Murder or Duty?

[Maverick]

Some of you experts need to try it.

Backing off and going away isn't an option, then if the guy had gone and gutted someone those same experts would be screaming the cops should have "done something".

[-aper-]

1) They flashbagged him
2) They released the dog on him
3) The poor guy was scared by the dog and  dropped his bags preparing to defend himself from the dog with a knife.
4) The dog suddenly turned away from the poor guy and followed one of his bags.
5) The guy decided that it is a good chance to escape from the furious dog and turned away too going either to run/walk away or lay on the ground (it doesn't matter as he did not try to attack anybody)
6) At that moment he was shot in the back with a few rounds.

100% murder

[Scherf]

Good thing they went with the live rounds first. Those beanbags have been known to cause lasting injury.

[craz07]

It's never perfect like a movie.. the suspect will pick up your cues and either back away or quickly take a stab at you..  based on your movements.. there is no agreed upon merge here like the DA.. this is real life stuff.. you could potentally not go home to your family today because "your jugular vein just got slashed wide open" in a matter of a stumbling millisecond.. another pisser day in new mexico..

[Gman]

Some of you experts need to try it.

Backing off and going away isn't an option, then if the guy had gone and gutted someone those same experts would be screaming the cops should have "done something".

This I agree with completely.  While instructing at Sig Sauer Academy, we used the electronic knife simulators, cranked up to give you a good crack when it contacts the body anywhere.  It was all L/E officers involved in the initial training with these electric knives.  Being armed with these versus others armed with sim or airmunition pistols, it quickly became evident that surprise attacks are almost impossible to defend against in these situations.  Even the old "21 foot" adage for knife attacks can be extended out even to further distances when the assault with a knife isn't expected, or comes from an unseen angle. .  I had no chance versus the knife armed guys if I had my back to them at 7 yards, none at all, they always struck me, even when I tried anticipating their attacks.  Any knife armed threat has to be taken as seriously as any other type of weapon.  If the guy in the OP video had a rifle in his hands, would we even be talking about this? 

Things are easy to pick apart in hindsight, but anytime a knife is in play, or any weapon for that matter, I'm of the opinion that the person wielding it has surrendered his rights by putting others in jeopardy, and anything that happens to him, regardless of how unjust it looks, is pretty much on him.  Like anything though, there are exceptions.  Risking  getting quips from Maverick, a recent incident here in Canada is such an example, when an officer shot a guy armed with a knife.  I can revert to my first statement regarding this happening, tragic as it was, as it was a kid with mental diseases/issues.  The officer then proceeding to methodically put 11 more rounds into him while he laid on the ground motionless, one shot every second or two - that is what I define as an "exception".  The situation in the OP was far different than the Canadian case and I'm not comparing the two in any way, just using the local Canadian one as an example of what an excessive shoot is considered to be up here by the law enforcement that arrested and charged the officer responsible.

[SmokinLoon]

Oh the examples of armchair quarterbacks this forum produces.

We have attorneys, LEO's, combat experts, k9 experts, and Disciples of Gandhi all so quick to come out of the woodwork.  Not to mention quite the fisherman in the O/P.

I say it ended badly for all involved. The LEO's gave the perp plenty of chances to comply with their lawful and legal orders and the perp chose to not comply.  As I said in the previous thread, I'd like to think I'd not have fired so quickly but I wasn't there. I'm surprised they didn't try a tazer sooner, but then again the 21ft rule is cutting it close when he has the advantage of height.  Oh the joys of hind sight.

Mind your manners, folks.  
  

[Scherf]

What are the yellow things on the one guy's back at around 2:30?

(Not trying to stir the pot, genuine question.)

[Ack-Ack]

But did they have to shoot him in the butt with the beanbag after he was down?  That was crossing the line.

ack-ack

[SilverZ06]

If the guy had just dropped the knife he would still be alive today. His fault completely.

[zack1234]

I have not watched the videos, but if  he was a dirty crimminal good riiddence to bad rubbish

Nothing like watching scum being owned on youtube

Its hard living in the ghettoe

[saggs]

Story said that the confrontation began when police questioned the man about camping on the property illegally (read it on TTAG).

How that escalated into what we saw on the video is the root of the problem.  The guy was basically guilty of squatting, I understand that the man was non-complaint... ... but so what.  I'm all for use of deadly force in defense of serious injury to yourself or others, so yeah, in the moment those officers took the shot that they had to.  

But my question is WHY?  Why did they allow the situation to escalate?  Why where those officers closing distance in an aggressive posture?  Why did they hit him with a flash-bang? why did they loose the K9 on him?  All these actions are doing is forcing the obviously "not all there" perp into a "flight or fight" response.

Let's face it, the odds are that a homeless crazy whino squatting on rural property is not going to present a deadly threat to anyone (at least not till he moves).  They've got rifles and binoculars, why not back off and watch/wait him out from a safe distance.  If it takes a cruiser parked there watching him overnight big deal. Who knows but that the guy was drunk or high on something, perhaps when he sobers up he would be more compliant.  The story stated that the shooting took place 2 hours after initial contact.  2 hours seems pretty impatient to me.  I mean at least give the man half a day to think on his situation, and let the cops do the same thing.  They should be thinking about how to de-escalate the situation even if it took much more time.

Like I said in another thread, too many cops today default to intimidation and show of force as their first and often only tactic.

[GScholz]

The victim was a homeless man and the crime the police where trying to arrest him for, and killed him over, was "illegal camping".

If that sounds absurd, it's because it is.

I guess real criminals are getting too hard to catch.

[Gman]

It's a sad event regardless of how or why.  I was never a cop, but instructed with officers in our classes, and our company had a training contract with the police in Jordan for a year back around 2006.  I've heard many stories and a lot of anguish over using lethal force vs civilians in tough call situations.  My father who was an officer for 35 years lost his partner Neil Cunningham to a gunshot, and it changed him for the worse to this day, but not as badly as seeing a friend of mine during high school kill himself while in a confrontation with police.  It's just an awful thing for everybody involved, officers, family, friends, victims, everyone.

 Again, hindsight and the internet now ensures that all of us can put an oar in the water of somebody else's ocean, all of us can be guilty of it, typically the folks who decry others for being couch commandos or posting opinions are the first ones to do so themselves - something all of us have done on occasion I'm certain.

[LCADolby]

If SWAT4 taught me anything, an arrest is 10 and a kill only 1.. If only these gun toting chaps were gamers

[rpm]

A bit more info: APD Chief calls it Justified shooting, walks out of press conference. He made false statements about using less than lethal force before deadly force. The opposite is clearly seen in the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=N9pREjgaLbg

The officer that shot first was hired with a promise to the media that he would not be carrying a weapon due to his questionable past. Now less than a year later, he's on a SWAT team and there's a dead man by his hand. They are making false statements to cover the officers. Even though he had a record of violence, he attacked nobody. He was shot in the back while complying with being told to get on the ground by an officer that was never supposed to carry a gun. This whole thing stinks to high heaven.