LE UOF Video thread

[voodoo_man]

Searched and did not find one. Since these video's are going to be a mainstay due to technology, maybe gives us a thread to have an open discussion about the video and what, if anything could have been differently.

I'll start off with this MD video of officer's having to deal with a guy who is possibly under the influence of a narcotic.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=29e_1441564124


*Mod's if there is a thread like this or a thread like this is not something that is for this sub/forum, delete/move please.

[Nephrology]

Safe to assume that 1st officer's taser probes did not make full contact?

Dude must have been really doped up to keep fighting after multiple (6?) taser shocks, a few solid whacks with a baton, and a healthy faceful of pepper spray...

[BJJ]

Great idea for a thread.

[voodoo_man]

Safe to assume that 1st officer's taser probes did not make full contact?

Dude must have been really doped up to keep fighting after multiple (6?) taser shocks, a few solid whacks with a baton, and a healthy faceful of pepper spray...

Physical contact wasn't made until the second officer bum rushed the subject at the exit of the McD's. Stand off force was used until then and after that. Only one officer put gloves on - something that would need to be addressed, since there was time and opportunity to put gloves on.

Direct taser contact seemed to work well.

[Symmetry]

Safe to assume that 1st officer's taser probes did not make full contact?

Dude must have been really doped up to keep fighting after multiple (6?) taser shocks, a few solid whacks with a baton, and a healthy faceful of pepper spray...

That's the problem with a combative suspect amped up on drugs. They don't really reach a point where they are submissive through pain compliance. So unless the baton strike disrupts some anatomical function such as a broken bone, the suspect may not be phased at all even after multiple strikes in good nerve plexus areas. They have to run out of steam, and the taser does help to wear them down. In the end though, you may just have to dog pile them and use leverage(like an extended baton) to pry their wrists into position for cuffing.

[Le Français]

Regarding the cpl. who appears just before 6:00 in the video: his SLS hood seems to be in the forward position. That's very dangerous, especially in a situation involving physical contact with a resisting person.

If that happened by accident, he might have an equipment issue. If he did it on purpose in anticipation of having to draw, he needs to smarten up.

[UNK]

Seems like a reasoned response. Interesting how the tasers in the back locked him up.

[pablo]

The way the Taser was popping, there was most likely a disconnect. A loud popping sound is usually means that the current is arcing through the air. If the Taser doesn't have an effect, quit pulling the damn trigger. There's no good reason to put yourself in a position to get dinged for using ineffective force down the road. That cop is lucky that guy didn't have a heart attack and die because the number of trigger pulls and the amount of time under power would have been a major factor, even though there is no electricity going into the suspect's body. I counted 7 deployments covering 5, 11, 28, 7 , 6, 5, 5 seconds inside the store. Plus whatever they did outside, that's a lot of time to apply power and account for.

Given the general lack of concern shown by the people in the restaurant I think there may have been some time to put on the brakes, try to wait for some more cover, get an ambulance ordered and then deal with the problem. The way cops are getting dinged these days for not following call response policy and ambushed, that's not a situation a cop needs to be in by himself.

[tanner]

Pablo makes an excellent point. The printout from the download from that TASER would be problematic if anything bad happened to the suspect. Just like bullets, each and every trigger pull has to be justifiable.

Plus, if what you are doing is ineffective, then it is time to switch tactics. Can't get caught in a feedback loop.

[voodoo_man]

Warning to anyone who doesn't want to see a dog get shot...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdhPkxJ6G_I

He's wearing a camera attached to his sunglasses, shows the situation completely and what happens afterwards.

[KeeFus]

Warning to anyone who doesn't want to see a dog get shot...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdhPkxJ6G_I

He's wearing a camera attached to his sunglasses, shows the situation completely and what happens afterwards.

Dont read the comments on the video...just dont. SMDH.

[Luke]

Deleted

[Symmetry]

Warning to anyone who doesn't want to see a dog get shot...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdhPkxJ6G_I

He's wearing a camera attached to his sunglasses, shows the situation completely and what happens afterwards.

