandatory, these are the most dangerous people on earth. You don't screw around with a beef jerky salesman. You simply take your free sample, stand amazed and loudly proclaim "THIS IS THE BEST GODDAMN BEEF JERKY I'VE HAD IN MY ENTIRE LIFE AND I'VE HAD THEM ALL!!!!!!!" You then buy a minimum 10 lb. order with promises of regular repeat business. Then he will let you live. You don't need to take his card, he already knows who you are, where you live and what your cell phone number is. Monthly allotments of beef jerky will simply arrive at your door on a monthly basis and you will notice the amount has been deducted from your bank account even though you never provided that information or even authorized the transaction. The important thing to do is just eat the damn beef jerky. This guy can put a hit team together composed of drifters, gun show salesmen, video game consultants and firearm instructors that can make it like you never existed.
The great Blahino --> http://genovapedia.org/blahapedia.html
He claims black belts in two styles. I'd be interested in who he trained under and what systems he holds yudansha grades in.
He claims black belts in two styles. I'd be interested in who he trained under and what systems he holds yudansha grades in.
He refuses to say what styles and under whom. His reasoning is PERSEC, yet boasts about being a merc and hunting armed men. HAHAHA!
He refuses to say what styles and under whom. His reasoning is PERSEC, yet boasts about being a merc and hunting armed men. HAHAHA!
Now we have wandered into the truly absurd. John Titor had more credibility.
Now we have wandered into the truly absurd. John Titor had more credibility.
We might want to be careful speaking of such things, according to the great Blahino we are committing espionage. Though we could always use the excuse of not having intent.
Actually go back and reread what I wrote. I used it as an example. The shooting was already OVER, but IF AT THAT POINT one of the officers ran up and began beating the suspect THEN you would have a situation where the other officers would have to stop him.
But that didn't happen. I was simply giving you an example where Officer A would be expected and required to stop Officer B.
Then give an example of what you are referring to instead of an example where the officers supported each other.
Who said anything about that being the equivalent of? I said its the same principal. By your logic every time a use of force occurred, other officers on scene would have to decide whether or not it was a good shoot and decide whether or not to take the officer into custody. It doesn't work that way, there has to be an investigation first before any action is brought against that officer.
You were the one who said it was equivalent. I have said officers at the scene had no problem with it and they may very well take an equivalent shot today.
Go find a dictionary and look up hind sight and reasonable. Then go read Graham V Connor. Either educate yourself, or stop playing your stupid games.
Why would hind sight apply when everything was done by the book?
The guy claimed he trained at the "farm," then back tracked and claimed he was a mercenary. He claimed to have conducted snatch & grab ops in the middle east, then back tracked and claimed to have worked in Mexico and South America during the "powder wars." He has some of the most outlandish delusions of grandeur I have ever seen. He contradicts himself left and right, and when caught outright in his lies he refuses to acknowledge anything and indirectly pleads the fifth. He also steals Will Brink's whole demeanor for his videos. Watch Will (Will check this guy out if you have not) and then watch the great Blahino. If he would just admit he lied, he would probably regain some followers.
That's nice. Now link us to the post where I made this claims or directed anyone to my Youtube channel. Gonna be tough since I never made such a statement and don't have a Youtube channel, but feel free to go through the motions for what ever reason you think you have going for you.
Eurodriver
07-22-16, 05:47
I can't imagine a life being so absolutely sad that someone has to make that kind of shit up. I also don't understand the desire to focus on the military. The military sucks balls.
I mean, I was a semi pro basketball player in Europe when Kevin Durant came down on my ankle and broke my foot during the summer league. But I only tell girls that; I didn't make a website about it. And it's way more effective than "blah blah oorah Iraq blah Hajis" - what's the appeal?
Whiskey_Bravo
07-22-16, 07:08
I can't imagine a life being so absolutely sad that someone has to make that kind of shit up. I also don't understand the desire to focus on the military. The military sucks balls.
