3 NYPD detectives acquitted in 50-shot killing

[m21sniper]

3 NYPD detectives acquitted in 50-shot killing

By TOM HAYS, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - Three detectives were acquitted of all charges Friday in the 50-shot killing of an unarmed groom-to-be on his wedding day, a case that put the NYPD at the center of another dispute involving allegations of excessive firepower.

Story continues:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080425/ap_on_re_us/police_shooting

EXCERPT:

Officers Michael Oliver, 36, and Gescard Isnora, 29, stood trial for manslaughter while Officer Marc Cooper, 40, was charged with reckless endangerment. Two other shooters weren't charged. Oliver squeezed off 31 shots; Isnora fired 11 rounds; and Cooper shot four times.

Oliver responded by emptying his semiautomatic pistol, reloading, and emptying it again, as the supervisor sought cover.

The truth emerged when the smoke cleared: There was no weapon inside Bell's blood-splattered car.

----------------------------------

The cop RELOADED AND CONTINUED TO FIRE?

It's amazing there weren't riots and such.

[KFC911]

Just an observation, but 31 shots would be more than one reload.

[The Gaijin]

The thugs that took the stand were the gang that could not talk strait..

The way the NYPD trains one bullet is the same as 100. Basically you don't stop shooting until the other guy stops moving. Mistakes have been made - but the theory is to eliminate the threat.

The driver - the groom to be - had been drinking and might have been too drunk to know they were cops. Him and his friend's had words with someone else (and a gun was mentioned) and might have thought they were getting ambushed. A very nasty neighborhood.

[3.2 CAB]

Being able to fire 31 rounds, with only one mag change, is not unusual with many hi-cap weapons. Glock 17-9mm standard mag holds 17rnds. 2 full mags could be over 31.

[VINMAN]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

It's amazing there weren't riots and such.

Give it time....

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by 3.2 CAB

Being able to fire 31 rounds, with only one mag change, is not unusual with many hi-cap weapons. Glock 17-9mm standard mag holds 17rnds. 2 full mags could be over 31.

Thanks for the correction. I'm used to my .45s and assumed most 9mm were 14 or so...

[djmcmath]

I seem to recall this story. The groom and his friends were coming out of a seedy joint in a bad part of town. The cops were under-cover investigating the goings-on at said joint. They told the groom and co. to stop, or some-such, and apparently forgot they weren't in uniform. Groom and co. decided they were in trouble and went for the car. The cops decided the "bad guys" were trying to get to their weapons and killed everyone.

Bad situation, iirc. Seems like 31 rounds is quite a few to figure out that nobody's moving down-range, but then, I've never wielded a weapon in anger, so I don't really know. I'd be interested to hear the viewpoint of an actual police officer on this one. I suspect most of the rest of us are just whistlin' dixie, per se.

Dan

[The Gaijin]

Originally Posted by djmcmath

I seem to recall this story. The groom and his friends were coming out of a seedy joint in a bad part of town. The cops were under-cover investigating the goings-on at said joint. They told the groom and co. to stop, or some-such, and apparently forgot they weren't in uniform. Groom and co. decided they were in trouble and went for the car. The cops decided the "bad guys" were trying to get to their weapons and killed everyone.

Seedy implies boarded up homes, bums on the street and windswept alleyways.. Just a little diffent. Busy neighborhood - but this was 4:00AM..

More like drunken party wants to get back into bar/stripclub and bouncer says: "go home". Followed by talk of a "gun" that cops overhear.

Plainclothes cops confront club-goers at car - cops say they identify themselves, and clubgoers say they did not. (As modern NYPD are not all Irishmen, there is some confusion over who-is-who.) Club-goers go to run over cop and ram police van. Cops open fire and kill driver and wound three others.

[Az911]

Originally Posted by djmcmath

Bad situation, iirc. Seems like 31 rounds is quite a few to figure out that nobody's moving down-range, but then, I've never wielded a weapon in anger, so I don't really know. I'd be interested to hear the viewpoint of an actual police officer on this one. I suspect most of the rest of us are just whistlin' dixie, per se.

