Another execution-by-police

[silverwhaletail]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Before this gets lost in the background noise and obfuscation taking hold in this thread, let's remember one very imortant point - these officers knew their suspect had moved out, yet they elected to carry out their commando raid anyway. They had the badges, they had the guns, they had the warrant, and they had total impunity for their actions. They sure as hell were not going to waste that.

No one is arguing the need for this kind of police action. There are certainly violent, well armed sociopathic criminals out there among us. Most are endlessly cycled through a catch and release program brought upon us by the hand wringing ninnies of our society who seem to be more worried about the criminals' childhoods than the victims' futures. God bless the men and women who go after these people in an effort to bring them to justice.

Unfortunately, today, we see these tactics originally developed for and employed only against such violent offenders being missused, overused, by overzealous Rambo wannabes. They appear to live in some sort of fantasy land where a full-on military style assault is appropriate for serving the lowest level warrants or capturing the lowest level petty criminals. And, under our present conditions, they get to play out those fantasies.

That appears very much the case in this particular incident. These cops had no reason to go to that house, knowing their suspect had moved out. Yet they did anyway. They wanted some excitement, had a valid ticket, and were not going to squander it. Their obvious eagerness to play cost an innocent citizen his life.

Great Post. You could be 100% correct in your assessment of this officer, maybe of the entire unit or police department. It sounds to me like you know him, know of him or have some other information that we don't know about. Maybe later you will fill us in on this guy's past.

I will agree with you that there are plenty of cops out there that probably have no business in law enforcement. However, usually guys that have made it through the winnowing process to be selected for tactical units are pretty qualified/proficient. To be on an entry team as opposed to a perimeter team even more so. To be the point man, even more so. But who knows....

But I'll ask that you concede that the Officers whom entered the house had absolutely nothing to do with the decision to hit that particular house. And agree with me that the decision to hit that house was made at the command level, not at the unit level.

[Burnin' oil]

I know a lot of cops and almost all of them are pretty decent guys who would prefer to never draw their weapon, tase someone or even go hands on. The "cowboys" seem to get weeded out. The guys I know on SWAT are the best of the best, intelligent and thoughtful.

[Burnin' oil]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Before this gets lost in the background noise and obfuscation taking hold in this thread, let's remember one very imortant point - these officers knew their suspect had moved out, yet they elected to carry out their commando raid anyway. . . .

Where did you get this info?

[1990C4S]

Originally Posted by Burnin' oil

Where did you get this info?

Post #10. I think....

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by silverwhaletail

Or simply have the people call 911 and ask the dispatcher if the police are at their address.

Golf club dude didn't have that option, now did he?

Originally Posted by silverwhaletail

When that Officer gathered up his Kevlar Helmet, body armor, comm gear and other equipment, just prior to leaving the station on his way to serve that search warrant, it is very likely that he paused, just before he closed the door to his locker.

Looking back at him, inside that locker, was a picture of his wife and his little girl.

I'd be willing to bet that he took an extra second or two before slamming that locker door closed.

Cold Blooded Murderer??? or just a Husband/Dad trying to do a job to the best of his ability?

You tell me...

None of the above.

How about some special forces fantasy harboring coward who is all giddy at the thought of an opportunity to "get some" in an almost no-risk raid? How about a guy who is part of a team that won't call it off, even knowing their suspect has moved out? How about a guy who lied to a judge (or is associated with someone who did), grossly miss-representing their case to a judge, so they could get their no-knock "A" ticket?

[Burnin' oil]

Here is a good article

Police video shows how drug raid turned deadly | The Salt Lake Tribune

[widebody911]

Originally Posted by Burnin' oil

Here is a good article

Police video shows how drug raid turned deadly | The Salt Lake Tribune

The shooting was deemed legally justified.

That's what blows my mind.

[silverwhaletail]

Originally Posted by Burnin' oil

Here is a good article

Police video shows how drug raid turned deadly | The Salt Lake Tribune

I just reviewed the article. I am going to assume that the article is accurate because of the amount of time that has passed between the incident and the publish date.

Good shooting. If the closing distance was only 8 feet, as the article stated, then I would say Very Good Shooting.

The article establishes the following;
-house is a dope house. vehicle and ped traffic all hours of the night. (meth and heroin, both felony drugs in any usable amount)
-Dead Suspect meth user with long history of drug use, per his family.
-Dead Suspect likely small time meth dealer.
-Dead Suspect authorized his house to be used as flop house by dealers.
-Dead Suspect's girlfriend has lived at the house.
-Dead Suspect's girlfriend "moved out???" and back in. and back out. and back in. and back out... (you have to be familiar with the lifestyle that these people live to understand this)
-Dead Suspect advanced on Officer, while holding a deadly weapon in a striking position.
-Dead Suspect is now dead.

