Couer d'Alene Police Officer Involved Shooting video
- Thread starter LockedBreech
- Start date
- Status
Hollywood myths, unrealistic conditions.....
I think some forum members & members of the general public have a misconception of who or what sworn US law enforcement officers are.
Many grew up with the "Officer Friendly" mindset or the policeman is my pal attitude.
They assume every LE officer who shows up is going to resolve any dispute exactly how they want or do exactly what they say.wrong
Hollywood has a lot to.do with it too. Real cops have a tough job & must react quickly.
CF
I think some forum members & members of the general public have a misconception of who or what sworn US law enforcement officers are.
Many grew up with the "Officer Friendly" mindset or the policeman is my pal attitude.
They assume every LE officer who shows up is going to resolve any dispute exactly how they want or do exactly what they say.wrong
Hollywood has a lot to.do with it too. Real cops have a tough job & must react quickly.
CF
dakota.potts
New member
The police are supposed to respond to a person in peril, even if that person is harming themselves. Imagine it plays out the other way: The cop waits around for 10 minutes to get negotiators or some kind of mental help on the scene, and by the time they get there the man is already dead.
I have read on these forums that an officer can respond with less-lethal force only at their discretion and with another officer to support them with lethal force.
I absolutely think the officer was justified. Yes, he ended up forcing the man's hand. But what else do you do when you've got someone threatening themselves with a knife and you have a duty to get them out of it? He gave the man many opportunities to respond verbally, to talk, to even make the officer aware of his presence.
A man with a knife can cover a lot of ground quickly. If he had stayed there with the knife, I might even agree that the shooting wasn't justified. But the first step towards the officer already broke that line, and I'm amazed the officer held out as long as he did. Frankly, there was a long, tense second and a half or so after the point where I felt I would have shot (knowing that nothing ever plays out like it does in your head) where the officer continued backing up and giving verbal warnings past the point of what I felt was reasonable and safe.
To suggest that he should have used a Taser or OC Spray? Laughable. Tasers have a known possibility to fail altogether as both darts must land and even then sometimes there are freak reasons they don't work. I know you can continue fighting and find a target after being sprayed with OC because there are training programs for government agencies (including FWC in Florida) where you must be pepper sprayed and then spar with an opponent, including simulated edged weapons, and they can do it. It says nothing of an incensed, adrenaline-high person already on the edge who feels they have nothing to lose.
To shoot at the legs is also a losing prospect. People can and will sprint and lunge with shattered kneedcaps. In my opinion, the only time a leg shot will stop somebody is when they lose their will to go on, or maybe if the leg is taken completely off. The human body has the strength to bring itself 15 feet forward even after major structural damage.
Somebody needs to bring up the video of the man in Honduras who killed 4 cops with a knife. There, they are expected to do what many say here: if there is a knife, they may only use a contact weapon as force. They try to take the knife away with a stick and he charges them. Each of them over 30 feet apart, he first kills holding an AK-47 and then kills 3 more who are actively firing handguns at him before he is downed. All with a standard kitchen knife and lots of running. It was a 15-20 second incident. I don't know about you, but I don't want to go 15 seconds with an unstable person with a knife in close quarters.
I have read on these forums that an officer can respond with less-lethal force only at their discretion and with another officer to support them with lethal force.
I absolutely think the officer was justified. Yes, he ended up forcing the man's hand. But what else do you do when you've got someone threatening themselves with a knife and you have a duty to get them out of it? He gave the man many opportunities to respond verbally, to talk, to even make the officer aware of his presence.
A man with a knife can cover a lot of ground quickly. If he had stayed there with the knife, I might even agree that the shooting wasn't justified. But the first step towards the officer already broke that line, and I'm amazed the officer held out as long as he did. Frankly, there was a long, tense second and a half or so after the point where I felt I would have shot (knowing that nothing ever plays out like it does in your head) where the officer continued backing up and giving verbal warnings past the point of what I felt was reasonable and safe.
To suggest that he should have used a Taser or OC Spray? Laughable. Tasers have a known possibility to fail altogether as both darts must land and even then sometimes there are freak reasons they don't work. I know you can continue fighting and find a target after being sprayed with OC because there are training programs for government agencies (including FWC in Florida) where you must be pepper sprayed and then spar with an opponent, including simulated edged weapons, and they can do it. It says nothing of an incensed, adrenaline-high person already on the edge who feels they have nothing to lose.