This is why you keep your f*****g dog fenced in or on a chain. Just curious what those guys use for caliber and ammo brand?

[KeeFus]

This is why you keep your f*****g dog fenced in or on a chain. Just curious what those guys use for caliber and ammo brand?

IIRC, Glock 17 & Gold Dot 124 gr+P.

[Symmetry]

IIRC, Glock 17 & Gold Dot 124 gr+P.

Cool. Looks like it worked.

[pablo]

This is why you keep your f*****g dog fenced in or on a chain. Just curious what those guys use for caliber and ammo brand?

This is where it'd be a really good idea to tell the officer at your house that's about to go in your backyard that you have a dog that's protective of it's home. Most alarm companies will notify the PD of this too, if they have the information. Cop was doing his job, the dog was doing his job, someone had the power to stop that confrontation and failed miserably.

[Symmetry]

This is where it'd be a really good idea to tell the officer at your house that's about to go in your backyard that you have a dog that's protective of it's home. Most alarm companies will notify the PD of this too, if they have the information. Cop was doing his job, the dog was doing his job, someone had the power to stop that confrontation and failed miserably.

I feel that a dog is the equivalent of setting a booby trap(which are illegal pretty much everywhere). Dogs are known for attacking children that wander onto someone's property to retrieve a ball. Dogs in general are loose cannons, and even the most highly trained ones can be unpredictable under stress......especially when they are not leashed by the owner. I have seen my share of mauled children over the years, and the owner has always insisted that their dog was sweet and loving.

[Totem Polar]

There's no win in that clip. Bottom line: the officer had to shoot a judge's family dog. Anyone watch long enough to catch the line "yes ma'am, I know your husband..."? Even with the best cop and the most magnanimous judge, that's going to cause some tension.

[Nephrology]

I feel that a dog is the equivalent of setting a booby trap(which are illegal pretty much everywhere). Dogs are known for attacking children that wander onto someone's property to retrieve a ball. Dogs in general are loose cannons, and even the most highly trained ones can be unpredictable under stress......especially when they are not leashed by the owner. I have seen my share of mauled children over the years, and the owner has always insisted that their dog was sweet and loving.

well, there are some dogs where this will never be an issue of course.... (beagles, golden retrievers, etc...)

[Hambo]

I feel that a dog is the equivalent of setting a booby trap(which are illegal pretty much everywhere). Dogs are known for attacking children that wander onto someone's property to retrieve a ball. Dogs in general are loose cannons, and even the most highly trained ones can be unpredictable under stress.

A SWAT instructor once told me that he thought the decision to shoot dogs got made before the team ever rolled. Meaning that some are predisposed to think dogs are a threat while others aren't. I'm in the camp that thinks a lot of people overreact to dogs.

[voodoo_man]

A SWAT instructor once told me that he thought the decision to shoot dogs got made before the team ever rolled. Meaning that some are predisposed to think dogs are a threat while others aren't. I'm in the camp that thinks a lot of people overreact to dogs.

I've flip flopped in both mindsets. Sometimes the team is told shoot all dogs on contact, sometimes we just do what we want. Now a days, I just let the dogs determine how I act towards them. The video outlined a very real scenario which I've been in several times, though thankfully I didn't have to shoot any dogs in those situations. One thing I tell people all the time is that you need to figure it out for yourself and not listen to others. Once a dog shows their intent (which is usually extreme obvious) you need to either act or run away very fast. I've seen officer's try to taze and OC spray dogs, that doesn't always work. I've had great results with 1000+ lumen flashlights in strobe on dogs that get aggressive at me at night, I don't know why but it seems to make them not come at me but stay where they are and bark or walk away from the light.

Since shooting dogs is a polarizing topic for many, I always like to add that I've seen first hand what happens when dogs attack, the person always goes to the hospital and if they are not stopped at that moment they are going to be difficult to deal with in the future.