Dan

31 rounds may sound like a lot but it's really not, 31 rounds could be fired in 15-20seconds.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by The Gaijin

The thugs that took the stand were the gang that could not talk strait..

The way the NYPD trains one bullet is the same as 100. Basically you don't stop shooting until the other guy stops moving. Mistakes have been made - but the theory is to eliminate the threat.

They SERIOUSLY need to re-evaluate their procedures if this is the case.

Originally Posted by The Gaijin

The driver - the groom to be - had been drinking and might have been too drunk to know they were cops. Him and his friend's had words with someone else (and a gun was mentioned) and might have thought they were getting ambushed. A very nasty neighborhood.

To the contrary, the cops did the ambushing. They used a crash/block vehicle and aggressively approached the vehicle. No weapon was found. Both survivors testified no announcements were made. Why were all three shot multiple times? They all 'looked like they were going for a gun'?

There is no defense for this.

Originally Posted by Az911

31 rounds may sound like a lot but it's really not, 31 rounds could be fired in 15-20seconds.

31 rounds is a lot of rounds when you're not recieving return fire. Imagine standing for FIFTEEN OR TWENTY SECONDS and continually pouring fire into a seated man with no obvious weapon. This is a full mag and a reload firing off the better part of a second magazine. Think about it- one of the other cops shot just 11 times, and the other fired just 3 or 4. Cop A clearly panicked.

[Az911]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

They SERIOUSLY need to re-evaluate their procedures if this is the case.

You think the NYPD can arbitrarily put a number of how many times a cop can fire his weapon at a suspect?

[HardDrive]

Shooting your gun 31 times at an unarmed man sure sounds like someone who is out of control. I can fire my Sig pretty fast, but at a certain point, your not really aiming. I can understand someone unloading their pistol in a panic, but reloading and doing it again? Dunno. I'm thinking the reckless endangerment charge should have stuck.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by Az911

You think the NYPD can arbitrarily put a number of how many times a cop can fire his weapon at a suspect?

Standard procedure in many departments is a double tap followed by a switch to low ready position to observe the status of the target. Many elite US military units also utilize the same tactic.

Does that answer your question?

Originally Posted by HardDrive

Shooting your gun 31 times at an unarmed man sure sounds like someone who is out of control. I can fire my Sig pretty fast, but at a certain point, your not really aiming. I can understand someone unloading their pistol in a panic, but reloading and doing it again? Dunno. I'm thinking the reckless endangerment charge should have stuck.

Agreed. The officers stated they saw ONE man 'reach for something'. That does not grant the right to unload 31 rounds as fast as you can, blasting holes into every occupant of the car in the process.

[3.2 CAB]

Well, cop A may have panicked, but he panicked AFTER, the lead officer had approached the driver of the car, and his cover officer did the same towards the passenger side. The officers testified that they badged and identified themselves to the driver(the dead guy) and the other occupants, as being Police Officers(this was confirmed by witnesses that watch the entire scene play out). The driver was then instructed to turn off the car, and then the Officers ordered all of the occupants out of the vehicle, with their hand up!

The subjects did not comply with the officers instructions(this too, was also verified by the witnesses at the grand jury). The driver chose to use his car, as a deadly weapon to hit the lead officer, and did hit the lead officer. Then the driver tried to make an escape, by ramming his vehicle into the unmarked Police unit. After crashing into the unmarked unit, the driver then threw his car into reverse and while backing at speed, he crashed into the side of a building. After backing into the building, the driver then threw his vehicle(weapon) back into drive, and made another attempt to hit the lead officer again, with his vehicle(deadly weapon). The lead officer dove out of the way of the drivers vehicle, and then the drivers vehicle rammed into the unmarked unit again at even a higher speed than the first time.

When the drivers vehicle had come to a stop, after crashing into the unmarked unit two different times, and hitting the lead officer once out of two attempts to strike him, the lead officer had to dive out of the way of the second strike attempt and the vehicle rammed the unmarked unit and came to a stop. It was then the backup cover Officer saw the occupant, that had said, just moments earlier, "yo, get the gun" the Officer saw that subject reaching down and around the interior of the car, as if he were trying to get his hands on that gun that he had spoken of just moments before(his taped statement, and grand jury testimony backed this up)(But in the actual court trial, he totally changed his statements, but even his "new" statements still did not match with the other subjects, they both gave conflicting testimony in court).

