View Full Version : Cop Accidentally Shoots Homeowner...SIX Times.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/crime/2009/10/09/pn.cop.shoots.homeowner.cnn
Geez...sucks for the Homeowner. Amazing that the Officer got cleared from the Dept. Shot six times....ouch. Hopefully they get $6 million. Good thing nothing happened to the kids. Is it me or does she seem very insincere?
its was on local news here and when I heard it made my skin crawl !!!!
no way should he have been cleared !! I have tons of respect for LEO but their are bad eggs in every group of people and things like this are what help identify them !!!!
also makes me wonder about the guys ability to use a gun ? 6 shots and amazing the guy lived !!! is/was this luck or bad shot placement or just reality ?? another subject I guess :)
LockenLoad
10-10-09, 13:38
they clear this guy and he is back on the street unbelievable:mad:
Well, keep in mind that it was an accident....and it happened only six times. Including the shots in the back and when he was bleeding out on the ground. :rolleyes:
NCPatrolAR
10-10-09, 18:24
The department will settle out of court. From all the stories I've seen, the officer that fired wasnt given a description of the homeowner so I can see why he might have fired when he encountered an armed person inside the residence.
The department will settle out of court. From all the stories I've seen, the officer that fired wasnt given a description of the homeowner so I can see why he might have fired when he encountered an armed person inside the residence.
According to the wife's account, she told the officer's her husband was in the house with a gun on the criminal. The first of six shots was in the back and no warning or verbal command was ever given. I too have been trained to keep firing until the bad guy goes down, but this cop continued to fire once his victim went down.
If a homeowner had been firing like this at the bad guy then he would be in jail for excessive force and probably a lot worst.
Heavy Metal
10-10-09, 18:54
The department will settle out of court. From all the stories I've seen, the officer that fired wasnt given a description of the homeowner so I can see why he might have fired when he encountered an armed person inside the residence.
Fog of War.
NCPatrolAR
10-10-09, 19:06
According to the wife's account, she told the officer's her husband was in the house with a gun on the criminal. The first of six shots was in the back and no warning or verbal command was ever given. I too have been trained to keep firing until the bad guy goes down, but this cop continued to fire once his victim went down.
I'm skeptical of the wife's now stated account; especially when her attorney is sitting right there beside her.
He didnt give a verbal command....big f'n deal. I've never seen it said that LEOs have to give a warning before shooting someone. When it comes to rounds in the back, that doesnt mean as much as people try to make it out to be.
John_Wayne777
10-10-09, 19:17
It's a sucky situation, but sometimes these things happen. Off-duty or plain clothes officers have been shot by their uniformed brethren on a number of occasions. Police responding to a 911 call often have precious little information and what they do have is often wrong. To an officer on scene a man with a gun looks like a threat...even if that man may happen to be the good guy.
This is why it's critical for folks to figure interaction with the police responding to a call for help as part of their plan.
I will be coming out with my new line of tactical response t-shirts, bathrobes and jackets for the armed homeowner.
http://www.customink.com/designs/proofs/14522684-3116448/back.jpg
:D
TUNNEL RAT 33
10-10-09, 20:54
thats why we are taught to gain advantage of cover and utilize loud and clear verbal commands - either way its another terrible situation
The department will settle out of court. From all the stories I've seen, the officer that fired wasnt given a description of the homeowner so I can see why he might have fired when he encountered an armed person inside the residence.
also rumor has it you can hear the cop say 'OH NO we F***ED up" on the 911 tapes
other rumors that sound to be true is the detectives went to the gun dealer where he bought his gun and tried to have the dealer say the gun was ilegal ? "
also suposedly he was drug outside and put in the car and driven away even after being identified as the home owner !
other rumors are they tried to pin that he had previous drug problems in other states but they messed up when they tried to pin one on him from a state he never live in !!
there are lots of rumor flying around that they are trying to cover themselves and messed up !!!!
again these are rumors ? maybe the 911 tapes when released will reveal more to the first rumor though
I would think police would be taught not to enter a house and open fire without identifying the person they are shooting first !!
or is it OK for cops to come into your house and just fire at whoever they want ????
if anything they should take more caution in a house !!! especially when they do not know which one the homeowner is !!!!!
in AZ quite a few home owners might be armed so police should not come in shooting and asking questions later
I know quite a few people here are not to happy about it !!! and feel like it was out of line and again !!! its one bad egg and wont let it spoil the police but they need to weed this guy out !!!!!
