Cop mistakes good Samaritan for bad guy

"Person holding a gun" does not seem like sufficient cause for shooting the guy."Person holding a gun" does not seem like sufficient cause for shooting the guy.
Click to expand...
Agreed, and a shooting review board may ding him on that count, and a wrongful death case against the city may be filed. But put yourself in the cop's place: you respond to an active shooter situation without knowing what else is happening at the time. You arrive, you see an armed person holding a rifle. You get out of your patrol car and . . . what? Tell him to raise his hands? If he is the shooter (a logical assumption), then you will be shot at. So, no, you shoot. If you don't, you could be the next victim. Things happen really quickly when adrenaline kicks in.

My take on it is "why was the good guy holding the rifle?" I was told many years ago: if you are involved in a shooting, put the gun down and sit down with your hands visible so the cops don't shoot you when they arrive. You will be roughed up and cuffed and thrown in the back of a car. You will be taken to jail and booked. Your best bet is to be as harmless looking as possible and don't try to argue with the police when they get there.
 
Scorch said:
But put yourself in the cop's place...
Click to expand...

If I shoot someone for holding a rifle, I have every reason to believe that the consequences would extend beyond a strongly worded letter in my HR file.

One of the questions the article doesn't address was whether Hurley was only holding the rifle, or whether he was doing something ambiguous and apt to be misconstrued.

My take on it is "why was the good guy holding the rifle?"
Click to expand...

Do you know whether the fellow from who you took it has a friend? How do you maintain control of the rifle if you just set it down? Did Hurley strip the magazine and bolt out of the rifle? Is that what he was doing when he was shot?

There is certainly a downside to holding a weapon when you know POs will be responding to that sort of call.
 
But best to realize that arriving LEOs on an active-shooter scene are
spring-loaded to "stop the threat."
Click to expand...

Where the treat is identified as anyone with a gun who isn't in a police uniform.

Agreed, and a shooting review board may ding him on that count, and a wrongful death case against the city may be filed. But put yourself in the cop's place: you respond to an active shooter situation without knowing what else is happening at the time. You arrive, you see an armed person holding a rifle. You get out of your patrol car and . . . what? Tell him to raise his hands? If he is the shooter (a logical assumption), then you will be shot at. So, no, you shoot. If you don't, you could be the next victim. Things happen really quickly when adrenaline kicks in.
Click to expand...

Yes, the "Kill them all. Let God sort them out" mentality. :rolleyes:

The argument from the officer's side will be similar to ones on the past. There was an active shooter/bad guy in area situation. There was a person with a gun. I was in fear for my life and the citizens' lives. I neutralized the threat.

And then the officer gets off due to qualified immunity.

The officers are supposed to properly assess who is and is not a threat. Yes, their jobs are dangerous. They should not be so paranoid as to think that are the only good guys.
 
Last edited:
I would humbly suggest that we let a lot more facts come out about what happened before starting to assign blame. Right now all we know are some very sketchy details from news reports.

And we all know how reliable they are in their reporting.
 
I was not there. I'm not declaring anyone innocent and I'm not going to criticize anyone but Troyke at least till legit investigation results come out.

I can understand discretely overwatching the scene with no gun showing.

I cannot particularly understand why anyone would want to disturb any of the scene evidence,including the AR-15. I assume Troyke was dead.The AR-15 is inanimate. It can rest in place.

I don't say that to armchair quarterback. I just don't understand.

I'm not trained as a LEO. If a man is standing over a down LEO with an AR-15 in his hands my adrenaline jolt would tell me I could easily be one second from getting hit. Thats not a lot of time to think it over.

Sure,from here I can say the Cop messed up.

But the Cop and I are both Human Beings. Fog of War is a thing.

Its Troyke who is responsible for the whole situation.
 
HiBC said:
I was not there. I'm not declaring anyone innocent and I'm not going to criticize anyone but Troyke at least till legit investigation results come out.

I can understand discretely overwatching the scene with no gun showing.

I cannot particularly understand why anyone would want to disturb any of the scene evidence,including the AR-15. I assume Troyke was dead.The AR-15 is inanimate. It can rest in place.

I don't say that to armchair quarterback. I just don't understand.

I'm not trained as a LEO. If a man is standing over a down LEO with an AR-15 in his hands my adrenaline jolt would tell me I could easily be one second from getting hit. Thats not a lot of time to think it over.

