Police Shoot Handcuffed Man in the Back

Status
Not open for further replies.
When I went through the academy (pushing 40 years ago) they really emphasized that LEOs were held to a higher standard. I came to know, when on the streets, that there were few friends out there. And also that there was a lot of "contempt of cop." Not against the law. But it was almost a sacred duty to protect a person suspected of a crime when they were cuffed - even in the face of some pretty stiff contempt. One of the officers on the local PD lost his badge and got some jail time for working over an abusive suspect in cuffs.

One of my classmates at the academy was a retired Navy CPO. He shot and killed a drunk kid (he was off duty at the time) with his county issued revolver. He was charged and convicted of murder 2 and is probably still in jail. For me, it was very sobering...

Carrying a badge is tough. No other way to see it. But still - you must be held to that higher standard. That being said, the shooting was a tragedy - both for the suspect and the LEO who shot him. And whether the LEO should face charges, I believe that he should. And stiff ones at that. Not only did the LEO violate the Penal Code but he violated the trust...

When I got a cell phone, I carried it on my weak side. I have carried concealed and open for enough years that I wanted no chance of confusion. The department that I was with held night shoots on a regular basis. One of the drills was to draw your weapon and point it in the direction of the target. The OIC would then pop a flash bulb and you were to fire six shots into the target and reload. It worried me because I could see it as the basis for unintentionally shooting during a traffic stop if you caught the flash of the headlights from a turning vehicle nearby. Under stress, a learned and reinforced response to the stimulus will tend to rule out other action. Not always. But possible. Lots of words - but I agree with the poster who said that a taser should feel very different from a service sidearm.
 
You want to get to the root causes of this?

1. Training
2. Hiring practices.
3. Training.


I predict the jury will convict him of whatever California's criminally negligent homicide equivalent is. If I was the guys attorney, thats what I would be aiming at, as the DA is going to look for more to appease the "public". I would go so far as to have him testify before the grand jury and admit he screwed up.

WildseemypsbelowAlaska ™

PS...99% of cops are good solid citizens. 99% of gun owners are good solid citizens. Neither should be tarred by the actions of the bad one's, dont you agree?

PPS...what kind of handgun are these officers issued?
 
You want to get to the root causes of this?

1. Training
2. Hiring practices.
3. Training.
Click to expand...

I suspect you're right, but for what it's worth:

Qualifications and training for BART police officers exceed the mandates of the state's Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, which certifies all California peace officers.
Click to expand...

BART Police

I don't know what type of guns they're issued.

I really don't understand those that call this a summary execution. I didn't see that on the videos. Let the courts figure it out. Good chance the guy will be over-punished anyway, given the political pressure on the DA.
 
so bad

poor thing. he turned in a resignation to avoid internal affairs. looks like a "I'm sorry" action and I do not like those. you favorite cat dies- im sorry. you get a hang nail- im sorry. a family member dies- im sorry.
WA is right - Train
train the way you fight and fight the way you train.
I hat it for the families but he needs to be relieved of any and all police power. let him push a short mop for a while.
 
From what I heard at roll call tonight, he drew the pistol when he meant to draw the tazer.


It was a tragic mistake, however, I think that leaving his job is more than enough punishment.


I think a suspension coupled with some retraining would be more fitting.


I understand being held to a higher standard, The problem I have with the Cop bashers is that this Police Officer was doing his job in good faith when a mistake occured. He doesn't have the key factor in determining guilt, INTENT, his intent was to arrest a resisting offender.
 
Negligent Homicide (or whatever your State calls it) needs no mens rea. It is an act of criminal negligence whereby recklessness itself generally meets the legislated criteria of mens rea.
 
Or as the model penal code points out

"Criminal negligence requires that the defendant should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the death of another human being will result from his conduct. The conduct must be a “gross deviation” from the standard of care of a reasonable person"

WildtheloweststandardAlaska TM
 
I don't see the "unjustifiable risk" He was assisting in a difficult arrest and drew wrong tool. I am sorry I can't take the leap of criminally charging a guy for making a mistake while doing his job. The only way I could interpret negligence is if he was playing with his gun and it went off or something of that nature.
 
I think a suspension coupled with some retraining would be more fitting.
Click to expand...


1 He was trained in the use of firearm and taser
2 he was aware of the risk
3 he failed to ensure that he was using the correct weapon
4 he killed another person

This man's mistake cost another his life, and some here think a suspension is enough to compensate for that? What if that dead person had been your child? Would you feel the same way?