I mean, I was a semi pro basketball player in Europe when Kevin Durant came down on my ankle and broke my foot during the summer league. But I only tell girls that; I didn't make a website about it. And it's way more effective than "blah blah oorah Iraq blah Hajis" - what's the appeal?
Now see guys. That's creative and the kind of initiative we are looking for.
Why would hind sight apply when everything was done by the book?
So you're just trolling?
Maybe it has said already, I admit I didn't read all 13 pages, maybe this was just the cliche misunderstanding of "THERAPIST" vs "THE RAPIST"?
So you're just trolling?
Not at all. Don't see any issue with this.
"I was afraid subject was going to fly away like Superman and had to keep him grounded for Officer Safety"
Some serious disinfo going around about post shoot investigations. Until an officer is read his Garrity rights, he doesn't have to say or do anything and can have an attorney present. Post Garrity he must answer questions without counsel.
It is recommended that an officer has at least one sleep cycle before making a statement. Recommended but not required.
Either way, none of the cursory evidence points to reasonable nor prudent.
At the end of the day he shot an unarmed man in broad daylight with a rifle.
That's a tough sell.
Garrity rights? Are you saying there is a separate warning for LEO before answering questions?
The way I understand it:
1) Officer being investigated is read his Miranda warning
2) Officer asserts his right to remain silent
3) Supervisor of higher rank than the investigated officer orders him/her to answer questions
The information gathered under duress is not admissible in a court of law.
Do you know of an agency that has a separate form and/ or procedure for "Garrity rights"?
hahahaha I googled it OH MAN what a sad pathetic life some people must live !!
really do think folks like that need to be checked in for safety of others !!!
FREAK !!!!!!!
I don't know if thats him or not and I'm not going to assume it is. However, google "Jason Blaha fake" and start down the rabbit hole of bullshit. The link from the Sherdog forums is a good read and really sums it up.
Garrity rights? Are you saying there is a separate warning for LEO before answering questions?
The way I understand it:
1) Officer being investigated is read his Miranda warning
2) Officer asserts his right to remain silent
3) Supervisor of higher rank than the investigated officer orders him/her to answer questions
The information gathered under duress is not admissible in a court of law.
Do you know of an agency that has a separate form and/ or procedure for "Garrity rights"?
You Garrity the back up/cohorts.
Essentially, you protect them from termination and prosecution in order to hammer the person whom you suspect of wrongdoing.
Grant you it is complicated and everyone thinks of it as "Miranda in reverse".
Every governmental body employs Garrity rights/warning.
I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on the matter, but there is more to an internal investigation than many would think.
ETA Once Garrity has been read you must cooperate and you can still be fired but not prosecuted.
Failure to cooperate and invocation of silence strips you of your Garrity immunity.
This is not counting basic Miranda. I am not a lawyer and it confuses me. There are far more scholarly people who are clearer on the matter than I.
Essentially, it is better to be out of work than in jail.
Best I can explain it.
KalashniKEV
07-22-16, 09:02
Okay let me run it down from the top -
1) Everyone in the United States has the right to avoid self-incrimination, it's called the 5th Amendment...
Check
2) Because officers are usually taking action as an agent of a governmental entity, their employer (the department), in order to conduct an investigation, can compel them to make a statement as part of the job. Used to be talk or be fired and then you are on your own.
BUT, do they get to hang out in jail until they feel like talking? Probably Officer "I don't know" slept in his bed that night. Give him the chance to hang out behind bars with some of the people he "works with" until he is arraigned and can post bond. That's what would happen to me if I shot an unarmed person.
3) So, if the agency wants a more detailed statement they give the guy the Garrity warning and they can learn enough to go on until the officer has spoke to an attorney and had a sleep cycle.
They don't want a more detailed statement. There are only two possible outcomes for the agency- "OK" or "totally ****ed." It is in their rational self interest to get the minimum blocks checked to justify the shooting and move on. In the case of the 77th RSC soldier who was killed by NYPD ESU, they planted a cordless drill they found in the trunk of his car in his lap and said- as they approached the vehicle, he reached under his seat and pulled out a cordless drill. The passengers in the car who witnessed the shooting (one of whom was an NYPD Officer) never knew anything about a cordless drill until it was FOIA'd by the family. The investigation was already complete though, because they determined that they were not guilty of any wrongdoing. That officer is still collecting pay and benefits.
