DonR101395
New member
What stress did she have? She had a squirrel in a tree trying to gather his nuts. If that is stressful to her she needs a new job.
Man Shot instead of Tased and a Quistion for LEOs
- Thread starter rmagill
- Start date
What stress did she have? She had a squirrel in a tree trying to gather his nuts. If that is stressful to her she needs a new job.
Exactly. This happened in my state. This wasn't any more stressful of a situation than a 1/2 off doughnut sale at crispy creme 
. The guy climbed a tree. He wasn't threatening, or dangerous. He was just sitting in a tree talking to himself. The fire department and police had already been there talking to the guy for an hour before the moron walked up and shot him in the leg.
The imbecile was under zero pressure. He had all the time in the world. He could've taken out his taser, checked it out, read the owners manual, have a coffee, then check it again, and taken a refreshing 15 minute nap before acting.
Something is clearly amiss for someone to make such a terrible error. A taser and a gun don't feel or look alike nor are operated in the same way. It should've come to the guy at some point, at least while he was aiming, that he was holding his gun. Either way, this shows the deputy to either have held malicious criminal intent or to be terrifyingly incompetent. Can you imagine what would happen if one of us had done something like this? He should've been fired on the spot and subject to trial.
. The guy climbed a tree. He wasn't threatening, or dangerous. He was just sitting in a tree talking to himself. The fire department and police had already been there talking to the guy for an hour before the moron walked up and shot him in the leg.The imbecile was under zero pressure. He had all the time in the world. He could've taken out his taser, checked it out, read the owners manual, have a coffee, then check it again, and taken a refreshing 15 minute nap before acting.
Something is clearly amiss for someone to make such a terrible error. A taser and a gun don't feel or look alike nor are operated in the same way. It should've come to the guy at some point, at least while he was aiming, that he was holding his gun. Either way, this shows the deputy to either have held malicious criminal intent or to be terrifyingly incompetent. Can you imagine what would happen if one of us had done something like this? He should've been fired on the spot and subject to trial.
Tasers
(1.) As Capt. Charlie pointed out, on the Taser you disengage a thumb safety to the "down" position to activate the laser.
(2.) Almost everybody issued a Taser in my area carries it in some kind of crossdraw holster. This makes it more difficult to make a mistake in weapon selection under stress.
(3.) Absent the issue of the tased person falling out of the tree, if there was a circumstance where you had somebody in a tree that you had to engage with a less-than-lethal weapon, a taser might not be the best option. The range is limited and the likelihood is great that one or both of the barbs would miss, hit a branch or foliage or something, and be ineffective.
(4.) The taser is a useful tool but has lots of limitations. Locally, there was a shooting in the summer of 2004 and another in April of 2006 where police were dealing with violent suicidal subjects and tried the Taser first, which didn't work, and then ended up shooting to protect themselves (one of the suspects was killed). If one of the barbs misses or doesn't stick, there is no incapacitation effect. It's just like OC -- some officers have a misplaced faith in it's effectiveness and don't have a "Plan B" in case "Plan A" doesn't work.
(5.) One of the things we try to train new officers is that just because there is an unusual situation going on doesn't necessarily mean that you have to rush in and do something, and that enforcement action is not necessarily the best or primary option in many instances. Usually the rookies figure that out once they get some experience, but some people just never "get it". The best cops (IMHO) have action oriented personlities, but you have have discretion about when to act and how and when to try to monitor a situation and wait for more help.
(6.) It's always hard to tell from a distance if the core issue in a given situation is (a.) lack of training, or (b.) the officer just "doesn't get it". Some people "get it" with minimal training, and some never do. Some people have natural aptitude to be the police and some don't have the frame of reference and never will, no matter what kind of degree they have or how many training sessions they attend. Usually (but not always) you can figure that out during a 12-week field training program when they first come on. But management often doesn't want to fail anybody during training, because (a.) it would be admitting they made an error in the selection process, (b.) they have an unreasonable fear of being sued because they don't have an understanding of the proper field training process and the relevant employement law, (c.) they're under pressure to get staffing levels up to avoid the payment of overtime or to avoid running short-staffed because it's a safety issue, and (d.) if the employee with the performance problems is a member of some "special group" and they're under pressure to get lots of "special" people on the police department.
