Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Gemini on March 24, 2014, 04:11:06 PM
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC9lHoZwfjM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/24/james-boyd-killed-by-cops_n_5021117.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/24/james-boyd-killed-by-cops_n_5021117.html)
We've had a few threads like this recently, and I thought this was an interesting case.
Watch the vid and see for yourself. Which do you think this is: Murder or Duty?
Personally I feel like the police were kind of justified in doing something drastic because the guy was waving a knife around (even though he was nowhere near them), but their reaction seems way overboard.
It's like they were playing at being SWAT rather than a regular PD.
-
There is no way this is going to end well. So, let me preface this thread by saying, if anyone decides they are above the forum posting rules, they will get instantly suspended from the board for no less than four weeks. That includes anyone quoting a forum rule violation as well.
I edited the title to make it less than 78 characters long.
-
Murder on Duty
it's one of the hazards of the job.
-
Duty.
Why should a police officer take a risk of possible injury when a suspect won't comply with audible instructions?
-
Duty.
Why should a police officer take a risk of possible injury when a suspect won't comply with audible instructions?
Because the job is to "protect and serve", protect not intended to mean yourself first.
Cops shouldn't say they put their life on the line for us every day if they won't "risk" possible injury.
-
Skuzzy, I don't think this is going to end well at all. It's likely going to end up worse than my thread did. :noid
-
Duty.
Why should a police officer take a risk of possible injury when a suspect won't comply with audible instructions?
Risk of possible injury? So some slow-moving idiot who brandishes a couple of knives 50ft away, and has just been flash-banged, is a threat to someone with an assault rifle?
Cops should be considered strictly liable in assaults and shootings. Burden of proof should be on the officers to show they used all reasonable care prior to using force.
As a society we entrust police officers to keep the peace, by holding them to lower standards in the application of force we allow them to exploit the people they are duty bound to protect far too easily. Power corrupts, you must have strong checks to that power to protect the people from that corruption.
-
Skuzzy, I don't think this is going to end well at all. It's likely going to end up worse than my thread did. :noid
well since you jinxed it, I say if it doesn't end well you should get a 1 week suspension. :)
-
Murder.
-
Murder, I am afraid.
The LAPD officers who shot up the newspaper delivery ladies' pickup fired more rounds in that one incident than the police did in Germany in all of 2010. Iceland police recently were mourning the first time that an Icelandic police officer had ever shot and killed a suspect.
I think there a wall of us vs them has been built between American police and the American population. I think that in a nation that claims to prize liberty so strongly we are much to blaze about government taking fellow American's most significant thing, their lives. We the people allow shoddy white washed "investigations" to excuse these things over and over and it happens from liberal San Francisco to conservative rural areas in Kansas.
I don't have a solution, but I see the problem.
-
Albuquerque officers have shot more people than the NYPD, a department serving a city 16-times larger, since 2010, according to ProgressNow.
-
Duty.
Who's to say that he didn't have a gun on him? Just before he was shot he had his hands to his sides; was he still holding the knives? He must have been, because he still had the knife in his hands once he was on the ground. Had he complied with the officers this wouldn't have happened.
Risk of possible injury? So some slow-moving idiot who brandishes a couple of knives 50ft away, and has just been flash-banged, is a threat to someone with an assault rifle?
In most states, that K9 is considered an officer. If you were to assault the K9 you could be charged with assault on an officer. After the flash-bang, they moved to attempt to make physical contact with the subject. It looks as if the subject still had the knives in his hands and was attempting to hold his ground against the K9. Thats when the K9 Officer pulled the K9 back and the officers took appropriate action in their eyes.
Just a simple thing they teach in most police academies; the 21 foot rule. At 21 feet someone can get to you before you can un-holster your weapon, get a sight picture and pull the trigger. The officers were well within the 21 feet after the flash-bang.
-
You know what they say about the perfect world with German mechanics, French cooks etc. Well they say British cops, I've seen another video like this one http://youtu.be/cX5CPx4RKWw (http://youtu.be/cX5CPx4RKWw) but this was the first one I found. Different cultures do different things, all I can say is from what i have seen, if my son or daughter had a psychotic break for some reason I would much rather it be in britain than Oregon.