I also recently saw this video, pretty brutal, thankfully NYC doesn't let you defend yourself...from anything...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoMmE90DeyQ

[Nephrology]

I've flip flopped in both mindsets. Sometimes the team is told shoot all dogs on contact, sometimes we just do what we want. Now a days, I just let the dogs determine how I act towards them. The video outlined a very real scenario which I've been in several times, though thankfully I didn't have to shoot any dogs in those situations. One thing I tell people all the time is that you need to figure it out for yourself and not listen to others. Once a dog shows their intent (which is usually extreme obvious) you need to either act or run away very fast. I've seen officer's try to taze and OC spray dogs, that doesn't always work. I've had great results with 1000+ lumen flashlights in strobe on dogs that get aggressive at me at night, I don't know why but it seems to make them not come at me but stay where they are and bark or walk away from the light.

Since shooting dogs is a polarizing topic for many, I always like to add that I've seen first hand what happens when dogs attack, the person always goes to the hospital and if they are not stopped at that moment they are going to be difficult to deal with in the future.

I also recently saw this video, pretty brutal, thankfully NYC doesn't let you defend yourself...from anything...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoMmE90DeyQ

Those are two dogs that needed to get shot way sooner than later.

[voodoo_man]

Those are two dogs that needed to get shot way sooner than later.

My point with this video is to show what happens if not stopped.

[Nephrology]

My point with this video is to show what happens if not stopped.

Your point is very well made.

[Hunter Osborne]

My point with this video is to show what happens if not stopped.

It looks like most of the good samaritans trying to help were pretty adverse/incapable of using any real force on the dogs. I only saw one guy swing what looked like a 2 foot piece of chain, but everyone else looked like they were just trying to pull them off the guy.

Pretty interesting insight into how that breed goes about business. There were a few times when there were a handful of people around the dogs, and one guy even standing over the victim, and the dogs were still locked in on the guy in the yellow.

[Coyotesfan97]

A SWAT instructor once told me that he thought the decision to shoot dogs got made before the team ever rolled. Meaning that some are predisposed to think dogs are a threat while others aren't. I'm in the camp that thinks a lot of people overreact to dogs.

When I was on the team we rarely shot dogs. A LSDD works wonders on driving off dogs. Beanbags work well to if needed after that. One dog thrown into the mix works wonders on messing up an entry that's for sure. We could've justified shooting some of them but didn't.

Most dogs are defensive. That means they're mostly posturing. It depends on the breed but I've driven off plenty of dogs with a loud negative command and shining a flashlight in their eyes. I go into a lot of yards at night with my dog and encounter other dogs occasionally.

I use Pfui (Phooey) but that's from working Dutch dogs. But a loud Pfui works on dogs that have never even heard it. Reading dogs can be tricky but most of them are not going to carry out a determined aggressive attack

Fortunately I've kept them off me and my dog. He's been attacked a couple times by loose dogs in the street but I or my backups have driven them off without shooting any of them. Tasers work great for 21 feet if you get a good connection. After 21 feet the wires break when the dogs running off.

I worked with a former animal control guy who'd just use an extended ASP in his hand like a short noose pole. He said it was all you need. I've seen plenty of dogs instinctively shy away from noose poles.

[JDM]

When I was on the team we rarely shot dogs. A LSDD works wonders on driving off dogs. Beanbags work well to if needed after that. One dog thrown into the mix works wonders on messing up an entry that's for sure. We could've justified shooting some of them but didn't.

Most dogs are defensive. That means they're mostly posturing. It depends on the breed but I've driven off plenty of dogs with a loud negative command and shining a flashlight in their eyes. I go into a lot of yards at night with my dog and encounter other dogs occasionally.