Allowing the defense of "I didn't mean it." opens the door for any person anywhere to use "oops, my bad" as a legal defense.

The problem I have with the Cop bashers is that this Police Officer was doing his job in good faith when a mistake occured. He doesn't have the key factor in determining guilt, INTENT, his intent was to arrest a resisting offender.
Click to expand...

California law:

192. Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without
malice. It is of three kinds:

(a) Voluntary--upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.
(b) Involuntary--in the commission of an unlawful act, not
amounting to felony; or in the commission of a lawful act which might
produce death, in an unlawful manner, or without due caution and
circumspection. This subdivision shall not apply to acts committed in
the driving of a vehicle.

Don't need intent for involuntary manslaughter. How is it that when people want to hold a cop accountable for his actions, and are not bashing cops in general, do people always come forward and excuse the cop's actions and accuse those wanting to hold him accountable of cop bashing? This thread is not about bashing cops in general, but is about holding one cop accountable for taking the life of another human being.
 
Last edited:
years ago...i saw a friend of a friend punch his fist thru a wall or door on a few occasions. what flipped his switch is hard to say, but to an onlooker it kinda looked like that video, especially when his pistol stuck in his holster for a sec and he just kept on going regardless.

of course it couldn't be, but it still looks like an execution. disturbing.
 
a note from this observer...i would hope all responses are in line with all the thought provoking posts on typical threads regarding:

"accidental or negligent discharge?"
 
Training

We all must train and train until an act becomes second nature, without thought. Sufficient training would help to eliminate incidents such as this in the heat of engagement or battle. This ex LE type will get some jail time because he had not received , I am sure, the necessary training and BART will also get some bad press and rightly so.
 
While training is obviously important and folks say that if you practice intensively you will be ok- we know that is not always the case. There are two well known pathways for an action:

1. An automatic one that is not under conscious control and is very quick
2. An analytic one that is slower and under control.

A handgun like taser may just be a response trap that leads to a quick draw on the gun if stress moves you towards an automatic response. I don't recall folks confusing their night stick for a gun or vice versa. We have heard of folks trying to reload with their cell phone (if that is true).

Perhaps, the nongunlike civilian tasers would be a better carry if we continue to see this.

As far as the legal ramifications - I can easily see the civil suit bringing in human factors experts to discuss such. I have a friend who was involved in a Glock lawsuit with someone shooting themselves by pulling the trigger on a loaded gun to fit it into the box with the post and a discussion of the components of liability. Yes, there are warnings but the design suggests the bad action - etc.
 
My son would not be fighting with the police.

I am sorry, I can't work up sympathy for this piece of police fighting human debris that is causing my brothers in Oakland such aggravation. His family just hit the ghetto lotto.
 
How's that, I didn't mention race at all. It is an term used when a lowlife regardless of color, creed, race etc. puts himself into a situation in which he is breaking the law and then sues the Police Department for injuries caused during the arrest process.
 
His family just hit the ghetto lotto.
Click to expand...

Another cop defends summary execution.

I didn't realize that resisting arrest was a death penalty offense that doesn't even deserve things like due process or all the formalities of a trial.
 
Did we ever determine whether the officer in question was wearing his Taser on the wrong side, leading to him drawing the gun accidentally? If so, that alone would be an action taken by the officer that would justify a finding of negligence, considering it both led to a death and that this result was foreseeable (hence the policy in the first place).

And that's beside the fact the the drive-stun mode would have been a more appropriate use of the Taser anyway (and presented a much lower risk to the suspect...Tasers being less than lethal, not non-lethal), and would also have prevented this death.

I honestly don't care if he spends any time in prison...I think all the mitigating factors mentioned should definitely be taken into account at sentencing, and I'd be fine with just the conviction. But I don't want to see this guy in another department two towns (or two states) over a year or two from now. He's proven he can't handle the responsibility. Not everybody can.

EDIT: Noting that the above is assuming that there aren't any crazy mitigating factors not shown in the video...which, while possible, does not fit in with any info released thus far since the release of said video. At this point I'm pretty comfortable taking the video at face value, which is to say that this was an entirely accidental shooting.
 
Last edited:
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner:
Also, you should almost certainly be charged with a crime when making a mistake at work causes somebody to be killed. What crime you should be charged with will vary on circumstances. Whether or not you should be convicted depends on whether a jury believes that you were acting in good faith, whether there was any negligence involved, etc. The punishment should you be convicted would depend on other mitigating circumstances as well.
Click to expand...
Excellent summary (IMHO.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top