4) Long story short, officers waiting to make statements for the criminal investigation are simply exercising the Constitutional Rights available to all.
OK, let them sit in the jail available to all while cooking it up (or just make a statement). They're already going to get a better lawyer from their union than CCW-Safe or the yellow pages are going to get Joe Citizen.
5) In regards to this - I've still got to say- that's a bunch of baloney - you are not up on the science, or the techniques of interview and interrogation, so your response is understandable, but incorrect.
No way, man. I watch a ton of cop shows. My favorite one is this one:
"For detectives, the clock starts ticking the moment they are called. They usually sit around eating donuts for the first 48 hours, so everybody can remember all the correct facts, that help everybody out, and keep things moving."
Hahaha... oh, wait... no... the chance of solving a homicide or arriving at the truth drops by over 50% after 48 hours have passed...
Now I understand where this "48 Hour Rule" came from!!!!!1!
They most definitely used science to come up with that one.
In the case you noted, what was the payout to the family? I bet it was substantial, and still, inadequate to compensate for the loss of a loved one.
It was $2M, but it came from the taxpayers of Fairfax County- not from the pension fund of the government employee union the killer belonged to.
That's like a dog biting a kid, and to remedy the situation the owner walks over and karate kid crane kicks his little brother in the face.
Are you going to trust that dog's owner as a responsible adult in the future?
Hell No.
Are you going to revenge it?
...
Apply some basic counterinsurgency theory- the people are ruled by an oppressive government not only taxes them into the grave to pay for bullshit, but kills innocent (or really guilty-of-fantasy-football/ untaxed ciggs/ etc) people with impunity... and you pay salary and benefits for those who conduct that service... and when they screw up they keep their jobs and benefits... and when they screw up, you get screwed again, hard?
I'm surprised it has taken so many years of winding the spring for things to let go, honestly.
Anyway, the only answer is a fundamental transformation of the way we conduct policing.
That's nice. Now link us to the post where I made this claims or directed anyone to my Youtube channel. Gonna be tough since I never made such a statement and don't have a Youtube channel, but feel free to go through the motions for what ever reason you think you have going for you.
This is a major sidetrack, but needs to be addressed- are you Osama bin Blah-den, the internet-famous illuminati reptilian assassin who lives off a CIA hush money stipend you earned in the "Powder Wars?"
Hahaha... oh, wait... no... the chance of solving a homicide or arriving at the truth drops by over 50% after 48 hours have passed...
Now I understand where this "48 Hour Rule" came from!!!!!1!
They most definitely used science to come up with that one.
It was $2M, but it came from the taxpayers of Fairfax County- not from the pension fund of the government employee union the killer belonged to.
That's like a dog biting a kid, and to remedy the situation the owner walks over and karate kid crane kicks his little brother in the face.
Are you going to trust that dog's owner as a responsible adult in the future?
Hell No.
Are you going to revenge it?
...
Apply some basic counterinsurgency theory- the people are ruled by an oppressive government not only taxes them into the grave to pay for bullshit, but kills innocent (or really guilty-of-fantasy-football/ untaxed ciggs/ etc) people with impunity... and you pay salary and benefits for those who conduct that service... and when they screw up they keep their jobs and benefits... and when they screw up, you get screwed again, hard?
I'm surprised it has taken so many years of winding the spring for things to let go, honestly.
Anyway, the only answer is a fundamental transformation of the way we conduct policing.
This is a major sidetrack, but needs to be addressed- are you Osama bin Blah-den, the internet-famous illuminati reptilian assassin who lives off a CIA hush money stipend you earned in the "Powder Wars?"
I never made any such claims and as we have seen the person(s) making the allegation can't link us to the post they claim exists. If you are legitimately concerned with side tracks you really need to take it up with them.