I use Pfui (Phooey) but that's from working Dutch dogs. But a loud Pfui works on dogs that have never even heard it. Reading dogs can be tricky but most of them are not going to carry out a determined aggressive attack

Fortunately I've kept them off me and my dog. He's been attacked a couple times by loose dogs in the street but I or my backups have driven them off without shooting any of them. Tasers work great for 21 feet if you get a good connection. After 21 feet the wires break when the dogs running off.

I worked with a former animal control guy who'd just use an extended ASP in his hand like a short noose pole. He said it was all you need. I've seen plenty of dogs instinctively shy away from noose poles.

LSDD?

[Coyotesfan97]

Light Sound Diversionary Device


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JDM]

Light Sound Diversionary Device


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks!

[El Cid]

I feel that a dog is the equivalent of setting a booby trap(which are illegal pretty much everywhere). Dogs are known for attacking children that wander onto someone's property to retrieve a ball. Dogs in general are loose cannons, and even the most highly trained ones can be unpredictable under stress......especially when they are not leashed by the owner. I have seen my share of mauled children over the years, and the owner has always insisted that their dog was sweet and loving.

Sounds just like LEO's I've worked with over the years who are either irrationally afraid of dogs, or just itching to use their sidearm. There are times when the appropriate response is to shoot a dog. But most situations don't require it in my experience. I'd recommend you spend more time learning about them rather than casting them all as "unpredictable" and "booby traps." Unless it's a group of attacking dogs, a single animal can usually be dealt with without resorting to deadly force.

[JM Campbell]

Light Sound Diversionary Device


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I want flash/bangs to.

#dogslivesmater


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[Kukuforguns]

Videos like the one with 2 dogs always depress me. There was so much fail in that video. There's a guy lying on the ground who could use some first aid. No one offers. Every human there outweighed each of those dogs by double and no one took a dog to the ground. We can speak and I saw no evidence of a coordinated response. As pointed out earlier, the only force multiplier was a chain used ineffectively (that and a hose). It was surprising to me that the dogs only wanted to hurt one human. They'd go around other humans who pulled them to get back to the one guy.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Coyotesfan97]

He's down on the ground he's prey and he's already been attacked. They're going to try to go back.

[Kukuforguns]

He's down on the ground he's prey and he's already been attacked. They're going to try to go back.

That's what I concluded after thinking about it. Predators instinctually go after the weakest member of a pack. The injured man was now the weakest member. The predator in the dog took control.

[Coyotesfan97]

One thing we always tell new handlers and we'll demonstrate it with his dog in a muzzle is don't hit the door pop if you're on the ground with someone on top of you. Your dog will go for the person on the ground.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pablo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnOBfCmled8

Here's one that's tougher to call. By what's been going on lately this would probably not be a good shooting in most jurisdictions. It's a good shooting in the sense that the was justified in using force, but the officer going into the house probably wouldn't pass muster. The subject had been in a car crash and fled to the house, I never have been able to find out if he was on drugs and/or had a head injury. When the officer arrived it was reported that the subject was threatening to harm himself with a knife. IMO that should have been treated as a BP, if the suspect wants to come outside of the house with knives, that's one thing. Tactically there's no good reason to be in that house without cover. With the kind of scrutiny that officers are under now days, there's not many good reasons to go in a house to confront a suicidal subject armed with a knife.

[Nephrology]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnOBfCmled8

Here's one that's tougher to call. By what's been going on lately this would probably not be a good shooting in most jurisdictions. It's a good shooting in the sense that the was justified in using force, but the officer going into the house probably wouldn't pass muster. The subject had been in a car crash and fled to the house, I never have been able to find out if he was on drugs and/or had a head injury. When the officer arrived it was reported that the subject was threatening to harm himself with a knife. IMO that should have been treated as a BP, if the suspect wants to come outside of the house with knives, that's one thing. Tactically there's no good reason to be in that house without cover. With the kind of scrutiny that officers are under now days, there's not many good reasons to go in a house to confront a suicidal subject armed with a knife.

What is everyone's opinion re: the use of less than lethal options in this scenario?

