SF Chronicle--Why risk for cops?

G

Guy B. Meredith

New member
Who killed Suzie Marie Pena?
- Debra J. Saunders
Sunday, August 14, 2005

WHY would anyone want to become a police officer when even self- defense is now deemed "excessive force" and "racist?"

Those charges have been hurled at Los Angeles police officers, who, on July 10, shot to death 19-month-old Suzie Marie Pena -- because her father Jose Raul Pena held the child as a human shield as he fired a stolen semiautomatic handgun toward police.

Pena had wounded one officer during a 2 1/2-hour standoff. What's more, police had managed to rescue Suzie Marie's 17-year-old sister, who had called the police because Pena was threatening her, and he did fire his gun toward her.

Were the police supposed to wait until Pena killed one of them before they stormed into the auto repair shop office?

Of course, the baby's death is a tragedy for her, as well as her mother, sister and brothers. It is also a tragedy for the police who shot at Pena and the child. (Police say they can't determine which officer fired the shot that killed the toddler.)

Still, Police Chief William J. Bratton has been clear that all fault lies with the father -- "a cold-blooded killer," who doomed his baby girl when he used her as a human shield while continuing to fire at the authorities.

As a nearby business owner confirmed to the Los Angeles Times, "The guy was shooting at (police) all the time. Bullets were pinging off cars. ... This guy was no innocent bystander."

Lawyers for the baby's mother, Lorena Lopez, demanded a federal investigation. Demonstrations followed. U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles, issued a statement in which she wondered why professional sharpshooters "could not have disabled this supposed crazy and confused man."

Last week, the FBI announced it had launched a probe into the shooting.

Lopez blames the LAPD for her child's death. "The police killed my daughter. I want justice." But her anger is misdirected. Lopez can't get justice from a dead man, and if she wants to assign blame, she might look at her choice in men.

Pena, an illegal immigrant who had been deported in 1995 after he was convicted for cocaine possession, was high on cocaine and had been drinking during the rampage. The coroner's office later found traces of cocaine in the baby's urine.

Pena threatened to kill Lopez, her daughter, their baby and himself. Lopez herself called police, charging that Pena was threatening her. Later, her teenage daughter called police because he was threatening her.

I don't mean to suggest in any way that Suzie Marie's life was open to forfeit because of her mother's bad decisions -- an innocent child died an early death when that never should have happened. But I will argue that Lopez should consider how her own bad judgment in partners brought violence and mayhem into her children's lives.

To call the police and ask for protection, then expect them not to protect themselves or neighbors who could have been hurt, makes no sense. What is more, reports make it clear that officers were trying to save the baby as they charged into Pena's office.

Should the police have waited longer? It's easy to answer "yes" now. And I am sure that many of the officers involved have asked themselves that question countless times.

Members of the public should be asking questions too: Do they want to hold police officers to such impossible standards that reasonable men and women don't want to wear blue?

E-mail: dsaunders@sfchronicle.com.

Page C - 5
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/08/14/EDG3FE6HSG1.DTL
©2005 San Francisco Chronicle
 
What a crappy situation. If it was me, I would have shot back also. Its amazing how all these "do-righter's" will complain about anything and place blame on anyone. The police did their job. It is entirely Pena's fault for this incident, imo.
 
Fully agree with all the above--LEO's are not to blame here in the least. It's unfortunate to say the least that the little girl lost her life in the event, but I prefer to look at the cause of the original problem, not the what-if's that go along with the aftermath. The police were faced with a very bad situation here. But it's not their fault it happened. Personally, I think the mother should be brought up on a minimum of criminal endangerment and a full investigation should be focused on why there were traces of cocaine in the baby's urine, not on why the PD couldn't turn a nightmare into a fairytale ending.
 
An innocent child died during a police action.
There should be a full and unbiased, damn the consequences investigation and blame and punishment assigned as necessary.
If not you run the risk of Ruby Ridge whitewashes becoming the accepted norm.