To shoot at the legs is also a losing prospect. People can and will sprint and lunge with shattered kneedcaps. In my opinion, the only time a leg shot will stop somebody is when they lose their will to go on, or maybe if the leg is taken completely off. The human body has the strength to bring itself 15 feet forward even after major structural damage.
Somebody needs to bring up the video of the man in Honduras who killed 4 cops with a knife. There, they are expected to do what many say here: if there is a knife, they may only use a contact weapon as force. They try to take the knife away with a stick and he charges them. Each of them over 30 feet apart, he first kills holding an AK-47 and then kills 3 more who are actively firing handguns at him before he is downed. All with a standard kitchen knife and lots of running. It was a 15-20 second incident. I don't know about you, but I don't want to go 15 seconds with an unstable person with a knife in close quarters.
DoubleDeuce 1
New member
Having been in situations like that as well as many others, the police officer did just fine in my opinion. He did not have the luxury to deep think things as the situation was unfolding. Regarding the remark about his being aggressive by having his weapon drawn as he moved into the house... how utterly, stupidly ignorant. Is it aggressive to move through a building in search of a burglar with your weapon drawn? It is just plain common sense and self preservation.
The officer calling out in a loud voice toward the end of the video I believe was to make certain that he was heard plainly by everyone around. People tend to have a selective memory when dollar signs start popping up, or don't like the police. It leaves no doubt that he gave clear, loud commands. I also believe the suspect in this incident knew exactly what he was doing.
Good job. Good clean shooting.
The officer calling out in a loud voice toward the end of the video I believe was to make certain that he was heard plainly by everyone around. People tend to have a selective memory when dollar signs start popping up, or don't like the police. It leaves no doubt that he gave clear, loud commands. I also believe the suspect in this incident knew exactly what he was doing.
Good job. Good clean shooting.
From the video, I see nothing wrong with the officer's actions. This is coming from someone who had a friend, that died in a very similar situation. He was running around jumping on cars. Had the police called him and they found him at his house. He was cornered in his room by an officer, with his mother at home. He then came out with a knife in each hand, and was shot 9 times by a single officer on scene. An off duty officer heard the shots, came running with a shotgun, and was then shot in the head, by the same officer. I think in my friend's case the officer was not prepared for what he responded to, panicked and took the lives of two people, which could have been avoided. Unfortunately there was no video to see what actually happened.
I live in the town next to Coeur D'Alene. It's a small community. The investigating district attorney was from a neighbouring county to the north, it was his opinion this was suicide by cop and that's why all the news sources picked that up. This happened last fall. It was investigated by the state police.
http://www.ktvb.com/news/Idaho-police-officer-cleared-in-fatal-shooting-238726941.html
We have two police departments here, Post Falls and Coeur D'Alene cities, the other towns contract with Kootenai County Sheriff. Together, including the Sheriff, they may have one police shooting every five years or so. Twenty minutes west in Spokane they have them about every month, but there are a quarter million folks there. The usual drug, alcohol and domestic problems going on here but they almost always end better than this, so these guys do a pretty good job day in and day out. That's saying a lot, this is north Idaho, big gun culture and everyone carries it seems.
http://www.ktvb.com/news/Idaho-police-officer-cleared-in-fatal-shooting-238726941.html
We have two police departments here, Post Falls and Coeur D'Alene cities, the other towns contract with Kootenai County Sheriff. Together, including the Sheriff, they may have one police shooting every five years or so. Twenty minutes west in Spokane they have them about every month, but there are a quarter million folks there. The usual drug, alcohol and domestic problems going on here but they almost always end better than this, so these guys do a pretty good job day in and day out. That's saying a lot, this is north Idaho, big gun culture and everyone carries it seems.
Or instead of waiting in case the individual harms themselves , go in and shoot them dead. That makes sense.
Without knowing the individual's circumstances possible mental illness etc , do you think calling someone a nut job and talking about bad elements in the gene pool is appropriate. I am just glad you are not a police officer with that attitude , I don't like to see anyone killed . The logic of what you are saying is just shoot anyone that is suicidal and do everyone a favour.
Last edited:
ClydeFrog wrote;
Indeed, perhaps you are correct. I grew up in this small town in Tennessee, back during my youth we had a population of roughly 11,000 and had a police force of around 15 officers (some auxillary) , and a Chief. In that time (around 1969 ) These guys were "peace officers" sworn to protect, and serve. Myself, and several of my friends used to go to the police - fire station on Saturdays and hang out in the area, eating peanuts and drinking sodas and listening to the officers regale us with stories of their jobs. in return, we sometimes washed patrol cars and swept the parking lot and lobby. We felt, and I believe they were, Men who protected us and, were there to help if there was trouble. And many time in my life they have done just that. Interestingly, they also operated a shooting range of sorts and would allow us to use the range and even offered instruction. A "Mayberry-ish" feel to be sure.