[Peally]

well, there are some dogs where this will never be an issue of course.... (beagles, golden retrievers, etc...)

There are no dogs where that's a guaranteed non-issue. Some idiot regularly beating his Goldie for fun is going to create a large unhappy dog. You simply cannot know the dog's background and what type of person may be attacked if it happens. Not saying it's going to happen all the time, but there's always a possibility for violence.

[DonGlock26]

Seems like a reasoned response. Interesting how the tasers in the back locked him up.

More muscle mass in the back/less fat.

[pablo]

Before you click the link, the video is safe for work, the ads on liveleak may be NSFW.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d84_1442271250

Denver police shooting. Given the amount of children present, this is basically active shooter response.

[pablo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2uwbvD_Q4s

Officers confronting a robbery suspect. I don't know if it was deliberate, but the different angles of approach worked out well in the officers' favor. I find it interesting that things went bad once the second officer arrived, taking a WAG I think the bad guy was waiting for a more opportune moment to murder the first officer. It's a good reminder to keep stuff out of your gun hand. I don't think it's a good idea to threaten suspects with bodily harm anymore, unfortunate the use of certain "strong language" as a last resort to deadly force can be drawn way out of context by an over zealous prosecutor. I really loved the people in that came out of the store and placed themselves in the line of fire.

[pablo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12LwjcwrH64

2009 Centenial Bridge Shooting

[Chuck Whitlock]

well, there are some dogs where this will never be an issue of course.... (beagles, golden retrievers, etc...)


There are no dogs where that's a guaranteed non-issue. Some idiot regularly beating his Goldie for fun is going to create a large unhappy dog. You simply cannot know the dog's background and what type of person may be attacked if it happens. Not saying it's going to happen all the time, but there's always a possibility for violence.

He was never abused, but we had to put down my daughter's Basset hound for aggression issues. Later found out that the dam and that whole litter met similar fates.

[voodoo_man]

https://youtu.be/cN-c2HOT5pw

Found this in my tubing.

Some I have not seen before, some we've all seen.

What would you have done differently in which scenario? What would you suggest practicing/training for which scenario?

[dbateman]

I feel that a dog is the equivalent of setting a booby trap(which are illegal pretty much everywhere). Dogs are known for attacking children that wander onto someone's property to retrieve a ball. Dogs in general are loose cannons, and even the most highly trained ones can be unpredictable under stress......especially when they are not leashed by the owner. I have seen my share of mauled children over the years, and the owner has always insisted that their dog was sweet and loving.

Um yeah...


For a guy going by the name Symmetry you are quite unbalanced.

[voodoo_man]

http://youtu.be/Y2uwbvD_Q4s

[TGS]

Sounds just like LEO's I've worked with over the years who are either irrationally afraid of dogs, or just itching to use their sidearm. There are times when the appropriate response is to shoot a dog. But most situations don't require it in my experience. I'd recommend you spend more time learning about them rather than casting them all as "unpredictable" and "booby traps." Unless it's a group of attacking dogs, a single animal can usually be dealt with without resorting to deadly force.

I've been in that situation, being one on one with a pitbull (technically 2 on 1, it was also attacking my Rott), and you're full of shit. I broke the animal's jaw, and it still didn't give up until it felt like it was done......and it certainly wasn't by our doing. My rott got some really good bites in on that animal, too.

I will have zero fucking hesitation about putting down a dog that is attacking a person.....including my own goddamned animal. Instead of passing off judgement on other people for not wanting to subject their life and limb to grievous bodily harm, how about you shut the fuck up.

[El Cid]

I've been in that situation, being one on one with a pitbull (technically 2 on 1, it was also attacking my Rott), and you're full of shit. I broke the animal's jaw, and it still didn't give up until it felt like it was done......and it certainly wasn't by our doing. My rott got some really good bites in on that animal, too.

I will have zero fucking hesitation about putting down a dog that is attacking a person.....including my own goddamned animal. Instead of passing off judgement on other people for not wanting to subject their life and limb to grievous bodily harm, how about you shut the fuck up.