The investigation is going to bring out facts that the hand wringers and wagon circlers are not privy to.
Like could the PD simply waited him out or was there an imminent danger to the public if they did. Was there time to negotiate or stall until trained snipers arrived or did it turn to mud in a hurry.

Ultimately the father caused the tragedy but it should be scrutinized to insure that if it was at all preventable proper training would be provided in the future and also for the peace of mind of the officers involved.

No investigation will ask harder questions than they are asking of themselves
 
The toxicology tests have been published and show that he had high amounts of cocaine and meth!! He is the guilty one as is the mother for permitting him near her child !!
 
Actually, I agree with joab. We can't afford to do a simple whitewash without going through the facts. The fact is, that the action was almost certainly justified, with utterly tragic results. But let's come to that conclusion logically.
 
What a NO WIN situation.

The cops shot and the baby got killed. Now everyone wonders why.

If the father had killed the baby, everyone would have wondered why the cops DIDNT shoot in time.


Danged if you do and danged if you dont.


Only one thing is for sure...
NO COP wanted to kill that baby...
 
There would be an investigation anyway, and probably a grand jury.

The LAPD formally investigates anything and everything concerning its officers, all the way down to anonymous complaints. There is no discretion allowed, which means the number of internal investigations is astronomical.

And now the FBI will be there to "help" :rolleyes:
 
I am still confused over why noone blames the lack of illegal immigration round-ups? If the seemingly illegal immigrant father had been rounded up and deported, I doubt he would have caused this incident. I similarly wonder where the cocaine trace derived from, breast feeding?
 
Do us all a favor and shoot the mother too.

I'm surprised that greedy, selfish whore isn't suing Glock for making the PD's guns. Or Ford for providing the Crown Victoria cruisers.
 
I don't think you can blame the mother either. The mother did not kill this child. Let's at least be consistent. The sole responsibility for this child's death rests with the scumbag. Sure, the choice of partners was poor, but she did not kill that child. And sure, she's being a _________ about this, but it isn't her fault any more than it's the police's.
 
It does, at times, seem like the police get into thinking that the availability of force is a mandate to use it. I'm thinking of the thread about the non-compliant traffic stop lady who got tazered.

In this case a good investigation is needed to demonstrate that returning fire was the only legitimate and prudent method of saving police and innocent lives, even at the extreme risk to one of them.

BUT, in a situation like this, it is the job of the police to save lives. Saving one cop (paid to take such risks) at the loss of one innocent is completely backwards. If police lives can't be risked for the sake of a hostage, then the police should have stayed home.
 
jcoiii
Most here can only try to imagine the pain of losing a child and the incredible difficulty in accepting that you were at least part of the reason that the child died.

Her lashing out at the police could be simply a way of trying to come to grips with what has happened, the anger stage.

Or she could just be a greedy self centered ole bat trying to get paid

I cleaned that last part up for Rich and The Robot
 
There are quite a few LAPD officers in my reserve unit who are extremely ticked off about this whole deal. Their SWAT team is the oldest in the country, and this is only the second hostage they have lost. From what I've heard from them there are a few details missing from the article that point out how badly the LA cops are being railroaded.

1. SWAT went in because Pena had just hung up on the negotiator saying he was going to kill the hostages. They couldn't wait any longer.

2. Pena was, obviously, a lot bigger than the infant. He was holding the child in front of his chest with one arm while shooting with the other. In the dark building the cops only saw the single silhouette of an adult man. They never saw the infant until after.

3. Pena popped into a doorway and started shooting at the same moment the cop on point tripped over something in the dark and fell down. No. 2 thought the point man had been shot and reacted by returning fire. All the officers I know are unanimous in saying they would have done the same.

This whole thing, the shooting and the aftermath, has taken a huge toll on the LAPD SWAT team. A sargeant I know believes many will probable resign over this. Having to live with killing a kid is hard enough, but then they get crucified in the media on top of that. The idea that they did this out of some racist impulse is insane. But that brand of insanity is standard in LA and SF, and that's why I bailed on Kalifornia and moved to Texas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top