Today, the city has grown to 25,000+ and we have more than 100 sworn officers, an SRT team, APC, Bomb Robot, remote cameras,etc. The police station is more akin to a "military base" you may not even enter the building without an officer escort. I work with the courts often and even then, we are only allowed to inspect the facility twice per year. The mindset of the officers has indeed changed as well, We seem to be mere "civilians" and there is a very pervasive us/them dynamic. "officer friendly" no longer exists. More is the pity.
As the department and mindset has changed, so have the tactics. It is also noteworthy that only 1 officer has ever been killed in the line of duty, that was in 1916.
This thread also reinforces my belief that, in today's world, you are much better served to arm yourself and, be prepared to protect yourself and, your family with as little "Law Enforcement" involvement in situations as possible as nothing good is likely to result from their involvement. The us/them sword cuts both ways.
ETA: Sorry for the veer but, you make a point worth highlighting.
Indeed, perhaps you are correct. I grew up in this small town in Tennessee, back during my youth we had a population of roughly 11,000 and had a police force of around 15 officers (some auxillary) , and a Chief. In that time (around 1969 ) These guys were "peace officers" sworn to protect, and serve. Myself, and several of my friends used to go to the police - fire station on Saturdays and hang out in the area, eating peanuts and drinking sodas and listening to the officers regale us with stories of their jobs. in return, we sometimes washed patrol cars and swept the parking lot and lobby. We felt, and I believe they were, Men who protected us and, were there to help if there was trouble. And many time in my life they have done just that. Interestingly, they also operated a shooting range of sorts and would allow us to use the range and even offered instruction. A "Mayberry-ish" feel to be sure.
Today, the city has grown to 25,000+ and we have more than 100 sworn officers, an SRT team, APC, Bomb Robot, remote cameras,etc. The police station is more akin to a "military base" you may not even enter the building without an officer escort. I work with the courts often and even then, we are only allowed to inspect the facility twice per year. The mindset of the officers has indeed changed as well, We seem to be mere "civilians" and there is a very pervasive us/them dynamic. "officer friendly" no longer exists. More is the pity.
As the department and mindset has changed, so have the tactics. It is also noteworthy that only 1 officer has ever been killed in the line of duty, that was in 1916.
This thread also reinforces my belief that, in today's world, you are much better served to arm yourself and, be prepared to protect yourself and, your family with as little "Law Enforcement" involvement in situations as possible as nothing good is likely to result from their involvement. The us/them sword cuts both ways.
ETA: Sorry for the veer but, you make a point worth highlighting.
Last edited:
johnelmore
New member
Let me sum this up to make it easy. Going up against a man open carrying a pistol is simply NUTS...crazy whether it be with knives, a bat or even fists. Common survival sense dictates men with pistols should be treated with a certain care and charging them with a knife is not wise.
Going up against a man in uniform is SUICIDE. The uniformed man has the government behind them and more of his brothers outside. Those going up against the uniform are ready to die. If you are dealing with the uniformed man you really must take the greatest care possible by being silent, pleasent and cooperative.
I am wondering if the uniformed man could have retreated backwards outside thus saving the crazy guy from certain death. I know he has every right to shoot, but would it have been morally correct.
Going up against a man in uniform is SUICIDE. The uniformed man has the government behind them and more of his brothers outside. Those going up against the uniform are ready to die. If you are dealing with the uniformed man you really must take the greatest care possible by being silent, pleasent and cooperative.
I am wondering if the uniformed man could have retreated backwards outside thus saving the crazy guy from certain death. I know he has every right to shoot, but would it have been morally correct.
Old knife attack video
http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=http%3A//www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DeexGDSsJn9c
Watch the video from about 7:00 or so on. Police understand this reality better than most.
In most selection interviews/oral boards for becoming a police officer, a scenario will be presented that almost perfectly matches the situation that Officer Mortensen found himself in. The police candidate will be asked how they would respond. Typically, any response besides that of immediate lethal force after strong verbal commands are given will be grounds for failing the interview. The department needs to know that their officers will not end up like the officers in the video linked above.