He didnt give a verbal command....big f'n deal. I've never seen it said that LEOs have to give a warning before shooting someone. When it comes to rounds in the back, that doesnt mean as much as people try to make it out to be.
Shoot first and ask questions later...got it! :D
Can you school me on what it means when a LEO shoots a homeowner in the back? It would seem to indicate to me that the officer was not being threatened by the homeowner. Although he was still talking to the 911 operator before and after the shooting. Lucky he didn't shoot his mouth off too. :rolleyes:
NCPatrolAR
10-10-09, 21:19
so I guess its OK for cops to come into your house and just fire at whoever they want ????
Where did I say that?
if anything they should take more caution in a house !!! especially when they do not know which one the homeowner is !!!!!
They certainly do need to be cautious.
they wont fire on the punk running away from a stolen car
You cant generally shoot someone over a property offense.
this is wrong IMHO !!!!
I can tell by your three exclamation points that you are really serious about this. You are certainly entitled to your opinion and no one is saying otherwise.
FRom what I remember, the subject that the homeowner was covering had just ran from officers at a shots fired call. The homeowner then calls, stating that he has heard gun shots and things went down hill from there. The stories I read also stated the officers entered the house searching for the suspect and encountered (and engaged) the homeowner in under a minute. Bad situation all around, but I dont think it marks the officer as a "bad apple".
NCPatrolAR
10-10-09, 21:21
Shoot first and ask questions later...got it! :D
Can you school me on what it means when a LEO shoots a homeowner in the back? It would seem to indicate to me that the officer was not being threatened by the homeowner. Although he was still talking to the 911 operator before and after the shooting. Lucky he didn't shoot his mouth off too. :rolleyes:
FYI, the officer doesnt have to feel threatened. If the officer felt the person with the gun posed a lethal force threat to someone else then he can certainly engaged the armed person.
NC patrol :) I edited my post a bit :)
took out the car thing and added a bit that I forgot to say trying to get our little one ready for bed here so my brain is frazzled
but also I never said you said it was OK :) more just stating that seems to be the position in this case so sorry if you felt that I accused you :) I write poorly :) thanks to public schools !!! so again sorry about makiing it sound that way :)
I do think the guy is trigger happy ? rush into a house not know who is who and start firing with the first shot into the back of the guy !
so bad ? maybe not BAD!
but trigger happy ! YES and a trigger happy cop responding to a house call makes up the story of a shot up owner
I really feel for the cops your hands are so tied often and you have the toughest job out there but also have the restraint is a KEY thing and this guy sadly seemed to lack that restraint
my brother is a prosecutor and has this attitude you cant put one good guy in jail so sadly if you have to let a bad guy or two go to avoid someone good being put away you will get the bad guy again ! but the good guy will never get another chance
cops should be the same way when entering someones home they should take double caution before opening fire since they dont know and it is someones private property
Just curious.....where did the perception that that officer knew he was shooting the homeowner come from?
It seems to me that the officer mistook the home owner for the suspect. An armed suspect. There had also been reports of shots fired.
It is tragic for both sides. Unfortunately, Law Enforcement is not too forgiving of mistakes.
Years ago, a local deputy shot a teenage girl who, after a foot pursuit, spun around on him holding a hair brush. People screamed that she was "only" holding a hair brush. Yes. The Deputy did not fire on her because she had a brush.
It is easy to arm chair quarterback these incidents. An armed homeowner holding a suspect is considered a good guy, not a suspect. That sad thing is, this situation sounded very dynamic and the shooting sounds more akin to fratacide, not homicide.
Hindsight people. All the armchair QBs, :rolleyes: . Call me when you've been there.
Don Robison
10-10-09, 22:44
Hindsight people. All the armchair QBs, :rolleyes: . Call me when you've been there.
+1
While this is a tragic incident; IMHO it wasn't criminal. Seems to be a "perfect storm" situation; suspect was running from cops, homeowner calls in shots fired, cop sees man with gun and shoots.
Reverse roles a bit and put the gun in the criminals hands and the officer didn't shoot until after the criminal shot the home owner and the cop would be second guessed about why he didn't shoot the bad guy sooner.