This is why I'm not in the FOP, nor will I ever be.
Actually, I agree that all settlement should be taken from pension funds.
Because all they do is raise taxes to pay people off.
A lot of 'rules' are more recommendations than actual rules.
Speaking for myself, I am personally very disillusioned. I feel like the Cuban Colonel from Red Dawn many days.
sidewaysil80
07-22-16, 09:41
It was $2M, but it came from the taxpayers of Fairfax County- not from the pension fund of the government employee union the killer belonged to.
You're incorrect yet again on the facts of this case. $1M came from the self funded insurance fund of Fairfax County Police. The other $1M came from a statewide insurance fund that is funded from all counties. Furthermore, the pension fund you speak of is funded by the county not the union. The payout created no additional tax burden or increase on residents.
You're incorrect yet again on the facts of this case. $1M came from the self funded insurance fund of Fairfax County Police. The other $1M came from a statewide insurance fund that is funded from all counties. Furthermore, the pension fund you speak of is funded by the county not the union. The payout created no additional tax burden or increase on residents.
That is wild. Where did they get the funds for the self funded insurance?
sidewaysil80
07-22-16, 10:25
That is wild. Where did they get the funds for the self funded insurance?
It's an insurance policy they pay into it from grants/budget, when something like this happens they use said insurance policy. It's incorrect to say the taxpayers of the county paid $2M. The insurance policies paid out the money, not the residents. Thats like if you get into a car accident and your insurance pays for the damages, sure you pay the premium each month but you didn't pay out the lump sum for damages.
That's nice. Now link us to the post where I made this claims...
I can't speak for you but Jason Blaha made the claims around the 2:00 min mark and it gets even crazier after that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOmVJmzF8LI
It's an insurance policy they pay into it from grants/budget, when something like this happens they use said insurance policy. It's incorrect to say the taxpayers of the county paid $2M. The insurance policies paid out the money, not the residents. Thats like if you get into a car accident and your insurance pays for the damages, sure you pay the premium each month but you didn't pay out the lump sum for damages.
I can't speak for you but Jason Blaha made the claims around the 2:00 min mark and it gets even crazier after that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOmVJmzF8LI
Where did the grants/budget funds come from that are used to pay the self insured insurance? What are the premiums like on self insurance?
sidewaysil80
07-22-16, 10:57
Where did the grants/budget funds come from?
Are you Jason Blaha?
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-22-16, 10:59
And now the police union is reporting that the cop was aiming for the white guy and hit the black guy. So all this time it wasn't the cops who were racist it was the guns...
sidewaysil80
07-22-16, 11:17
And now the police union is reporting that the cop was aiming for the white guy and hit the black guy. So all this time it wasn't the cops who were racist it was the guns...
I'm at a loss as to what benefit they would think comes from releasing that information. The only thing I can think of is they are trying to get ahead of the Black Lives Matter/racist cop debacle in hopes that is leads to less media coverage.
WickedWillis
07-22-16, 11:19
And now the police union is reporting that the cop was aiming for the white guy and hit the black guy. So all this time it wasn't the cops who were racist it was the guns...
Complete negligence is a fireable offense, correct? And this Officer was also SWAT?!?!?
KalashniKEV
07-22-16, 11:23
And now the police union is reporting that the cop was aiming for the white guy and hit the black guy. So all this time it wasn't the cops who were racist it was the guns...
The toy truck could have maybe might been a gun. Gottagohomeatheendoftheshift!
Better to shoot first and then find out what he's holding.
DIALLO! should be their war cry.
(I'm not trying to list off an encyclopedia of Police killing citizens for no reason at all and then not being held accountable to any professional standards... but after shooting 41x at an unarmed person for no reason, they all walked off scot-free in the Diallo killing. Also, one of the officers, Kenneth Boss, had previously shot and killed an unarmed person. Where is he today? Promoted to Sergeant. Still in uniform collecting salary and benefits. Still providing a shining example to his fellow officers and subordinates of no accountability, and promoting a culture bankrupt of standards and discipline.)
sidewaysil80
07-22-16, 11:34
The toy truck could have maybe might been a gun. Gottagohomeatheendoftheshift! Better to shoot first and then find out what he's holding.