The cover Officer also had seen the lead Officer being struck the first time, and when the second attempt to strike the lead Officer happened, he saw the lead Officer go down, and was now out of view on the street. After this, the subjects car had rammed the unmarked unit again and came to a brief stop. The backup cover Officer, had already seen 2 attempts on the lead Officers life, and he is now watching the passenger reaching around the floor or side of the seats, as looking for a weapon, and the subjects were still not complying to instructions and commands by any of the Officers. This was the start of the firing by the first backup cover Officer. What he had seen was two attempts on the lead Officer, who is now down, and after further commands were ignored. After the gunfire started, Officer 3, got out of the unmarked unit, and joined in the firing along with the lead Officer, who has now made it back up to his feet, and started firing also. Then another Police Unit rolled up just when the firing started, and those two Officers started firing. The firing continued till the perceived threat was neutralized. The total number of rounds fired by the five(5) Officers was 50(but I have read reports of the number being 51rounds fired) The driver was only struck four(4) times and the other occupants were also hit 2 or 3 times.

So, 5 Officers fired 50rnds(maybe 51rnds) in about 15 seconds or so. That really is not a extremely large amount of gunfire, from 5 Officers, for that amount of time. The subjects had exited the vehicle, so they were not just like 3 sitting targets and the Officers just had to point, shoot and hit. Some of the Officers were firing at the same moving subject, while another subject was not sustaining any gunfire as yet. When it was over, the driver, was hit four times, but in vital areas, and died soon afterward. The other two subjects received no life threatening wounds.

How can this happen? When you get involved in a live-fire shootout, I know that many times you are running on instinct, and if asked just after it was all over, how many rounds did you fire? Like other Officers that have been involved in a live-fire contact, you would have to be the Amazing Kreskin, to come up with a number that would be even close, to the true number of rounds fired. I had been involved in several live-fire engagements that had negative outcomes, over my 20+yr career. I can certainly see how this could have happened. One thing that does not sit well with me, is the Officers involved, apparently are not very proficient with their weapons. Had just the 2 or 3 first involvement Officers, been able to place 2 or 3 rounds with good center mass hits. The media would not have had such a heyday and made a really BIG DEAL because of the 50(51)rounds fired.

Being that other than just white Officers were involved, the "Black victim" RACE CARD could not be used before or even after the verdict was read, so they are now using the "BLUE RACE CARD"
Just my $0.07

[Az911]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

Standard procedure in many departments is a double tap followed by a switch to low ready position to observe the status of the target. Many elite US military units also utilize the same tactic.

Does that answer your question?

AHAHAHAHAHAH The comparison of elite US military units and NYPD tactics is the funniest thing I've read all day. Cops are trained to shoot until the threat is neutralized, stop trying to arm chair quarterback a situation that you know very little about.

[Az911]