And the adult post of the day award goes to...

Toughen up chief. You're awfully thin skinned. I said there are times when it's necessary and appropriate. But people who refer to dogs as "booby traps" are the ones who need to zip it.

[TGS]

And the adult post of the day award goes to...

Toughen up chief. You're awfully thin skinned. I said there are times when it's necessary and appropriate. But people who refer to dogs as "booby traps" are the ones who need to zip it.

Get in a fight with a single dog and then get back to me and make that qualification that single animals don't need lethal force.

That's probably the outright most stupid thing I've ever read on this forum.

[El Cid]

Get in a fight with a single dog and then get back to me and make that qualification that single animals don't need lethal force.

That's probably the outright most stupid thing I've ever read on this forum.
Lmao! I said "usually." Seems you were sufficiently traumatized that a professional counselor could be useful. Good luck with your anger issues.

I'm done with this "debate". Apologies for thread drift to the OP.

[TGS]

Lmao! I said "usually." Seems you were sufficiently traumatized that a professional counselor could be useful. Good luck with your anger issues.

I'm done with this "debate". Apologies for thread drift to the OP.

It's called paraphrasing, and what you specifically wrote is still massively stupid.

[Hauptmann]

From my experience dogs are about as unpredictable as people. Sometimes you can recognize the body language, sometimes you can't. Same with a person. Usually the owners don't recognize their fur baby as anything other than a sweet angel that would never hurt anybody..........just like the mothers of many murderers. That being said, if you can avoid shooting a dog, it will be better for everybody emotionally and politically.

[voodoo_man]

The shooting of Zachary Hammond occurred on July 26, 2015, in Seneca, South Carolina. Hammond, age 19, was shot in his car during an undercover narcotics operation that targeted his passenger. Hammond, who was unarmed, was shot twice by 32-year-old police lieutenant Mark Tiller
Mark Tiller claims Hammond was trying to use his car as a deadly weapon Seneca officer Mark Tiller won't be charged.


liveleak video link -> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=066_1445960413

Second video, right after the above video ends, shows life-saving efforts -> http://www.wyff4.com/news/2nd-dashcam-video-shows-what-happened-after-officer-kills-teen/36072754

[Peally]

liveleak video link -> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=066_1445960413

Second video, right after the above video ends, shows life-saving efforts -> http://www.wyff4.com/news/2nd-dashcam-video-shows-what-happened-after-officer-kills-teen/36072754

The comments are LOL as usual. Looks pretty straight cut and dry to me, getting run over isn't funny.

[voodoo_man]

The comments are LOL as usual. Looks pretty straight cut and dry to me, getting run over isn't funny.

No, running over isn't funny.

The only point of contention I have is that they knew who he was. Letting him drive away would not have exactly stopped them from putting a warrant out for his arrest. I understand that making the arrest on the spot is always the best course of action, though sometimes the ends do not really require the means.

I have been in this same exact position, a few time and choose not to shoot because each time I had a good ID on the guy. A warrant on his house is worth more than a warrant on his car.

[GRV]

From this angle, especially on first watch, it doesn't look like the driver is trying to run him over. Rather it looks like he's just trying to get away.

[Peally]

Could be. I try not to Monday Morning Quarterback this stuff unless it's blatant though.

[Shellback]

Looks pretty straight cut and dry to me, getting run over isn't funny.

He wasn't in a position to be run over.

[Nephrology]

Here is a terrifying one.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e81_1446578220


Nebraska City, NE - In October of 2014, the Nebraska City Police Department got body cameras.

“This camera doesn't know who the good guys are, or the bad guys are,” said Nebraska City Police Chief David Lacy.

On December 7th, 2014, an officer’s camera captured a moment the department will never forget.

“When you see the video it all happens very quickly,” said Chief Lacy.