Edit: The video also serves to show why Officer Mortensen chose 5 COM shots, instead of a leg shot, single shot, etc.
http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=http%3A//www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DeexGDSsJn9c
Watch the video from about 7:00 or so on. Police understand this reality better than most.
In most selection interviews/oral boards for becoming a police officer, a scenario will be presented that almost perfectly matches the situation that Officer Mortensen found himself in. The police candidate will be asked how they would respond. Typically, any response besides that of immediate lethal force after strong verbal commands are given will be grounds for failing the interview. The department needs to know that their officers will not end up like the officers in the video linked above.
Edit: The video also serves to show why Officer Mortensen chose 5 COM shots, instead of a leg shot, single shot, etc.
Nobody is arguing the officer should have allowed the man to stab him.
What some of us wonder is if the apparent 'pressure of time' approach was necessary; if you're only concerned the man is a danger to himself, isn't it essentially a 'hostage' situation? And in most hostage situations, don't we focus on giving space and time, within a controlled perimeter, to the hostage taker while we try to defuse their emotions?
In this instance, there were enough officers present to control the subject to within the house, and no 'pressure of time' other than a concern the man would hurt himself; a concern that was not only NOT prevented, but actually precipitated, by the police response.
I will restate it; never call the police to 'save' someone you think is going to harm themselves. It's like calling a hammer to paint a flower.
Larry
What some of us wonder is if the apparent 'pressure of time' approach was necessary; if you're only concerned the man is a danger to himself, isn't it essentially a 'hostage' situation? And in most hostage situations, don't we focus on giving space and time, within a controlled perimeter, to the hostage taker while we try to defuse their emotions?
In this instance, there were enough officers present to control the subject to within the house, and no 'pressure of time' other than a concern the man would hurt himself; a concern that was not only NOT prevented, but actually precipitated, by the police response.
I will restate it; never call the police to 'save' someone you think is going to harm themselves. It's like calling a hammer to paint a flower.
Larry
DT Guy wrote;
That is a very concise explanation of the "other side" of the discussion. Well said.
This was the whole point I was trying to argue. It is not the actions of the officer defending himself that is remotely in question, any one of us "civilians" that were being approached by someone with a knife would likely have reacted similarly. The officer's response to the attack is not remotely questionable in my mind.
However, the questionable tactic that remains is the officer's initial response to the situation; Entering the house without seeming regard for the actual situation he was in. He did not ask many questions of the lady when he arrived, he was seemingly not on the same page with the other officers that were there to back him up. In short, he did not seem to take the time to gather enough intel, and formulate a plan other than, what I would consider a rather strong-arm approach to a delicate situation. As was said earlier;
If you simply want to look at the officer's reaction to the attack, then it looks like he handled it well. There is, however, a bigger picture.
That is a very concise explanation of the "other side" of the discussion. Well said.
This was the whole point I was trying to argue. It is not the actions of the officer defending himself that is remotely in question, any one of us "civilians" that were being approached by someone with a knife would likely have reacted similarly. The officer's response to the attack is not remotely questionable in my mind.
However, the questionable tactic that remains is the officer's initial response to the situation; Entering the house without seeming regard for the actual situation he was in. He did not ask many questions of the lady when he arrived, he was seemingly not on the same page with the other officers that were there to back him up. In short, he did not seem to take the time to gather enough intel, and formulate a plan other than, what I would consider a rather strong-arm approach to a delicate situation. As was said earlier;
If you simply want to look at the officer's reaction to the attack, then it looks like he handled it well. There is, however, a bigger picture.
As has been pointed, EVERY situation that has ever occurred could have been handled differently. The officer could have stood on the porch and tried to yell at the guy through the door...and then could have also been sued by the grieving widow for not having entered the house and disarmed her husband when he decided to disembowel himself in the living room
It's not like the officer just decided to walk down the street, pick a random house and execute the occupant. He was called there because of a fear of violence after a violation of the law that happened elsewhere (leaving the scene of an accident).
Some of the comments on the page where the video was posted are just amazing. My favorite is how easy it is to take a knife away from somebody!
It's not like the officer just decided to walk down the street, pick a random house and execute the occupant. He was called there because of a fear of violence after a violation of the law that happened elsewhere (leaving the scene of an accident).
Some of the comments on the page where the video was posted are just amazing. My favorite is how easy it is to take a knife away from somebody!
Is that just your opinion or do you know cases where that happened. ? Is it not possible that his family could sue the officer or police department for going in and shooting him,if a jury have the same difference of opinion as people on this forum as to the tactics used they might have a case. This opinion that the officer had a duty to enter the house, could someone show me a department policy that says that. ?