(7.) And in general, you can NEVER take any news report seriously, because the media usually doesn't get the facts straight. Also, whoever is writing the article usually is NOT knowlegable about their subject matter, and they get it all wrong. I don't know the facts of this case, but there is often a "the rest of the story" out there someplace . . . of course, if there is, it is the responsibility of the police agency to release that information IF THEY CAN so that the facts are made public.
(1.) As Capt. Charlie pointed out, on the Taser you disengage a thumb safety to the "down" position to activate the laser.
(2.) Almost everybody issued a Taser in my area carries it in some kind of crossdraw holster. This makes it more difficult to make a mistake in weapon selection under stress.
(3.) Absent the issue of the tased person falling out of the tree, if there was a circumstance where you had somebody in a tree that you had to engage with a less-than-lethal weapon, a taser might not be the best option. The range is limited and the likelihood is great that one or both of the barbs would miss, hit a branch or foliage or something, and be ineffective.
(4.) The taser is a useful tool but has lots of limitations. Locally, there was a shooting in the summer of 2004 and another in April of 2006 where police were dealing with violent suicidal subjects and tried the Taser first, which didn't work, and then ended up shooting to protect themselves (one of the suspects was killed). If one of the barbs misses or doesn't stick, there is no incapacitation effect. It's just like OC -- some officers have a misplaced faith in it's effectiveness and don't have a "Plan B" in case "Plan A" doesn't work.
(5.) One of the things we try to train new officers is that just because there is an unusual situation going on doesn't necessarily mean that you have to rush in and do something, and that enforcement action is not necessarily the best or primary option in many instances. Usually the rookies figure that out once they get some experience, but some people just never "get it". The best cops (IMHO) have action oriented personlities, but you have have discretion about when to act and how and when to try to monitor a situation and wait for more help.
(6.) It's always hard to tell from a distance if the core issue in a given situation is (a.) lack of training, or (b.) the officer just "doesn't get it". Some people "get it" with minimal training, and some never do. Some people have natural aptitude to be the police and some don't have the frame of reference and never will, no matter what kind of degree they have or how many training sessions they attend. Usually (but not always) you can figure that out during a 12-week field training program when they first come on. But management often doesn't want to fail anybody during training, because (a.) it would be admitting they made an error in the selection process, (b.) they have an unreasonable fear of being sued because they don't have an understanding of the proper field training process and the relevant employement law, (c.) they're under pressure to get staffing levels up to avoid the payment of overtime or to avoid running short-staffed because it's a safety issue, and (d.) if the employee with the performance problems is a member of some "special group" and they're under pressure to get lots of "special" people on the police department.
(7.) And in general, you can NEVER take any news report seriously, because the media usually doesn't get the facts straight. Also, whoever is writing the article usually is NOT knowlegable about their subject matter, and they get it all wrong. I don't know the facts of this case, but there is often a "the rest of the story" out there someplace . . . of course, if there is, it is the responsibility of the police agency to release that information IF THEY CAN so that the facts are made public.
article from Central Kitsap Reporter 06-24-06
SHOOTING BY DEPUTY IN NAVY YARD CITY DESCRIBED AS "ACCIDENTAL"
Central Kitsap (Washington) Reporter
www.centralkitsapreporter.com
By Kassie Korich
Jun 24 2006
A Kitsap County Sheriff’s deputy attempted to use her Taser on a distraught man in a tree Thursday afternoon, but accidently shot him in the leg.
Police were called to a vacant lot in the 200 block of National Avenue South in Navy Yard City after a 911 call came in at 11:40 a.m. about a man in a tree.
The man, identified by authorities as William A. Jones, 32, of Bremerton, was about 20 feet up in the tree. Several deputies and firefighters from the Bremerton Fire Department were trying to bring Jones down from the tree, when eyewitnesses said, the shot rang out.
“He was making irrational statements while up in the tree, we don’t know if he was suicidal,” Sheriff’s spokesman Deputy Scott Wilson said.