The point man was a Sgt. This tells us two things. 1. He was the most experienced, most highly skilled operator in the unit. 2. There was someone of higher rank running the operation.

Also interesting to note that the Sgt had one officer involved shooting in his history and that that shooting was also a good shooting. How do I assume that the prior shooting was clean? Because if it wasn't, you can bet your bottom dollar that The Salt Lake Tribune would be running that history in the second or third paragraph of this story, not on the third page.

And one more thing about my prior rant about "The War on Drugs." The only reason that I think that its stupid is because I live in a 5000 sq foot house on a street with 3 MD's, a fed ex pilot, a retired military officer, a Banker, an architect, a Charter Cable exec, a clothing line owner and a General Contractor. That's it, 12 houses. (the 12th is vacant and for sale).

If I lived in a neighborhood like the one where this shooting occurred, then I probably wouldn't think that "The War on Drugs" is so stupid.

[silverwhaletail]

And one other thing.

Once the point man entered the room, he had to own it. A quote in the article referred to the Sgt as stating that he was trying to "dig the corner." What that means is that when entering the room, his primary responsibility was to own either the left or right side of the room, all the way into the corner. And even though his primary responsibility changed the split second that Golf Club Boy showed up, even with all of the training in the world, he is still going to be thinking about digging "his" corner. In a perfect entry, the team would flow into the room and the 3rd man would pick up the corner that the point man was originally tasked with. If there is an armed suspect in that corner who had decided to shoot it out, then you will have to take those rounds and attempt to overcome that threat with superior firepower.

And he had to do it immediately because the guys following him in all have their responsibilities also. Usually the 3rd guy would be responsible for going long where Golf Club Boy presented himself. But the Point had to assess and confront because Golf Club Boy presented himself.

Also keep in mind that you are trying to get 5 to 7 guys through one, small residential entry doorway in a matter of seconds. If the first or second guy gets shot and goes down, then you will have a traffic jamb at the door and everybody else will also get shot.

Pretty simple stuff really. or is it?

[widebody911]

Good shooting. If the closing distance was only 8 feet, as the article stated, then I would say Very Good Shooting.

Hell, that close, I could have shot him.

The article establishes the following;
-house is a dope house. vehicle and ped traffic all hours of the night. (meth and heroin, both felony drugs in any usable amount)
-Dead Suspect meth user with long history of drug use, per his family.
-Dead Suspect likely small time meth dealer.
-Dead Suspect authorized his house to be used as flop house by dealers.
-Dead Suspect's girlfriend has lived at the house.
-Dead Suspect's girlfriend "moved out???" and back in. and back out. and back in. and back out... (you have to be familiar with the lifestyle that these people live to understand this)

So this is a death sentence? Was this guy such a threat as to necessitate such an operation? No.

-Dead Suspect advanced on Officer, while holding a deadly weapon in a striking position

Suspect didn't advance on schidt. There was 5 seconds between the door being broken in and getting shot.

The point man was a Sgt. This tells us two things. 1. He was the most experienced, most highly skilled operator in the unit.

No. It could also mean he was the most politically-savvy or well-connected.

2. There was someone of higher rank running the operation.

Irrelevant

Also interesting to note that the Sgt had one officer involved shooting in his history and that that shooting was also a good shooting. How do I assume that the prior shooting was clean? Because if it wasn't, you can bet your bottom dollar that The Salt Lake Tribune would be running that history in the second or third paragraph of this story, not on the third page.

There's no video of that shooting - it's the cops' word against the dead guy; if there hadn't been video of this one, we'd be reading a story of a meth-crazed lunatic with an exotic weapon trying to kill some heroic cops. There's lots of cases where the story doesn't match the video, particularly when the cops aren't aware of the video. It's really hard to concoct a good story with video evidence to the contrary, which is why there's such a huge crackdown on citizens recording cops.

[asterix031]

This "dead person" (or however you want to label him as the raid wasn't a trial...)... He should have woken up from his (possibly druggy) sleep and within moments be fully alert and coherent, allowing himself to recognise that his residence was being raided by a legitimate police team with a misplaced warrant?

Back "in the day" when I was house sharing as a student in a reasonably sensible neighbourbood, our house was broken into and vandalised while I was out. Furniture was broken, kitchenware shattered, etc... Enough noise to wake the dead. But funnily enough they did not wake up my sober, law-abiding house-mate, who slept through the whole commotion and was lucky not have been attacked. He was a very heavy sleeper... Though if he had woken he probably would have stepped out of his room half awake and in fear, holding a golf club too.