I dont think he was running ? he was in his house
also this is supposed to be from a transcript of the 911 call ! the lawyers have
About three minutes later, with the 911 call still recording, an officer was picked up saying "We f**cked up," and then Lilly saying, "I f**cking shot this guy ... f**cked up."
About six minutes into the call, Coutts was recorded as saying "Was the gun down here?" Lilly's response was recorded as "I don't know. I heard screaming and I (inaudible) fire."
"Don't worry about it," Coutts was recorded as saying. "I got your back."
this could end up being a situation like when those cops tried to frame up that girl for causing a accident that the cops did and they got busted for it ? cause it was on tape ??
again we wont know for sure until the 911 tapes are released ?
its a bad situation for sure
This reminds me a little bit of that situation up in PA where a dispatcher didn't feel like informing officers that a person they were about to eject from his mothers house was armed (after the suspects own mother made this clear.) The bad guy killed three of the four cops who initially showed up.
thopkins22
10-11-09, 00:19
I don't understand how someone stating that they f'd up after realizing they shot a good guy is incriminating in any way.
There was a video/audio recording from an A-10 where there was miscommunication and it resulted in some Brits getting shot up in a convoy. Upon being told, they stated over and over, similar statements to the one this guy supposedly made.
Terrible mistake, but nothing I've seen or heard has it anywhere near the magnitude of a cover up type thing.
Is CNN the only one with the recording? Where's the rest of it CNN? I'd like to here the whole thing before I pass judgement.
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-11-09, 01:26
After scoring the winning touch down, the running back exclaimed "I f'cked up!"
The surgeon came out of the ER and said "I f'cked up, it was a complete success."
Or maybe I'm just f'cked up.
I guess I f'd up, I played it again and couldn't find anything about those comments. Pretty confident CNN would've exploited that one and the other hear-say comments. Particularly after reporting there was no indication of attempt to cover anything up. Some of the FACTS I CAN see are 911 caller reports unknown shots fired outside house, then intruder is in the house. Then wife claiming to tell 3 officers responding, while she's outside in the yard, that her husband has a gun and don't shoot him. Do they read her mind that he belongs there? If the caller said on the tape he had a firearm, CNN would've exploited that too, I'm sure. If he f'd up, he f'd up, but CNN is far from being unbiased.
Bolt_Overide
10-11-09, 04:40
yet another shining example of a thread full of people who are willing to put forth full opinions and judgements on situations they have extremely limited knowlege of.
Im glad that none of you will ever be in a position to affect my life in any meaningful way. Please do your best to get out of jury duty if youre ever called.
We support cops when they brutalize the brutal.
Well, I can certainly understand (now) how the cop was cleared by his department.
A buddy of mine is a deputy and he pulled his Glock on a homeowner this past weekend (domestic dispute) when the homeowner told him to go f*ck himself. The homeowner (unarmed, but upset) backed down once he was looking at the business end of a Glock 17. I wonder what would have happened if he hadn't....
Yes, accidents/mistakes happen, but that doesn't mean that there aren't consequences. Some poor girl recently bumped into my car when her foot slipped off the brake. The state trooper still wrote her a ticket...
A buddy of mine is a deputy and he pulled his Glock on a homeowner this past weekend (domestic dispute) when the homeowner told him to go f*ck himself
Just so there is no mistake of fact; an angry homeowner telling you to "go **** yourself" is never justifiaction to draw your weapon. There must be some other articulable fact to justify the use of force (firearm display), other than the insult and belligerence.
I like this site, and I know that cop bashing is not tolerated, but when moderators are looking past the facts just to make it look ok, it is sad and should not be tolerated either.
Multiple calls to 911, the guy was on the phone with 911 when he got shot, the wife was outside when police arrived, they drag him outside when he has bullet wounds to the head area. All wrong. I wont even get in to shooting him in the back or while he was on the ground.
All they are asking for is 6 million? I would add a few zeros in there, if the guy is permanently disabled.
There is not one person here saying what happened is OK, not one. It's a tragedy not matter how it ends up. What is being said is that people who have no idea what actually happened and do not have all the facts have no business arm chair quarterbacking this shooting. What they are saying is there is more to it than what was initially reported. Before we string up these cops maybe we should have all the facts and make an educated, unbiased decision. That should work both ways.
rrpederson
10-11-09, 10:30
to all the other officers out there: to the rest of these people, we will always be wrong. we are supposed to be psychic, know the future, the past and all in between. we are supposed to make perfect decisions all the time, every time.
to everyone else: is it tragic, yes. is it terrible, absolutely, but it is irritating when u people are out there making judgements and decisions on events that happened in the past, events that u were not even present for. u watched this on the news from the comfort and safety of your home. like another guy said, post up when u have been there and done that.