A male deputy at the scene initially tried to use his Taser on Jones, but was unsuccessful.
“He requested an additional application (of a Taser),” Wilson said.
Instead of drawing her department-issued Taser from its belt holster, a deputy accidently grabbed her department-issued .40-caliber pistol and fired a single bullet into Jones’ leg. Jones was airlifted to Harborview Medical Center in Seattle where he is listed in stable condition.
“The deputy reached for what (she) thought was a Taser and instead drew a firearm,” Wilson said. “We’re looking at it as an accidental shooting and it is being investigated by the Washington State Patrol.”
“We are very concerned about the welfare of this person,” Sheriff Steve Boyer said. “But this incident, as tragic as it is, brings to the forefront two issues: Training is effective and humans do make mistakes.
“The deputies involved responded to the call and attempted to resolve this situation utilizing available resources, as they have been trained. At some point the man refused to cooperate further. A decision was made to employ a less lethal use of force again, as trained. The second deputy reacted instantaneously to the first deputy’s command, per past training, but mistakenly unholstered a firearm instead of the Taser. That, unfortunately, is human error.”
The Kitsap County Sheriff’s Office administration will review the agency’s inventory and policy regarding current Taser models, and related support items, to prevent a reoccurrence of a similar incident, according to the department. There is no plan to remove the Taser from agency service.
The deputy, a five-year veteran, has been placed on administrative leave. Officials are not releasing her name.
An anonymous eyewitness said the deputy was distressed by the shooting. “She was on her hands and knees crying, like it was an accident,” the witness said. “The way she came over and the way the deputies came over, I think it was accidental.”
According to the 911 caller, David Blakeslee, Jones had been at the lot all morning. Blakeslee could hear him talking to himself.
“He was there first thing in the morning,” Blakeslee said. “He was talking to himself at a normal tone and was talking about time on the job and what he could see there. He was having full-blown conversations. I first thought he was on a cell phone, but he wasn’t.”
Blakeslee says it was after 11 a.m. when he went across the street and found Jones strapped up in the tree and called 911.
Sheriff’s deputies arrived as well as a Bremerton Fire ladder truck. The deputies attempted to talk the man into coming down from the tree, according to Blakeslee. “They talked to him for an hour-and-a-half trying to get him to come down,” he said.
SHOOTING BY DEPUTY IN NAVY YARD CITY DESCRIBED AS "ACCIDENTAL"
Central Kitsap (Washington) Reporter
www.centralkitsapreporter.com
By Kassie Korich
Jun 24 2006
A Kitsap County Sheriff’s deputy attempted to use her Taser on a distraught man in a tree Thursday afternoon, but accidently shot him in the leg.
Police were called to a vacant lot in the 200 block of National Avenue South in Navy Yard City after a 911 call came in at 11:40 a.m. about a man in a tree.
The man, identified by authorities as William A. Jones, 32, of Bremerton, was about 20 feet up in the tree. Several deputies and firefighters from the Bremerton Fire Department were trying to bring Jones down from the tree, when eyewitnesses said, the shot rang out.
“He was making irrational statements while up in the tree, we don’t know if he was suicidal,” Sheriff’s spokesman Deputy Scott Wilson said.
A male deputy at the scene initially tried to use his Taser on Jones, but was unsuccessful.
“He requested an additional application (of a Taser),” Wilson said.
Instead of drawing her department-issued Taser from its belt holster, a deputy accidently grabbed her department-issued .40-caliber pistol and fired a single bullet into Jones’ leg. Jones was airlifted to Harborview Medical Center in Seattle where he is listed in stable condition.
“The deputy reached for what (she) thought was a Taser and instead drew a firearm,” Wilson said. “We’re looking at it as an accidental shooting and it is being investigated by the Washington State Patrol.”
“We are very concerned about the welfare of this person,” Sheriff Steve Boyer said. “But this incident, as tragic as it is, brings to the forefront two issues: Training is effective and humans do make mistakes.
“The deputies involved responded to the call and attempted to resolve this situation utilizing available resources, as they have been trained. At some point the man refused to cooperate further. A decision was made to employ a less lethal use of force again, as trained. The second deputy reacted instantaneously to the first deputy’s command, per past training, but mistakenly unholstered a firearm instead of the Taser. That, unfortunately, is human error.”