In all seriousness, have you read and/or are your familiar with the SCOTUS rulings on use of force? It's not the same as the military by any stretch and its worth educating yourself on the matter. I'm not saying that in regard to this incident, but based on your comments it seems either you disagree with or don't understand some of the landmark cases that define use of force in LE capacity as apparent by you chastising it with the whole "gottagohomeattheendofshift" thing.
Furthermore Diallo was a massive screw up, but it was before my time. However, there are plenty of bad shoots in my opinion (i.e. John Greer, Walter Scott, Akai Gurley, Sal Culosi, Eric Harris), however the statutes/existing laws don't always translate those bad shoots into jail time. It's not because of the thin blue line cover up either, its just the requirements that have to be met for certain charges are not met nor is there enough evidence to support them.
Are you Jason Blaha?
Clearly stated no several times.
So where do grant and budget funds come from?
sidewaysil80
07-22-16, 11:55
So where do grant and budget funds come from?
Splitting hairs or trolling...I'm not entertaining either one. Clearly your only intention is to deflect from my point.
Splitting hairs or trolling...I'm not entertaining either one. Clearly your only intention is to deflect from my point.
You said the payouts weren't via tax payers. I am just curious where the funding for the grants and budgets came from.
Not trolling at all and I most certainly do not want anything deflected from you.
And now the police union is reporting that the cop was aiming for the white guy and hit the black guy. So all this time it wasn't the cops who were racist it was the guns...
This is what I suspected. We still don't know that the officer's perception of a threat was at the time he discharged his firearm.
The investigators should work diligently to find the person who made the initial 911 call and interview them.
This is what I suspected. We still don't know that the officer's perception of a threat was at the time he discharged his firearm.
The investigators should work diligently to find the person who made the initial 911 call and interview them.
Probably from a trac phone with no callback number.
You Garrity the back up/cohorts.
Essentially, you protect them from termination and prosecution in order to hammer the person whom you suspect of wrongdoing.
Grant you it is complicated and everyone thinks of it as "Miranda in reverse".
Every governmental body employs Garrity rights/warning.
I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on the matter, but there is more to an internal investigation than many would think.
ETA Once Garrity has been read you must cooperate and you can still be fired but not prosecuted.
Failure to cooperate and invocation of silence strips you of your Garrity immunity.
This is not counting basic Miranda. I am not a lawyer and it confuses me. There are far more scholarly people who are clearer on the matter than I.
Essentially, it is better to be out of work than in jail.
Best I can explain it.
I investigated a few officer involved shootings and never read anyone a Garrity warning. I am not aware of any agency that uses a Garrity warning. Once you read someone Miranda, Garrity vs New Jersey applies if they are ordered by a higher ranking officer within their own agency to answer the investigator's questions.
If you could provide the name of at least one agency that has a formal Garrity warning and/or document, I would appreciate it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOmVJmzF8LI
Uh, I am speechless. Merely watching the videos that Blaha must have taken and posted himself, I am struck by several things:
1. M4C is NO PLACE for anyone like him.
2. He reflects very poorly on all responsible gun owners.
3. Unfu$&ingbelievable. I mean seriously, I can't even believe what I just watched.
Whiskey_Bravo
07-22-16, 15:18
And now the police union is reporting that the cop was aiming for the white guy and hit the black guy. So all this time it wasn't the cops who were racist it was the guns...
That is almost a worse excuse. He was from what it looks like about 30 feet or so away, we will call it 50 and he was aiming at the autistic kid but hit the black guy in the leg? WTF. Take his rifle and pistol away. There are autistic jihadis in Iraq with 40 year old rusty AKs that are a better shot than that.