Sure,from here I can say the Cop messed up.

But the Cop and I are both Human Beings. Fog of War is a thing.

Its Troyke who is responsible for the whole situation.
Click to expand...
The cop didn't mess up; unfortunately, the guy with the AR did.
 
I cannot particularly understand why anyone would want to disturb any of the scene evidence,including the AR-15. I assume Troyke was dead.The AR-15 is inanimate. It can rest in place.
Click to expand...

How would you know there was only one shooter involved?
 
HiBC said:
I cannot particularly understand why anyone would want to disturb any of the scene evidence,including the AR-15. I assume Troyke was dead.
Click to expand...
Why would you assume that? More to the point -- in the heat of the moment, why would a good Samaritan assume that the bad guy he just shot is dead or, at least, completely neutralized? That could be a VERY dangerous assumption. I don't fault him at all for wanting to get the rifle away from the downed shooter, but he should have just kicked it a few paces away rather than picking it up.
 
How would you know there was only one shooter involved?
Click to expand...

Good point . All the more reason to stay with cover and not approach Troyke.

OK, I don't know that Hurley knew Troyke was dead. I heard an unconfirmed bit of info I did not repeat . It would confirm Troyke was dead. But it may be misinformation. I'm not going to spread it.
I'll just suggest its possible Hurley first went to Troyke before he went to the weapon.

I did NOT say "Troyke was dead" I said "I assume" While that might be inappropriate on scene,its not so bad typing a post making a different point.
I don't care if he was dead or not.

IMO....or what I would hope I would do, Is remain with cover . Why on earth would I need to approach Troyke or the gun?

If Troyke appears to recover and become a threat again,then shoot him again. From cover,with a fresh magazine. Steady and supported.
WHICH IS 20/20 HINDSIGHT.

I am not the person just done with a gunfight,and I have not just killed my first man.
(Hey critics!! JUMP ON THAT!! How do I know he just killed his first man? ASSUMPTION!! He might be a regular Billy the Kid!! Its OK. I know its the moment you reactionary critics live for. Its like launching a clay bird in front of a trap shooter!! The same critics seldom write an original post, They wait in the wings,lurking...till they see a NIT to Pick!! Then they can show their GENIUS!! Not the greatest thing about TFL)

The important points,from my point of view:

If Troyke is just laying there,why do I need to walk up to him? Why do I need to do ANYTHING with the gun?

Cleaning up the scene is THE COPS JOB.

Having said that, I DO NOT FAULT HURLEY AT ALL!! He was a Hero who did the best he could. He stopped a killer.

I'm not faulting anyone but Troyke, which I clearly said before.
 
Last edited:
Colorado no longer has qualified immunity. The liberal left legislature passed a bill, which Polis signed on Juneteenth in 2020 eliminating it.
Click to expand...

All the more reason the cop should have been more careful in not pulling the trigger.

It will be interesting to see if any charges are forthcoming.
 
The processional for Officer Beesley is forming up and some roads are starting to be closed. Have a few LEO friends in the processional.
 
210304783_2583413421961637_4956109724696222203_n.jpg


Rest in Peace Officer Beesley.
 
Qualified immunity doesn't have anything to do with immunity from criminal charges. It is a legal protection afforded to government employees for civil litigation, mostly designed to reduce frivolous lawsuits. Colorado can eliminate qualified immunity in state courts, but it will still be applicable to any federal civil rights lawsuits. If a prosecutor or a grand jury decides to indict a police officer or other government employee for a criminal violation, qualified immunity plays no role.
 
No one here has provided adequate information to criticize the responding officer who killed the good Samaritan. The lesson we can glean from the information we have is that you DO NOT want to pick up the criminals gun, especially a rifle. Being at the scene of an officer murder holding a long gun makes you look very suspect. This is not to say simply holding a long gun should result in your being shot by responding officers, but it does increase your chances of being engaged. Imagine the responding officer approached Hurley from behind and issued a standard, "Police Don't Move" challenge, to which Hurley naturally reacted to by turning towards the speaker. How much leeway does he get? There are so many factors that play into this split second decision, I'm not sure its even fair to postulate.

If you feel your are able to safely approach and want to secure the rifle, just stand on it. Put your gun away and hold your hands up, palms out.

If you've got medical training, go to work on the downed cop if he isn't clearly deceased.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top