For Officer Coray Bell and his former partner Andrew Kriekemier, a call they received a little after midnight on December 7th seemed routine. “We got called to a noise disturbance at an apartment complex. It’s just a typical call, hey we’re going to come here and tell them to be quiet
and we’re going to leave” said Officer Bell.“I saw him draw his service weapon and then I drew mine,” said Officer Bell.

When the door flew open, an AR-15 was pointed directly at Officer Kriekemeier.

”Our training had kicked in, we needed to get in there and take care of the threat,” said Officer Bell.

Officers Bell and Kriekemeier had trained for this moment, but had hoped they would never be put into a shoot don't shoot situation.“Within milliseconds it could have been totally different,” said Officer Bell.

The person holding the gun quickly dropped the assault rifle. Officers later found out that the young adults were trying to play a drunken prank on their friends.“It's not very smart for the individuals
to be playing the prank, you never know who is going to be at the door and in this case it was law enforcement,” said Officer Bell.Nebraska City Police Chief David Lacy is proud of his officers for the decision they made.

“I’m glad these guys didn't pull the trigger and I’m glad that they got to go home and didn't have to face any repercussion about taking someone's life over a stupid prank,” said Chief Lacy.Chief Lacy believes his officers would have been justified if they had pulled the trigger.

What an awful idea for a prank. Those idiots playing the "prank" are sincerely lucky they did not end up dead.

[Peally]

Not gonna lie, I'd be laughing at them if they did.

[voodoo_man]

Here is a terrifying one.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e81_1446578220



What an awful idea for a prank. Those idiots playing the "prank" are sincerely lucky they did not end up dead.

Wow....

[voodoo_man]

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/local/crime/article43267758.html

[voodoo_man]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ4YrxGFF1I

[breakingtime91]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ4YrxGFF1I

bet he is glad he had that much ammo on board.

[voodoo_man]

Fuckin got it. Way to stay in the fight, bet he is glad he had that much ammo on board.

"You fight with what you brought, that's it."

Bring enough to the fight.

I like the fact he kept shooting, I don't exactly know at what or where, but he kept shooting.

Dr. Dre background music wasn't bad either.

[breakingtime91]

"You fight with what you brought, that's it."

Bring enough to the fight.

I like the fact he kept shooting, I don't exactly know at what or where, but he kept shooting.

Dr. Dre background music wasn't bad either.

lol same thoughts here. Not sure why but I accidentally deleted my first two sentences lol

[El Cid]

"You fight with what you brought, that's it."

Bring enough to the fight.

I like the fact he kept shooting, I don't exactly know at what or where, but he kept shooting.

Dr. Dre background music wasn't bad either.

Interesting post - met Ben in a training class last year. Class act.

4288

[breakingtime91]

Interesting post - met Ben in a training class last year. Class act.

4288

did they get the guy?

[KeeFus]

did they get the guy?

Yes. http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/florida-keys/article41374809.html

Heres the first officers in car video.

http://youtu.be/USdbH2TdJiQ

[Hauptmann]

bet he is glad he had that much ammo on board.

The suspect turned back into his vehicle and started to try to get the car moving after the first short volley from the officer(about 4 rounds). Everything after that had no effect on the suspect physically or psychologically because in a gun fight the shots fired get turned out. Most officers generally train to work within the capacity limitations of their particular sidearm. This officer psychologically knew that his pistol had a higher capacity, so he likely felt that he could deplete a large number of rounds and still have enough on hand to continue the fight. I have seen similar shooting situations where the officer had a 1911, and continued firing after the vehicle sped away, but at a slower rate of fire to manage his ammo consumption. The 1911 OIS resulted in the suspect taking one hit which caused him to bleed out about a half mile down the road.