Whiskey_Bravo
07-22-16, 15:32
It's an insurance policy they pay into it from grants/budget, when something like this happens they use said insurance policy. It's incorrect to say the taxpayers of the county paid $2M. The insurance policies paid out the money, not the residents. Thats like if you get into a car accident and your insurance pays for the damages, sure you pay the premium each month but you didn't pay out the lump sum for damages.
I can't speak for you but Jason Blaha made the claims around the 2:00 min mark and it gets even crazier after that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOmVJmzF8LI
WTF did I just watch? Is he serious or just trolling people? lol, "exotic game hunting" he stacks bricks. Recruited before 17? "If you come at me, you better be a stone cold killer, I haven't flinched in 20 years" FFS his name is Blaha. Also, why does he have stuffed animals in his videos?
Holy absolute crap....... That was one of the best things I have ever seen.
Speaking for myself, I am personally very disillusioned. I feel like the Cuban Colonel from Red Dawn many days.
I think there are quite a few people out there who feel like that. I know most days I do.
I investigated a few officer involved shootings and never read anyone a Garrity warning. I am not aware of any agency that uses a Garrity warning. Once you read someone Miranda, Garrity vs New Jersey applies if they are ordered by a higher ranking officer within their own agency to answer the investigator's questions.
If you could provide the name of at least one agency that has a formal Garrity warning and/or document, I would appreciate it.
I don't know what to tell you. I was Garritized once and it was all because of someone else being investigated. I was just there, told all I knew, done. Nothing more came of it to me.
I'm surprised this is even a question. Most CALEA Accredited agency have a Professional Standards/Internal Affairs.
My Experience: I was sat down by a ranking officer and ranking investigator. Doofus X did such and such. Doofus X is under investigation. Records have me at that location. Large crowd, lots going on. I am advised of Garrity and told lack of cooperation can lead to bad things. I was further advised of OCGA on False Statements. I am also advised that should I say anything incriminating against myself it cannot be used. I was recorded and basically said Doofus X was on scene but out of field of view. I was speaking with/managing 10 people at my part of the scene and did not speak to Doofus X the whole time.
I am asked if there is anything I wish to add. I say no. I am advised if anything more is needed, I will be contacted.
I say 10-4 and get 10-8.
Nothing else is requested of me and I don't care enough about Doofus X to ask if he got his ass skinned.
I am NOT the Garrity go to guy. I just know what happened to me and others. I figured this was common knowledge.
Please contact/e-mail CALEA. They love keeping people in the loop and standardizing practices
http://www.calea.org/
I believe Phoenix PD has a Garrity after shootings. I haven't been in one so I can't confirm for sure. But I do know that after a shootinguy you are required to give an interview and walk through with our Profesional Standards Bureau and its requirement is directly linked to employment.
I can ask some coworkers if there is some sort of actual "Garrity warning" or paperwork.
I believe Phoenix PD has a Garrity after shootings. I haven't been in one so I can't confirm for sure. But I do know that after a shootinguy you are required to give an interview and walk through with our Profesional Standards Bureau and its requirement is directly linked to employment.
I can ask some coworkers if there is some sort of actual "Garrity warning" or paperwork.
HBO (Help a Brother Out) please. Garrity isn't always to do with shootings. It can range from minor verbal reprimand to Federally Fooked.
All I know was I was recorded and signed an interoffice memo stating I had spoken to SGT A and LT B about Doofus X and that I had been advised of Garrity and cooperated fully.
A few weeks later I got an IO memo that my assistance in investigation was no longer needed. No further action to be taken.
I do not recall a paint by numbers form. Nor do I know if one exists. This was some years back and I try to stay out of the Principal's office as they say.
CALEA really should give T2C the hook up if there is a paint by numbers form.
I've dealt with CALEA countless times. No forms, unless one was developed since I retired.
In our area, with one exception, departments request an outside agency to investigate an officer involved shooting.
.............
Back on track. It will be interesting to learn what was said by the officers and witnesses on scene when the gentleman was shot. The media has a nasty habit of picking and choosing inflammatory bits to air and print long before we get the whole story.
Clearly stated no several times.
So where do grant and budget funds come from?