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-11-09, 10:50
"Lesley Arambula, the lawsuit claims, was interrogated for hours and kept in a squad car with her children with no word on her husband's condition.
At the hospital, Arambula was questioned by detectives immediately after coming out of surgery and told, according to the lawsuit, that the intruder would be cited and released because he was found to be unarmed.
"Tony was incredulous at their conclusion and asked the police if they had looked under Matthew's bed. The police assured him that they had done so and completed a thorough investigation, but promised to go back and look again," the lawsuit stated.
The intruder's gun was found under the boy's bed during a subsquent search. "
http://abcnews.go.com/US/phoenix-family-lawsuit-cops-shot-homeowner-intruder/Story?id=8756441&page=3
Hadn't heard that one yet.
What is Castle Doctrine in AZ? Sounds like you'd be better off putting down the armed intruder and reholstering before the cops get there. Assuming the cops could find the BG's (the intruder for those unclear) gun, eventually.
At the very least, I want that board that cleared this shooting be the same board that is used when a civilian shoots a BG.
And to throw fuel on the fire, 9mm? :D
I'm not an LEO - just an interested observer. Therefore, a couple of observations...
1) Did the wife tell the 911 dispatcher that her husband was armed, had the suspect at gunpoint, where they were in the house, what her husband was wearing, and what he looked like? That's a lot to remember in a stressful situation, but it would have helped identify the players.
2) If this information was available to the dispatcher, was it relayed to responding officers?
3) Did the wife meet the responding officers and again relay the information that her husband was armed, that he had the suspect at gunpoint, what her husband looked like, what he was wearing, and where he was?
4) Did the husband make any sudden furtive movement when responding officers challenged him? He had ability and opportunity to use deadly force. Did a startled response from him add jeopardy to the list?
5) Did the responding officer(s) enter and open fire on the first person they saw with a weapon?
We are still early into the analysis of what happened, and there is no point in speculating on incomplete data or what transpires as news from the media. I sounds like the police screwed up, and that screw up may or may not have been precipitated by the actions of the husband and/or the inactions of the wife.
Innocent mistake or not, if there was any kind of subsequent attempt to cover up, responsible LEO should be fired and prosecuted.
This is why Mas Ayoob stresses in his LFI classes - there is a greatly increased chance for a mistaken identity shooting when a good guy has a gun and the responding officers do not know who the players are. For that matter, how does the homeowner know that the bad guy he has on the floor is the only bad guy in the house? When responding officers arrive and challenge him, what will his response be?
Mas recommended that, when possible, we have someone meet the responding officers and let them know what is going on, and who is who. Additionally, it would be best if someone known to the good guy can let him know when officers have arrived. He also recommended, when possible, to keep your weapon to protect yourself and your family, but stay put and let the professionals capture the bad guy (but this may not have been an option in this situation).
Cop shoots good guy holding gun, good guy shoots responding cop, it doesn't matter. The wrong person gets shot.
I really don't know what happened. It's likely the players don't know exactly what happened. Tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, time compression, etc, could cloud recollections of events. I also understand that it's one thing to critique with the benefit of hindsight and the comfort of my computer chair. It's far different when it's you holding an assailant at gun point and you hear someone you don't know yell at you to put down that gun.
John_Wayne777
10-11-09, 11:02
I like this site, and I know that cop bashing is not tolerated, but when moderators are looking past the facts just to make it look ok, it is sad and should not be tolerated either.
If you have a problem with a particular moderator or with how the site is moderated, take it up with them via IM.
Don't try some lame call-out in the open. It will end VERY badly for you.
John_Wayne777
10-11-09, 11:04
There is not one person here saying what happened is OK, not one. It's a tragedy not matter how it ends up. What is being said is that people who have no idea what actually happened and do not have all the facts have no business arm chair quarterbacking this shooting. What they are saying is there is more to it than what was initially reported. Before we string up these cops maybe we should have all the facts and make an educated, unbiased decision. That should work both ways.
Agreed...and that's the last word on this topic.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.