Originally Posted by 3.2 CAB

Well, cop A may have panicked, but he panicked AFTER, the lead officer had approached the driver of the car, and his cover officer did the same towards the passenger side. The officers testified that they badged and identified themselves to the driver(the dead guy) and the other occupants, as being Police Officers(this was confirmed by witnesses that watch the entire scene play out). The driver was then instructed to turn off the car, and then the Officers ordered all of the occupants out of the vehicle, with their hand up! The subjects did not comply with the officers instructions(this too, was also verified by the witnesses at the grand jury). The driver chose to use his car, as a deadly weapon to hit the lead officer, and did hit the lead officer. Then the driver tried to make an escape, by ramming his vehicle into the unmarked Police unit. After crashing into the unmarked unit, the driver then threw his car into reverse and while backing at speed, he crashed into the side of a building. After backing into the building, the driver then threw his vehicle(weapon) back into drive, and made another attempt to hit the lead officer again, with his vehicle(deadly weapon). The lead officer dove out of the way of the drivers vehicle, and then the drivers vehicle rammed into the unmarked unit again at even a higher speed than the first time. When the drivers vehicle had come to a stop, after crashing into the unmarked unit two different times, and hitting the lead officer once out of two attempts to strike him, the lead officer had to dive out of the way of the second strike attempt and the vehicle rammed the unmarked unit and came to a stop. It was then the backup cover Officer saw the occupant, that had said, just moments earlier, "yo, get the gun" the Officer saw that subject reaching down and around the interior of the car, as if he were trying to get his hands on that gun that he had spoken of just moments before(his taped statement, and grand jury testimony backed this up)(But in the actual court trial, he totally changed his statements, but even his "new" statements still did not match with the other subjects, they both gave conflicting testimony in court). The cover Officer also had seen the lead Officer being struck the first time, and when the second attempt to strike the lead Officer happened, he saw the lead Officer go down, and was now out of view on the street. After this, the subjects car had rammed the unmarked unit again and came to a brief stop. The backup cover Officer, had already seen 2 attempts on the lead Officers life, and he is now watching the passenger reaching around the floor or side of the seats, as looking for a weapon, and the subjects were still not complying to instructions and commands by any of the Officers. This was the start of the firing by the first backup cover Officer. What he had seen was two attempts on the lead Officer, who is now down, and after further commands were ignored. After the gunfire started, Officer 3, got out of the unmarked unit, and joined in the firing along with the lead Officer, who has now made it back up to his feet, and started firing also. Then another Police Unit rolled up just when the firing started, and those two Officers started firing. The firing continued till the perceived threat was neutralized. The total number of rounds fired by the five(5) Officers was 50(but I have read reports of the number being 51rounds fired) The driver was only struck four(4) times and the other occupants were also hit 2 or 3 times.
So, 5 Officers fired 50rnds(maybe 51rnds) in about 15 seconds or so. That really is not a extremely large amount of gunfire, from 5 Officers, for that amount of time. The subjects had exited the vehicle, so they were not just like 3 sitting targets and the Officers just had to point, shoot and hit. Some of the Officers were firing at the same moving subject, while another subject was not sustaining any gunfire as yet. When it was over, the driver, was hit four times, but in vital areas, and died soon afterward. The other two subjects received no life threatening wounds.
How can this happen? When you get involved in a live-fire shootout, I know that many times you are running on instinct, and if asked just after it was all over, how many rounds did you fire? Like other Officers that have been involved in a live-fire contact, you would have to be the Amazing Kreskin, to come up with a number that would be even close, to the true number of rounds fired. I had been involved in several live-fire engagements that had negative outcomes, over my 20+yr career. I can certainly see how this could have happened. One thing that does not sit well with me, is the Officers involved, apparently are not very proficient with their weapons. Had just the 2 or 3 first involvement Officers, been able to place 2 or 3 rounds with good center mass hits. The media would not have had such a heyday and made a really BIG DEAL because of the 50(51)rounds fired.
Being that other than just white Officers were involved, the "Black victim" RACE CARD could not be used before or even after the verdict was read, so they are now using the "BLUE RACE CARD"
Just my $0.07

Remember the enter button is your friend.

[3.2 CAB]

I'm sorry about the novel, but this story is being supported by half truths or zero truth. Just like the media, constantly using the catch phrase, 50 Shot Trial, etc........ They don't want to say a person was shot 4 times, when saying 50 sounds better. So many people, actually think that these subjects were turned into swiss cheese, because they also are saying the the driver was shot 50 times.
SO MUCH BULL$HIT!!!

[sammyg2]

Maybe that lowlife should have stopped when the cops said to stop, instead of pulling out and almost running them over.
If he did that he might have gotten a ticket instead of getting shot.

Bad things happen to stupid people.

[3.2 CAB]

So true.

[HardDrive]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

Maybe that lowlife should have stopped when the cops said to stop, instead of pulling out and almost running them over.
If he did that he might have gotten a ticket instead of getting shot.

Bad things happen to stupid people.

It sure does seem that your chances of getting killed by a police officer go down dramatically by following directions. Not breaking the law helps as well.