I am not surprised that a resident in a house (known for drugs) when startled in the middle of the night may have said "what the Fuch" and took some time in comprehending his environment, especially if under the influence. I would expect the team performing the raid to know this would be a likely scenario to encounter, and be appropriately prepared / equipped to handle it correctly. The intention of the raid was an arrest, not a killing, correct?

Can such raids not be handled differently? Example - Surround the property appropriately, then gas the occupants unconscious before entering, allowing evidence to remain intact and disabling anyone inside at the same time? Or are bullets, dead bodies of possibly innocent people, and press conferences on raids-gone-wrong a more acceptable solution?

[silverwhaletail]

Originally Posted by widebody911

Hell, that close, I could have shot him.



So this is a death sentence? Was this guy such a threat as to necessitate such an operation? No.


Suspect didn't advance on schidt. There was 5 seconds between the door being broken in and getting shot.



No. It could also mean he was the most politically-savvy or well-connected.



Irrelevant



There's no video of that shooting - it's the cops' word against the dead guy; if there hadn't been video of this one, we'd be reading a story of a meth-crazed lunatic with an exotic weapon trying to kill some heroic cops. There's lots of cases where the story doesn't match the video, particularly when the cops aren't aware of the video. It's really hard to concoct a good story with video evidence to the contrary, which is why there's such a huge crackdown on citizens recording cops.

Hell, that close, I could have shot him.

In Law Enforcement "jargon", "good shooting" means clean, or justified shooting. It has nothing to do with accuracy.

In this incident, Golf Club Guy's decision to "come out swinging" came with a cost.

So this is a death sentence? Was this guy such a threat as to necessitate such an operation? No.

Yes, it turned into a death sentence.

That night you were not the one with the "juice" to make that call.

Suspect didn't advance on schidt. There was 5 seconds between the door being broken in and getting shot.

I must not have watched the same video that you watched. I saw Golf Club Boy come into the room holding a long metal object in his hands in such a manner as is commonly used by subjects whom are prepared to use the long metal object as a weapon with which to strike someone/something.

5 seconds. So Golf Club Boy used 4 seconds to flush the rest of the dope down the toilet and the remaining second to attack the police. Stupid Cops shouldn't have wasted so much time making entry. Better luck next time. Maybe they'll turn off the water at the street and hope that there isn't enough water in the toilet to complete the flush.

No. It could also mean he was the most politically-savvy or well-connected.

You mean like if your the "mayor's nephew" you are picked to be the point man, first through the door???? I'm obviously to stupid to understand your point. Sorry about that.


Irrelevant

Very relevant. Some idiots posting on this board think that the guys making the decisions where and when to serve High Risk Night Time Warrants are the same guys who actually enter the structures and carry out the service. And I thought that I was the one who is stupid.

There's no video of that shooting - it's the cops' word against the dead guy; if there hadn't been video of this one, we'd be reading a story of a meth-crazed lunatic with an exotic weapon trying to kill some heroic cops. There's lots of cases where the story doesn't match the video, particularly when the cops aren't aware of the video. It's really hard to concoct a good story with video evidence to the contrary, which is why there's such a huge crackdown on citizens recording cops.

The push to video LE events/incidents is coming from inside LE, not outside of LE. Citizen complaints of misconduct against the police are easier to refute if there is audio/video evidence of the event.

Further, city attorneys and county attorneys are pushing for more and more technology. Believe it or not, the more audio/video that exists documenting critical (and even not so critical) incidents, the easier and CHEAPER it is to defend the city against lawsuits like the one that Golf Club Boy's family will file against the county who employed these officers.

Do you think that cities and counties would pay for this stuff (technology) if they didn't think that in the long run, it was more cost effective?

For years and years, smart cops would record contacts with citizens with cheap little recorders and then save the tapes. When somebody WITH A JOB made a misconduct complaint against them, they would produce the tape during the internal affairs interview, indisputably invalidate the complaint ( "and then the cop called me a N, blah blah blah"). The cop would get a copy of the complaint which was signed by the citizen and march over to the court house and file a small claims suit against the citizen. ALOT of guys won a few thousand dollars on these small claims cases. The best one that I remember at Long Beach PD was a registered nurse who was arrested for drunk driving and accused the officer of raping her on the way to jail.

Unfortunately, the 9th circuit court of appeals eventually put an end to it, because they reasoned that the threat of being sued by the police might cause a person with a LEGITIMATE complaint to remain silent.

If the issue is ever re-opened and is heard by the Supreme Court of the United States, I hope that they overturn the 9th Circuits decision and we can again "Get Paid!" when citizens file false complaints against us.