You can deny being the great Blahino, but your posts here are in the same manner as your replies to people on the book of face and the tube of you, as well as your "informative" videos.
"You better not be a PAWG."
WickedWillis
07-22-16, 17:36
You can deny being the great Blahino, but your posts here are in the same manner as your replies to people on the book of face and the tube of you, as well as your "informative" videos.
"You better not be a PAWG."
Phat ass white girl?
Phat ass white girl?
Haha. It is how the almighty secret squirrell pronounces pogue (POG).
Then give an example of what you are referring to instead of an example where the officers supported each other.
Sadly for you, it doesn't happen too much in real life and it isn't national news when it happens.
But want to know what is very, very common? Guys who are completely FOS on the internet.
And now the police union is reporting that the cop was aiming for the white guy and hit the black guy. So all this time it wasn't the cops who were racist it was the guns...
Sure, because I always handcuff the victim I'm trying to save from his alleged, after accidentally shooting the victim. WT actual F, over? Seriously, this is best excuse the PBA could come up with? Note to self, never allow the PBA to speak for me in a post shooting scenario. :rolleyes:
You can deny being the great Blahino, but your posts here are in the same manner as your replies to people on the book of face and the tube of you, as well as your "informative" videos.
"You better not be a PAWG."
I can deny it easily since I don't have a clue who he is nor do I care.
Interesting that you don't question sidewaysil80 when he informs us that taxpayers aren't funding a government agencies self insured insurance plan.
Sadly for you, it doesn't happen too much in real life and it isn't national news when it happens.
But want to know what is very, very common? Guys who are completely FOS on the internet.
Why is it sad for me that officers support each other?
Do you mean making the statement that taxpayers aren't the source of funds for a government self insured insurance plan?
Sure, because I always handcuff the victim I'm trying to save from his alleged, after accidentally shooting the victim. WT actual F, over? Seriously, this is best excuse the PBA could come up with? Note to self, never allow the PBA to speak for me in a post shooting scenario. :rolleyes:
The fog of war maybe?
Why is it sad for me that officers support each other?
Do you mean making the statement that taxpayers aren't the source of funds for a government self insured insurance plan?
Why are you so obtuse? Do you enjoy mucking up otherwise interesting and potentially informative threads with pedantic and frequently unimportant questions. Is it a learned trait or just your nature?
Why are you so obtuse? Do you enjoy mucking up otherwise interesting and potentially informative threads with pedantic and frequently unimportant questions. Is it a learned trait or just your nature?
If someone is claiming that tax payers aren't the cash for a government insurance plan shouldn't that be disinformative?
Although I will say that attempting to make that claim is very interesting.
If someone is claiming that tax payers aren't the cash for a government insurance plan shouldn't that be disinformative?
Although I will say that attempting to make that claim is very interesting.
Its only interesting in a thread about government spending and funding. In a thread about an OIS, its akin to a toad wearing a purple fez. Move on man, just move on... :rolleyes:
Its only interesting in a thread about government spending and funding. In a thread about an OIS, its akin to a toad wearing a purple fez. Move on man, just move on... :rolleyes:
Perhaps except that he claimed tax payers weren't on the hook for an OIS.
Perhaps except that he claimed tax payers weren't on the hook for an OIS.
There is no except, there's just accept, which you should do. :(
You're incorrect yet again on the facts of this case. $1M came from the self funded insurance fund of Fairfax County Police. The other $1M came from a statewide insurance fund that is funded from all counties. Furthermore, the pension fund you speak of is funded by the county not the union. The payout created no additional tax burden or increase on residents.
It's an insurance policy they pay into it from grants/budget, when something like this happens they use said insurance policy. It's incorrect to say the taxpayers of the county paid $2M. The insurance policies paid out the money, not the residents. Thats like if you get into a car accident and your insurance pays for the damages, sure you pay the premium each month but you didn't pay out the lump sum for damages.
He gave you an answer JasonB1, but obviously you don't like/agree with what you were told.
Perhaps except that he claimed tax payers weren't on the hook for an OIS.