-
horrible misunderstanding IMO. More training and more potential consequences may be necessary in the use of deadly force. That said I'm not a cop and I haven't 'walked a mile in their moccasins' so it's kind of wrong of me to criticize because I was not there.
-
I will say that in the last few years this sort of stuff is in the public eye a lot more, and also due to that seems to be happening a lot more often too.
The LAPD a year or two ago, chasing after that armed and dangerous x-cop I think he was? Anyhow, the LAPD accidentally shot up a truck of the same model and color in the dark, containing 2 older aged Asian ladies - wrong race, sex, and everything else, a terribly bad shoot. Also, enroute to that very same bad shooting, the LAPD encountered another unlucky soul driving the same make and model vehicle - they rammed him at full speed and unloaded a bunch of rounds into the truck, luckily missing the occupants. I've never heard about what punishment if any happened over that, as the LAPD policy is to keep the punishment classified. The police likely weren't fired from the articles I read. The 2 woman in Torrance mistakenly shot cost the taxpayers 4.2 million dollars, and 40,000 for a new truck, the initial peace offering from the city, which the lawyer didn't like, hence the 4.2 mil. Also, the 2 woman stopped doing the delivery job, saying it was "dangerous"...no kidding. They now clean homes for a living - get that.
It's a tough job, no denying it, and I won't bash the police here or anywhere else for that matter, but brutal mistakes like the former make it a hard thing sometimes to support. I do understand the police were out of their element, being hunted by one of their own, and having lost an officer to the culprit prior to the "bad shoots".
-
well since you jinxed it, I say if it doesn't end well you should get a 1 week suspension. :)
BUT, YOU said the word "jinxed". Not suppose to to be the first one to say "jinxed". So you'd be joining me for that week vacation. :lol
-
I will say that in the last few years this sort of stuff is in the public eye a lot more, and also due to that seems to be happening a lot more often too.
The LAPD a year or two ago, chasing after that armed and dangerous x-cop I think he was? Anyhow, the LAPD accidentally shot up a truck of the same model and color in the dark, containing 2 older aged Asian ladies - wrong race, sex, and everything else, a terribly bad shoot. Also, enroute to that very same bad shooting, the LAPD encountered another unlucky soul driving the same make and model vehicle - they rammed him at full speed and unloaded a bunch of rounds into the truck, luckily missing the occupants. I've never heard about what punishment if any happened over that, as the LAPD policy is to keep the punishment classified. The police likely weren't fired from the articles I read. The 2 woman in Torrance mistakenly shot cost the taxpayers 4.2 million dollars, and 40,000 for a new truck, the initial peace offering from the city, which the lawyer didn't like, hence the 4.2 mil. Also, the 2 woman stopped doing the delivery job, saying it was "dangerous"...no kidding. They now clean homes for a living - get that.
It's a tough job, no denying it, and I won't bash the police here or anywhere else for that matter, but brutal mistakes like the former make it a hard thing sometimes to support. I do understand the police were out of their element, being hunted by one of their own, and having lost an officer to the culprit prior to the "bad shoots".
Frenchy,
It wasn't even the same model. They shot up a blue Toyota Tacoma when the guy was driving a Nissan Titan (green IIRC) and they also shot up a Honda Ridgeline as I recall. The Toyota was the one I referenced earlier, two women delivering papers, one in her 20s and one in her 50s. Both survived by some miracle.
-
I left work yesterday to go to lunch. I had my work radio clipped to my pant's front pocket. we used two way radios to communicate at work as I work at a steel mill. there was a sheriff's car in the parking lot not a biggie as it is a popular restaurant. I didnt even know I had the radio with me until the female officer yelled to stop and put my hands up. I looked around wondering who she was yelling at and what was happening. then I noticed she had her weapon out and was aiming it at me. I just froze and raised my arms, my friend didnt even notice anything and kept walking with her yelling at him to stop. when she noticed that it was a work radio and not a weapon she holstered her weapon.
after about 1/2 an hour and every fricking officer in the city showing up, well almost. the officer said she was sorry as she thought my radio was a weapon. I went inside picked up my cold food and went back to work and felt I needed a shower to change my underwear.
semp
-
BUT, YOU said the word "jinxed". Not suppose to to be the first one to say "jinxed". So you'd be joining me for that week vacation. :lol
bah :old:
-
murder
-
Not going to respond to the ancilary situations that some others brought up as they have zero bearing on the original situation.