I personally have two racial profiling complaints (both from my black brothers) that were completely invalidated by patrol car audio/video. One of them is from a television evangelist. The other is from a black cop who was fired for misconduct.

[silverwhaletail]

Originally Posted by asterix031

He should have woken up from his (possibly druggy) sleep

Can such raids not be handled differently? Example - Surround the property appropriately, then gas the occupants unconscious before entering, allowing evidence to remain intact and disabling anyone inside at the same time? Just Or are bullets, dead bodies of possibly innocent people, and press conferences on raids-gone-wrong a more acceptable solution?

Golf Club Boy was not sleeping. These people seldom sleep. And NEVER at night. methAMPHETAMINE.

No. US Supreme Courts have "allowed" no-knock warrants so that evidence does not get destroyed. Pretty hard to "justify" any search warrant if 100% of the time you never find what the warrant specified that you were justified in searching for.

And houses catch on fire and burn down when you shoot chemicals inside.

[asterix031]

Originally Posted by silverwhaletail

Golf Club Boy was not sleeping. These people seldom sleep. And NEVER at night. methAMPHETAMINE.

Perhaps, I did not see the part of him not sleeping and thinking of cleaning out the basement to create a new dope lab whilst on his high in that video.

Originally Posted by silverwhaletail

No. US Supreme Courts have "allowed" no-knock warrants so that evidence does not get destroyed. Pretty hard to "justify" any search warrant if 100% of the time you never find what the warrant specified that you were justified in searching for.

And houses catch on fire and burn down when you shoot chemicals inside.

It was a single example asked as a question, with the point being that surely if we can put man on the moon decades ago (or hoax it if you so wish to believe) then we can perform raids on houses in a safer manner for both the person being raided but more importantly the officers performing the raid and any innocent bystander that may be affected. Not needing to shoot anyone dead I would think is much easier to explain - whether a raid goes right or wrong.

Take out the neighbourhood, the dead golf club boy, etc... From this equation. This could happen to anyone. Another possibility is the officer being shot dead in the process of raiding the wrong house by a law abiding pelicanite defending his home in a good neighbourhood. "Bad people" and drugs aren't exclusive to certain neighbourhoods. Are raid procedures?

Once again, what I was trying to discuss: Is there a safer way to perform such raids, or is it not going to happen due to red tape, cost, winning elections?

[DavidI]

Police work is dangerous, period. So is being a criminal. Both have their inherent risks. Cops try to minimize the dangers, but sometimes it is unavoidable. I personaly am leery about "no-knock" warrants because they present a high-risk to both sides. In some instances, they offset the danger in favor of the cops, and that is their intent when dealing with dangerous suspects. The element of surprise is the intent.

Having been the "point" on many entries, you have a fraction of a second to make the ultimate decision, which will then be reviewed for countless hours by many who have never made those type of decisions. This in not a bad thing because there has to be a checks and balance in our great society.

This is a difficult incident to evaluate without the entire package, which is most likely more than a 1,000 page volume.

The standard for evaluating a use of force is "objectively reasonable." That is, at the time of the incident and from the officer's point of view at that particular split second, was the use of force, deadly in this incident, "objectively reasonable?"

In any city, particularly the inner city, 98% of the community are good, hard-working people. I know first hand, having spent the majority of my 22+ year career there. They deserve to be protected from the predatory 2% criminal element.

To call this tragic shooting an "execution by cop" is foolish and naive. I usually stay out of these discussions because of the strong "net bangers," but what the hell........ David

[Rikao4]

2 LEO's got killed just asking to speak to a suspect..

Rika

[sc_rufctr]

Originally Posted by DavidI

...

Having been the "point" on many entries, you have a fraction of a second to make the ultimate decision, which will then be reviewed for countless hours by many who have never made those type of decisions. This in not a bad thing because there has to be a checks and balance in our great society.

....... David

Absolutely 100% correct...

[bivenator]

The officers actions once the door was breached are understandable. The breaching of the door with a "no knock' missing warrant was where the mistake was made. The proper execution of a poor plan still means a fubar with one dead. This is not acceptable.

[Brando]

All police-involved shootings should be reviewed by the citizenry, not fellow cops. In all shootings they circle the wagons. I believe even the San Bernardino Sheriff's murder of a marine who was in detained and compliant (circa 2009) was ruled as a "good shoot". Where's the oversight for mistakes? Let alone, mistakes that were willingly made.

[Rikao4]

= civilians running a war from their couch..
and a force that would hesitate when perhaps they should not..
I don't have the answer..

Rika