The Kitsap County Sheriff’s Office administration will review the agency’s inventory and policy regarding current Taser models, and related support items, to prevent a reoccurrence of a similar incident, according to the department. There is no plan to remove the Taser from agency service.
The deputy, a five-year veteran, has been placed on administrative leave. Officials are not releasing her name.
An anonymous eyewitness said the deputy was distressed by the shooting. “She was on her hands and knees crying, like it was an accident,” the witness said. “The way she came over and the way the deputies came over, I think it was accidental.”
According to the 911 caller, David Blakeslee, Jones had been at the lot all morning. Blakeslee could hear him talking to himself.
“He was there first thing in the morning,” Blakeslee said. “He was talking to himself at a normal tone and was talking about time on the job and what he could see there. He was having full-blown conversations. I first thought he was on a cell phone, but he wasn’t.”
Blakeslee says it was after 11 a.m. when he went across the street and found Jones strapped up in the tree and called 911.
Sheriff’s deputies arrived as well as a Bremerton Fire ladder truck. The deputies attempted to talk the man into coming down from the tree, according to Blakeslee. “They talked to him for an hour-and-a-half trying to get him to come down,” he said.
Someone posted "malicious intent" on the part of the Deputy. I would not go that far...I mean a person would have to be a real piece of *doo doo* to actually plan on shooting someone in this case. Now...imcompetence...that is something that I totally agree with!! It will be curious what the end results of this will be...can you imagine if it were a citizen shooting someone in a tree and saying something like..."gee, I thought I had my Taser/Shocker/Pepper Spray/Hose/Deodorant or Wife's Meatloaf in my hand"??
I can agree with that, of course incompitance can also be criminal if it results in the direct injury of another. I know that's a slippery slope.
Still, she should be fired, and the department should not support her in any civil action that might come. I wonder if she is one of those cases that should have been probationally removed but wasn't because she is female. I also wonder if she was a man would the department have released her name.
Rainbow Six
New member
Someone mentioned muscle memory. My guess is that some of the earlier posts hit the nail on the head. She has practiced drawing her firearm but hasn't practiced much with the Taser. Her brain said shoot him with the Taser... her muscle memory heard shoot and went for the firearm that she has probably practiced drawing for longer, and for more repititions.
And I'm with those who say that the Taser is NOT really a good option for getting someone out of a tree. I'd think you'd simply "wait and negotiate" unless there were other crazy circumstances. I'm personally not going to deploy the Taser on anyone who stands to take a fall from higher than a standing position unless there is a weapon involved and the fall is the lesser of all evils.
Lastly, it's easy for a lot of you non-cops to sit at your keyboard and second guess her actions. Until you've been there and done that, your opinion really doesn't hold any weight. On top of that, you're judging something based on a news article on it. I can tell you from experience that only a small percentage of the information printed in news articles on cases I've had personal knowledge of has been correct. It's usually grossly biased if not almost totally inaccurate.
And I'm with those who say that the Taser is NOT really a good option for getting someone out of a tree. I'd think you'd simply "wait and negotiate" unless there were other crazy circumstances. I'm personally not going to deploy the Taser on anyone who stands to take a fall from higher than a standing position unless there is a weapon involved and the fall is the lesser of all evils.
Lastly, it's easy for a lot of you non-cops to sit at your keyboard and second guess her actions. Until you've been there and done that, your opinion really doesn't hold any weight. On top of that, you're judging something based on a news article on it. I can tell you from experience that only a small percentage of the information printed in news articles on cases I've had personal knowledge of has been correct. It's usually grossly biased if not almost totally inaccurate.
Harley Quinn
Moderator
Like I said on another thread same topic
The taser is not the best for the situation either. He/she got the guy out of the tree and should be fired for it. Simple.
HQ
The taser is not the best for the situation either. He/she got the guy out of the tree and should be fired for it. Simple.
HQ
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Should the officer be fired?