Last edited:
Culture & mindset....
Much has changed from the 1950s/1960s/1970s.
Many PDs & law enforcement agencies have changed their training standards and SOPs. Officers or deputies used to be more concerned with "community policing" or "community oriented policing" but now, in 2014, new cadets or rookies are conditioned to maintain their safety & be ready to react to any danger signs rapidly.
Years ago(2000) I applied to a sworn LE position with the PA State Police as a liquor enforcement agent. The application material stated; We(the PA State Police) are a para-military organization.
Many new cops & academy cadets are taught to be "firm, fair & friendly".
Now, I don't think every officer or deputy who answers calls for service is unprofessional or rude. I'm aware of the fact that they need to keep their safety & the PD regulations in check.
Much has changed from the 1950s/1960s/1970s.
Many PDs & law enforcement agencies have changed their training standards and SOPs. Officers or deputies used to be more concerned with "community policing" or "community oriented policing" but now, in 2014, new cadets or rookies are conditioned to maintain their safety & be ready to react to any danger signs rapidly.
Years ago(2000) I applied to a sworn LE position with the PA State Police as a liquor enforcement agent. The application material stated; We(the PA State Police) are a para-military organization.
Many new cops & academy cadets are taught to be "firm, fair & friendly".
Now, I don't think every officer or deputy who answers calls for service is unprofessional or rude. I'm aware of the fact that they need to keep their safety & the PD regulations in check.
The woman in the video (wife?) asked him to. We clearly heard her say she was afraid he was going to harm himself. What police agency DOESN'T have a policy that their officers are supposed to intervene when someone is in danger? Isn't that the very reason we have police? Or are they only there to write up the report after the guy stabs himself or someone else?
It's a simple equation: Command to drop knife + dropped knife = no gunshot wound. The other option is equally simple: Commmand to drop knife - dropped knife = 5 rounds to COM.
There were TWO people in that room making decisions, yet only the decisions of the officer seem to be getting second-guessed here. Those who criticize the cop for his actions seem more than happy to give the knife wielder a pass. The decision that caused that guy to die wasn't made by the officer; it was made by the guy with the knives.
Sworn duty, audio....
Officer Mortensen(check spelling) has a sworn duty to enforce the law & protect the public but I didn't hear or see anything that would have required he(Ofc Mortensen) make entry into the dwelling.
The officer asked the distraught woman questions. I didn't hear her ask the cop directly to stop the male subject or want to have him removed.
She only said he was in the kitchen with a knife.
It's unknown(to me) if LE tracked the male to the location or if the female subject called 911 & requested help.
As I keep going back to, there would be no valid reason why the police officer had to go deeper into the property & make contact with the male.
Unless the male subject attacked the officer, the woman or another person in the home. Or if the male yelled; "I'm gonna kill myself!"
He(the subject) chose to move closer to the armed, uniformed officer. He knew the officer would react at some point.
The officer does yell several commands for the subject to stop & as noted, attempts to resolve(de-escalate) the situation in the beginning.
Clyde
Officer Mortensen(check spelling) has a sworn duty to enforce the law & protect the public but I didn't hear or see anything that would have required he(Ofc Mortensen) make entry into the dwelling.
The officer asked the distraught woman questions. I didn't hear her ask the cop directly to stop the male subject or want to have him removed.
She only said he was in the kitchen with a knife.
It's unknown(to me) if LE tracked the male to the location or if the female subject called 911 & requested help.
As I keep going back to, there would be no valid reason why the police officer had to go deeper into the property & make contact with the male.
Unless the male subject attacked the officer, the woman or another person in the home. Or if the male yelled; "I'm gonna kill myself!"
He(the subject) chose to move closer to the armed, uniformed officer. He knew the officer would react at some point.
The officer does yell several commands for the subject to stop & as noted, attempts to resolve(de-escalate) the situation in the beginning.
Clyde
[QUOTEAs I keep going back to, there would be no valid reason why the police officer had to go deeper into the property & make contact with the male.][/QUOTE]
should the cops wait until the lady caller doesn't show up for work the next day to see if she was stabbed to death, or maybe wait until the guy is roaming the neighborhood killing kids.....?
answer this: why were the police at the residence in the first place?
should the cops wait until the lady caller doesn't show up for work the next day to see if she was stabbed to death, or maybe wait until the guy is roaming the neighborhood killing kids.....?
answer this: why were the police at the residence in the first place?
- Status