The guy was obviously coherant, able to put sentences together and well aware of the situation. Given that situation there is no reason to believer he was anything near or resembling helpless or incapable of using the knives. Having one in each hand kind of gives an inkling as to his probable intent. One knife, there may have been some doubt, two indicates he is prepared and intends to use them.
The tape (first youtube link only as I don't trust anything from huff post to be unedited for pure bias intent) is incomplete and we were not given the original call. I don't know if anyone else had been threatened prior to PD arrival.
First off let me state something. There is no requirement that an Officer subject themselves to death or injury prior to taking action. Anyone who thinks there is some kind of tv-land requirement to let the suspect actually attempt to inflict death or harm first is being unrealistic. I have some other words but that would cross skuzzy's line. There is a definite line between an acceptable risk and being stupid in taking a risk. Going up and trying to remove knives from an individual who is prepared, with two out in hand and ready to use them is not taking a risk, it is being beyond stupid. Anyone who thinks it isn't shouldn't be out unsupervised or around moving machinery.
This individual had plenty of opportunity to drop his weapons and comply. He did not. After the flash bang he moves to intercept the dog with a knife before the handler pulled the dog back. That confirmed intent to harm. He removed other options at that point. He was on higher ground in terrain that precludes a quick and precise movement to contact with him to try and have a physical removal of the knives. I would have preferred a taser be used first given the situation however the PD may not have that option. A taser is not universally issued nor approved for use by all law enforcement agencies. Had he been tased and dropped to the ground he could have been instructed, again, to drop the knives then cuffed, had he complied. Had he not complied then the only other option was still deadly force. Tasers are also not a fail proof method of gaining compliance. They are usually effective but not always and anyone who trusts it to work 100% of the time will be disapointed and maybe end up dead.
Anyone who wants to have someone with a knife or knives taken out, hand to hand in a similar situation is welcome to do so on their own. Responding units will be there later to call the morgue truck for you should you fail or an ambulance if you are lucky. That type of action is neither advised nor required by any law enforcement agency or military unit in combat. It makes for great tv and movie scripts where they use rubber knives and everyone follows a script but not in real life. One should never confuse the two.
-
I find it funny in a sick way that they opted to use bean bags to make him drop the knives twice after he had already been shot. and he was on his stomach and unable to move.
semp
-
Sorry,
The officers could have backed away. They were in no critical danger at the time. There is caution, and then there is complete devaluation of human life and the authority we've defacto given to police in the US is marching towards devaluation.
-
What bothered me about the situation was that the dog was sent in at all against someone with knives, when the situation was clearly under control. That was pretty careless. Bean bags, pepper spray, tasers, etc. could've been tried before forcing the issue. Knives vs. assault rifles.... I think they had other options if they were a bit more patient.
Obviously, I wasn't there, but I believe cooler heads could've prevailed in this one. Tragic and preventable, yes. Outright murder, no.
-
Murder...
Coogan
-
Here is a much clearer video of the incident:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DngOL6LokN4
From this it looks to me like the cops only fired when the dog was in danger of being hurt by the guy wielding his knives.
However, he had just been flashbanged...I don't think it's cool to shoot someone for not complying with instructions after they have just been attacked with a device designed to confuse and disorientate the victim.
The guy was obviously a dangerous, unbalanced person and something needed to be done. But it does seem like better training and less trigger-happy police officers could have made this situation come out a lot better - i.e. without a corpse.
-
Im getting tired of this crap on this forum.
-
That was murder.
-
Seemed a tad forward on the draw.. but until you have been in those situations.. you never ever really know where "that line" is until it's too late.. Duty
-
I'd opine it's murder, but not in the first degree. More like manslaughter / excessive force.
-
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".
-
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
-
Good thing they went with the live rounds first. Those beanbags have been known to cause lasting injury.
-
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..
-
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.
-
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.
-
What are the yellow things on the one guy's back at around 2:30?
(Not trying to stir the pot, genuine question.)