Here are some others:
1. A famous film clip of a female officer running up to a guy and ND into the ground
2. Another well known tv clip with a slew of officers chasing a knife holder and swaring him. A male officer runs up with an SMG and NDs. The department says the guy was struggling so Officer ND was just trying to scare him.
3. A recent one I posted - Mister Screwdriver resists the taser and with no fire discipline, an officer shoots him and another officer.
4. In Dallas, the SWAT team did a raid and 4 officers were shot - mostly by each other.
Were all these guys fired? Should they be?
Here are some others:
1. A famous film clip of a female officer running up to a guy and ND into the ground
2. Another well known tv clip with a slew of officers chasing a knife holder and swaring him. A male officer runs up with an SMG and NDs. The department says the guy was struggling so Officer ND was just trying to scare him.
3. A recent one I posted - Mister Screwdriver resists the taser and with no fire discipline, an officer shoots him and another officer.
4. In Dallas, the SWAT team did a raid and 4 officers were shot - mostly by each other.
Were all these guys fired? Should they be?
All the situations you point to were high stress threat. Not the one in question. Tell me, how would anyone be under stress over a guy in a tree that will not come down?
This reminds me of when we have an inmate who won't come out of his cell. We use force if negotiation fails but we don't shoot him. And its no stress, just do it by the numbers.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
I'm just thinking out loud. I've seen a nationally known instructor under no stress, brain fart and draw on a high level handgun class.
If you know the accident literature, it is amazing how people do stupid things under no stress. The officer in question was under some stress.
I'm not arguing for not firing her but just pointing out that such incidents can happen to anyone.
I was also wondering if the ones I mentioned got fired. They probably should if they can't function under stress. That's when we need them to.
If you know the accident literature, it is amazing how people do stupid things under no stress. The officer in question was under some stress.
I'm not arguing for not firing her but just pointing out that such incidents can happen to anyone.
I was also wondering if the ones I mentioned got fired. They probably should if they can't function under stress. That's when we need them to.
Capt. Charlie
Moderator Emeritus
Here's the problem: Law Enforcement today is a thinking man's job. It requires someone with good common sense, good judgment, and the ability to remain calm under stress. Serious mistakes in this job don't include a typo in a newspaper, or a mistake on an assembly line. The consequences of serious mistakes here are likely to include serious injury or death. Along with integrity, this is the crux of the reason that officers are held to a higher standard, and it's the reason that LE management can NOT afford to be timid in weeding out those who can't cut it.
Muscle memory, or instinctive response, is a valuable "tool" for a person, but except for the most dire of circumstances, the brain needs to be in control, not the muscle. Every situation is different, and every person has a different point at which muscle memory kicks in, but we simply can't afford to have those who employ muscle memory at the wrong time, whether consciously or not.
Good question, Glenn. This is usually the toughest question facing any supervisor; most understand the gravity of ending someone's career. Anyone who simply does a Donald Trump "You're fired", without conscience, is a poor supervisor.
I can only tell you how I do it. The very first thing I consider, is whether or not there was intent. An officer who intentionally violates law or policy is easy to deal with, and I believe in progressive discipline when I can.
Unintentional mistakes though, are more difficult to deal with. There, I look at that officer's history. Is (s)he a constant screw-up? Will counseling or remedial training resolve the problem? Transfer to another assignment? If none of the above are successful, it's time to take harsh steps. Ignoring the problem won't make it go away.
I doubt there was intent in this deputy's actions, but the seriousness of her mistake warrants serious supervisory action. She apparently is a 5-year veteran, so she doesn't rate the tolerance I'd give to a rookie, but as to whether or not she should be fired, I can't make that judgment and recommedation without access to her history. If numerous screw-ups are on record, and remedial training failed to correct the problem, then so be it. On the other hand, if I look at her record and see commendations, numerous good arrests, few uses of force, etc., then I'm prone to recommend that we attempt to salvage her.
One thing's for sure: If a LE supervisor errs, it must be in favor of the public's safety, no matter how tough the decision is.