Tell you what, since you're obviously not going to get the answer you're all worked up and looking for then do us all a favor and use your Google Fu and find the answer you're seeking. Report back to us with your finding once you do. Take your time, PLEASE!
Once you hit China, one usually stops digging.
On Topic, I'll wait until the full findings, but it does look bad.
sidewaysil80
07-22-16, 19:02
I apologize as I didn't intend to derail this thread. RazorBurn posted my statements which clearly explain my point. I'm sure old Blaha will make some snarky comment or zinger but I'm not going to keep beating a dead horse.
SeriousStudent
07-22-16, 19:16
JasonB1 - get out of this thread and don't come back.
Perhaps except that he claimed tax payers weren't on the hook for an OIS.
Eff me, why do I try to provide lucid answers for anyone.......
You are playing semantics.
Of course the taxpayers are on the hook, the premiums that go into the risk pool/self-insurance fund/whatever, are paid by the governmental entities, which derive their money from taxpayers, or in some cases seizures. So yes, in the strictes sense the taxpayers are on the hook, especially if the governmental entity doesn't belong to a risk pool. In much the same way when a storm damages your roof, you are, in the same manner, on the hook for the damages, even though the insurance paid for it, because you paid the insurance premiums.
So yes, the taxpayers were on the hook.
I tempted to ask you if you were dropped on your head as a child, but fear that you were, which is something you had no control over and therefore would be rude and unfeeling.
Best wishes,
Dan
ETA: Serious Student, you are an accurate reference of my typing speed. LOL
man I feel bad for you bro. typing all that.
At least you burned some finger calories and.. well...I still care, man
If you guys want a laugh, go watch his Jason Blaha Firearm Enthusiast channel. It is like if someone video taped the gun shop myth thread. If you call him out on the myths, he deletes the comments. It is epic.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
07-23-16, 10:53
edited, will discuss via PM
Now that we're back on topic,can anyone explain why you'd handcuff and not provide immediate critical care to the man you were allegedly saving from an assailant? I get establishing scene control, but doing this to a compliant, unarmed man you deem to be a potential victim you just accidentally shot, doesn't seem to fit the "scene control" mould. :confused:
Now that we're back on topic,can anyone explain why you'd handcuff and not provide immediate critical care to the man you were allegedly saving from an assailant? I get establishing scene control, but doing this to a compliant, unarmed man you deem to be a potential victim you just accidentally shot, doesn't seem to fit the "scene control" mould. :confused:
Are you wondering why a guy who shot someone for unknown reasons to then act in a rational manner??
Now that we're back on topic,can anyone explain why you'd handcuff and not provide immediate critical care to the man you were allegedly saving from an assailant?
Aside from the fact the officer's thoughts may have been focused on, 'I am sooooo screwed...'
One of the weaknesses I've seen in police training is there is not a lot of inter-discipline training.
I'll use something I experienced at a course I attended - we were working on pretty basic vest index shooting, and I was doing what I call a strike and cover as I was drawing. An added advantage of the technique is it gets your hand and arm out of the way - making it harder to shoot yourself. One of the instructors came over to me and said 'I like that but we can't teach it because it is a DT skill.'
Same organization invited me to sit on a steering committee for vehicle stop curriculum development at one point I brought something up about positioning and liability reduction and was told essentially the same thing 'can't teach that, it is a legal subject.'
So, the firearms instructors tend to focus on the firearms solution, the DT instructors tend to focus on the hands on solution, the crime scene guys tend to focus on evidence identification, preservation and collection. As a result shit like rendering aid gets lost in the weeds.
For people responsible for dealing with everything from cats in trees, multicar pile ups, complicated domestic quarrels, armed robberies, and terrorism; You get treated like you cant walk and chew gum at the same time.
A LOT of it is the whole "liability" standpoint where people will just lock up and freeze in fear of doing something not on their cheat sheet or flow chart.
When/If the SHTF, I just say "They can bill me" and do whatever I need to.
It hasn't won me many friends, that attitude.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.