-
But did they have to shoot him in the butt with the beanbag after he was down? That was crossing the line.
ack-ack
-
If the guy had just dropped the knife he would still be alive today. His fault completely.
-
I have not watched the videos, but if he was a dirty crimminal good riiddence to bad rubbish :old:
Nothing like watching scum being owned on youtube :)
Its hard living in the ghettoe :rofl
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
If SWAT4 taught me anything, an arrest is 10 and a kill only 1.. If only these gun toting chaps were gamers :old:
-
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.
-
If after non-compliance the fellow vocally threatened to kill the LEOs (which evidently led to the several hour standoff) then I would think this was not merely a case of resisting arrest by a squatter. I'd think the LEOs would be forced to arrest him at some stage.
http://krqe.com/2014/03/21/apd-officer-involved-shooting-was-justified/
If he did vocally threaten to kill them, then picking up a bag, etc, and especially showing knives if he did so, did not seem to be a particularly good idea. If the LEOs on the scene knew he had a criminal background, including knifings and assault on an officer, then they would certainly be on edge. The fellow apparently had a history psychological problems and does not seem particularly on the ball in the video clip, with regrettable results.
The final moments of the attempted arrest, on the other hand, do seem to be a bit of a cluster to me.
-
The final moments of the attempted arrest, on the other hand, do seem to be a bit of a cluster to me.
^My take on this. It appeared to me that right until the point of opening fire the situation was reasonably well in hand, and heading towards the subject being subdued, as far as I can ascertain the use of force was spontaneous and excessive. It's apparent that the officers are equipped with non lethal solutions, bean bag rounds etc. Whilst I was not there, and can't know what they perceived it did not appear that the level of force used was warranted.
-
The victim might well have been suffering from mental disease such as schizophrenia (more prevalent in homeless people). This really amplifies the limitations of the 'obey verbal instructions or force is used' approach.
-
You guys really think Barney Fife, or the Keystone Cops for that matter, were just conceived out of thin air? It's a universal problem. Always has been. The camera pretty much tells the whole story. That's why it's so easy to convict a real citizen when they get caught on tape. The same holds (or should) for anybody breaking the law...or their sworn duty.
-
Just a simple thing they teach in most police academies; the 21 foot rule.
Nah, you've just been watching 'Justified'.
-
I can only remember one time (about 20 years ago) where police shot and killed someone in Japan. He was surrounded and being beaten by a gang. The Japanese police face people with knives all the time.
They use sasumata.
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l31/Rolex53/swat_zps5d15cea6.jpg) (http://s92.photobucket.com/user/Rolex53/media/swat_zps5d15cea6.jpg.html)
These are even in schools and I recall an incident where a whacko with knife was disarmed and held down by the principal and two women teachers using sasumata until the police arrived. No one was hurt.
The police also have shields.
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l31/Rolex53/379px-Japanese_non-lethal_police_weapon_zpsc624f2db.jpg) (http://s92.photobucket.com/user/Rolex53/media/379px-Japanese_non-lethal_police_weapon_zpsc624f2db.jpg.html)
These things have been around for centuries.
-
Most folks don't understand the use of force continuum. The more militarized law enforcement becomes the more danger you can be in. The bottom line is that in this day and age if you disobey an order from a LEO no matter what the order you are playing with your life.
I am not going to form an opinion from just the video. I have investigated many shooting deaths, mostly involving Detroit officers, some are righteous some are not, but one thing is for sure, they are very complicated investigations.
shamus
-
No Tazer? :headscratch: or did I miss something? What happened to trying all the non lethal ways first?
The perp did move when he was facing all those guns and may have been going for a weapon. I don't have a problem when he was taken down by gunfire but why keep firing into the wounded body? Then your handy dog trainer must let the mutt play with his dead leg. Good JOB! :rolleyes:
Camping is a crime! Get off the spawn or you shall be killed! (http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q81/luiscanifru/emoticons/bomb.gif) (http://media.photobucket.com/user/luiscanifru/media/emoticons/bomb.gif.html)
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
I just need to add this as a topic one cannot bring to this board. Even when warned, people still cannot resist violating the forum posting rules.
Rule #4 has been modified. Wish there was another way.