Charlie, your post remided me of a succint explanation of that thinking that I received in the academy, 30-odd years ago (it's those odd years that'll get ya
). Went something like this-
"Mistakes of the mind can be forgiven, often corrected. Mistakes of the mind happen to all of us. Mistakes of the heart- now that's a different story. Those are based in poor ethics, and they'll cost you your career, your family- and maybe even your freedom."
The lesson was easy to remember.
). Went something like this-"Mistakes of the mind can be forgiven, often corrected. Mistakes of the mind happen to all of us. Mistakes of the heart- now that's a different story. Those are based in poor ethics, and they'll cost you your career, your family- and maybe even your freedom."
The lesson was easy to remember.
Rainbow Six
New member
Absolutely! I couldn't agree more. In fact I counselled an employee just last night on the difference between screwing up on her job and getting someone's order wrong at McDonalds. Her attitude was that her mistakes were "little ones" and that a big deal was being made of nothing. And that's what we're working with...
As for screening and weeding, the sad fact is that to fill positions/zones a lot of us front line shift level supervisors are force fed the ones that should have been rejects. We are tasked with trying to keep them in line and turn them into the best officers we can. In fact in a lot of cases some of us have warned admin pre-hire on certain applicants based on working side by side with them while they worked with smaller agencies within our jurisdiciton...
Some still get hired with stipulations and we're told to make their probation intensive to ensure the problems from elsewhere do not follow them here. Some come clean with proper supervision and training... Some suck. Not all of the ones that suck get cut. And that's where things can get ugly for all involved...
Capt. Charlie
Moderator Emeritus
And this is a real problem at far too many agencies. It puts mid-level supervisors between the proverbial rock-and-a-hard-place. We know they shouldn't be out there, have strongly recommended that they not be out there, and still, if they screw up, our own future is in question through vicarious liability.
The only answer, sadly, has been said time and again: Document, document, document!! Meticulous records of actions taken and recommendations concerning problem officers is the only thing that can save your bacon in a civil suit and shift the blame to where it should have been in the first place.
Accident or not!
That lady shouldn't be carrying a firearm.
I knew a Deputy that shot the lead guitarist in the hand by accident. A few years later that same Deputy shot himself in the hand, accidentally. Some people just don't have the skills necessary to be law enforcement agents.
That lady shouldn't be carrying a firearm.
I knew a Deputy that shot the lead guitarist in the hand by accident. A few years later that same Deputy shot himself in the hand, accidentally. Some people just don't have the skills necessary to be law enforcement agents.
Rainbow Six
New member
And document I do... CYA!!!
FMUStewart
New member
Listen here, "Deputy Sheriff" - Non-LEO's opinions DO hold weight, and may be the determining factor should this case ever make it to court. If you were to ever to become the REAL Sheriff, all of the little non-LEO opinions would also hold a lot of weight.
I'm not weighing in either way on the topic (its a new article...a blip in the bigger picture), but you're blatently condescending attitude towards those people that you serve is nonsense and is shameful to your community....
...God's sheep...
Stew
Harley Quinn
Moderator
Bad shootings happen true
Now you have this to ponder:
Both weapons were very inapropriate. Why would you tase someone in a tree?
Why would you shoot him if there is not a threat to you or others (beside tree person).
Conversation was something like, come on down. No. Boom.
Sometimes people have to be protected for their own good.
Fire Dept should have been called. Ladder up to the guy and get him down.
Negotiation or hey leave him alone. Now you have me wondering about the SGT on the scene, if any.
Fire um both.
Rules of engagement always know your back ground. What if she missed and the bullet took out some one down the street a mile away?
To me this is a no brainer, counseling for preperation to lose job and let her go.
HQ
Now you have this to ponder:
Both weapons were very inapropriate. Why would you tase someone in a tree?
Why would you shoot him if there is not a threat to you or others (beside tree person).
Conversation was something like, come on down. No. Boom.
Sometimes people have to be protected for their own good.
Fire Dept should have been called. Ladder up to the guy and get him down.
Negotiation or hey leave him alone. Now you have me wondering about the SGT on the scene, if any.
Fire um both.
Rules of engagement always know your back ground. What if she missed and the bullet took out some one down the street a mile away?
To me this is a no brainer, counseling for preperation to lose job and let her go.
HQ