LEOs: How do you feel / approach this situation?

TRIP20------not a good idea to "automatically hand the LEO your gun", as he may not know you from ADAM. Do not have a weapon in your hand when they enter. If you begin to bring it up to "hand it to him" he may perceive a serious theat.......and there could be one more shooting. IMHO
 
my significant other, at the time was mugged outside our apartment door. i heard the comotion and ended the situation. after police arrived my girlfrien was being loaded into the ambulance and i was inside talking to a detective. i said i wanted to go to the hospital w/ her and he told me that they HAD to sieze the weapon for a day or so, but that i would get it back quickly. i said, no problem and he brown bagged it and i signed off on the evidince sheet. i then reached into my pantry and pulled out another pistol press checked it and stuffed it into my pants. he looked up, smiled and said "were done, thanks".
i got a phone call the next morning and had my pistol back by noon.
i would say the biggest factor regarding the original pistol is location. that happened to me in S. FL.
your results may vary.
 
I can say that alot of the "after" stuff is based on the local political climate. The first officer to respond will arrive gun drawn...well high state of alert may be a better word for it. Personally I wouldn't pat down "the shooter" yet. I would verbally ID all persons and take physical control of "the gun" I would than begin to Field interview / Record ID info on all witnesses. Depending on the Detective, "the shooter" would be invited down to the copshop for a formal statement. Maybe given a ride in a marked or unmarked car. Unlikely, but may even be told just to come in tommorow at 10AM. at places where I wave worked aslong as the story "check out good" "the shooter" would not be charged, Until/if the DA determines justification. The firearms used would be seized as evidence for forensic exam pending the results of the DA/Trial.

Some areas may require a shooting case be presented to the grand jury reguardless of circumstances. If you have 2 guns on your persons at time of shooting both may be seized...If the shooting happened in your home all might be siezed (depends on the detective and if he belives that the one -you hand him- was the one used)

My best advice is just to play it mellow, I always reccomend haveing a lwayer present, particularry if the questioning starts to go beyond My name is...I saw an armed criminal...I feared for my life...I fired my weapon. If it looks like a good shoot most cops will work with you, but if your all "mall-ninja" Things may not be as smooth.

Your best bet is to speak to a local defense attorney... Ayoob even recomends having one on retainer (which I think is excessive).
 
Sorry tanstaafl4y, but I have to disagree about advising an attorney. My job, after securing the scene, is to find out what happened. If someone that shot in SD starts to give a statement to me, and I stop him and say "Maybe you'd better talk with your atty", he's most likely to immediately clam up and go on the defensive. Counterproductive to the investigation and simply increases and extends his worry, and I need him to be calm (as possible) and clear headed so that I get an accurate picture of the incident. If he's lying, the overall investigation will usually reveal that.
 
Capt Charlie, Based on you posts I do realize that you are a LEO. As you noticed the quality of my post started to degrade (too close to quitting time).

I am sure that we both agree that much of law enforcement is based on Officer instinct. This come from time on the job, Formal classroom training, the stuff the crusty old FTO taught you, and just plain old gut.

I did not mean to imply "shut up and demand a lawyer". What I meant to say was that if tone of the interview with the police changes from general fact-finding type questioning to suspect interragation-type questioning a lawyer may not be a bad idea. Its hard to convey exactly what I am trying to say by a few lines of text on the internet. But I hope the "jist" of it is clear.
 
I understand what you're saying, but even then, not so. If it turns out that the good guy is really the bad guy, we're under no obligation to help him out by suggesting an atty (not the same as Miranda). To the contrary, we're now on opposite sides and helping the BG will only hurt the investigation.

But in this scenario, it's established that the shooting was righteous, and I see no need to further stress out the good guy by suggesting an attorney.
 
I am a retired LEO, and, IMHO and based upon countless conversations with lawyers over the years, I believe that a person in this scenario must really answer the following questions: Did you act reasonably, responsibly with prudence and common sense? Would most God fearing, honest, law-abiding citizens act in a similar fasion? It really boils down to common sense. A person must demonstrate by his/her actions that they took a reasonable response to a situation, and that it was not exploited to use deadly force. I cannot imagine that in any law enforcement jurisdiction (local, state or federal) that a person would not be found innocent in such a situation. Like many of the other posts have said, you might have your weapon confiscated for a brief period of time to thoroughly document the circumstances, but I seriously doubt that you would ever be charged with the violation of any law. In any potential deadly encounter situation, I think the main issue is to not to appear to be or have been a "cowboy." I realize that some people simply do not want to get involved in a situatioin like this for fear of being sued later by the BG's family, etc., but, personally, I could not just stand by and watch someone killed or injured without taking some action. I grew up watching the old westerns and John Wayne, and I guess I believe that if you always do the right thing, things will turn out right. Probably very naive of me, but that is the way I live my life. I don't want to hurt anyone, but I will NEVER be a passive victim. Just my thougts.
 
Civ Shooting Investigation

I go with most of what Capt. Charlie said about the on site investigations, EXCEPT EVERY THING is taken as evidence, including second guns. Can't know the evidence value or ballistics until the lab has had a look. Were I giving non lawyer advise to a Cillyvian I would strongly advise NOT to give any information except "I was here and there was a shooting". Wait for your lawyer to arrive BEFORE giving your side. I have seen to often words spoken and taken down at a scene twisted by lawyers and DA's with an agenda. This advise is what our guild lawyer gives us. I did handle a scene where a civ shot at a guy on his front porch at O-dark 30 but there was no real threat and we took his gun and chewed him a new one. (perp had fled never to be IDed). He got his gun back much later....afte he took classes.

Capt. C; Being one of those Dets. you hand the scene over to Me thinks you owe us alot of us Krispy creams in your karma...
 
Geeze Sulaco2, you're probably right! But it's hard to buy you a coffee & a Krispy Creme at 0300 after your done canvasing the area, interviewing witnesses, looking for shell casings, bullet fragments, etc., and measuring bullet flight trajectories, 'cause I've already been asleep for 3 hours. :rolleyes: :D :D :D

"Patrol. We do it all, then move on to the next." :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top