[breakingtime91]

The suspect turned back into his vehicle and started to try to get the car moving after the first short volley from the officer(about 4 rounds). Everything after that had no effect on the suspect physically or psychologically because in a gun fight the shots fired get turned out. Most officers generally train to work within the capacity limitations of their particular sidearm. This officer psychologically knew that his pistol had a higher capacity, so he likely felt that he could deplete a large number of rounds and still have enough on hand to continue the fight. I have seen similar shooting situations where the officer had a 1911, and continued firing after the vehicle sped away, but at a slower rate of fire to manage his ammo consumption. The 1911 OIS resulted in the suspect taking one hit which caused him to bleed out about a half mile down the road.

....okay?

[NickA]

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/local/crime/article43267758.html
Interesting that none of the three officers had a knife to cut the seat belt.

[voodoo_man]

Interesting that none of the three officers had a knife to cut the seat belt.

Interesting isnt the word id use.

[voodoo_man]

https://www.facebook.com/OldGoldBass/videos/458252207708848/

[Luke]

https://www.facebook.com/OldGoldBass/videos/458252207708848/

What do you think about that

[Hauptmann]

....okay?

Sorry, I guess my post was cryptic. Not necessarily directed towards you. My point was related to the average officer and their general beliefs of what is effective in a gun fight. A good comparison is the officer of 30yrs ago with his revolver, and the officer today with his high capacity semi auto. OIS hit ratios have gotten worse in recent years, even in large departments like LAPD and NYPD with their 9mms in comparison to previous generation officers using revolvers. The difference is a psychological effect of having more ammo on hand, which makes the average officer under stress......for a lack of a better term "sloppy". I remember reading old bullet-points from the late 1970s from a Quantico FBI firearms trainer who have been involved is several gun fights. One of them was, "firing at targets you cannot see will only result in running out of ammo". I have lost track of how many OISs I have studied where officers either tried to shoot into a vehicle to hit a suspect they could not see, shoot through a fence to hit a suspect, or tried to bounce rounds off of pavement to hit a suspect under a vehicle and nearly run out of ammo doing so. Blind barrier shooting tends to run the mags dry with no measurable results, unless the officer has trained to understand the limitations of such a tactic and if it is worth putting any ammo towards it. At least in the video, both officers depleted a good portion of their ammo on a suspect they could no longer see, with no hits. A very common OIS tactic, with similar results to many other shootings. Not so much of a critic of the officers, just that it is hard to train officers to stop shooting once they have started.......even with no threat visible.

[JDM]

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/local/crime/article43267758.html

It boggles my mind there are people waking around without a cutting tool...regular people. I couldn't imagine being a cop and not having a knife or three handy.

[Hambo]

The suspect turned back into his vehicle and started to try to get the car moving after the first short volley from the officer(about 4 rounds). Everything after that had no effect on the suspect physically or psychologically because in a gun fight the shots fired get turned out.

The suspect was hit twice. Of course we don't know when he sustained those wounds, but it is possible to hit someone in a car. Just saying.

[voodoo_man]

What do you think about that

"Use the force required to overcome resistance" which they did.

Sometimes police work, especially on the street level doesnt look good, but thats what needs to happen.

[Shellback]

https://www.facebook.com/OldGoldBass/videos/458252207708848/

For jaywalking?

[voodoo_man]

For jaywalking?

So says the media. Do we really know what it was for? No.

Furthermore, when i see things like "all this over jaywalking" or something like that, people fail to realize that anything can be a major issue if left unchecked. The community may have complained and asked for increased enforcement, point is, a snip of a video, without context cannot be used to damn anyone on anyside without all the info.

[pablo]

For jaywalking?

Level of resistance, not the offense, dictates the response.

The start of the video is conveniently edited out and is usually a pretty good clue that it wasn't "just" jaywalking.

[Shellback]

So says the media. Do we really know what it was for? No...

a snip of a video, without context cannot be used to damn anyone on anyside without all the info.

I was going by the video. When they asked what they were being arrested for the officer stated, “Crossed against the light.”

I wasn't trying to damn anyone.

[JM Campbell]

Level of resistance, not the offense, dictates the response.

The start of the video is conveniently edited out and is usually a pretty good clue that it wasn't "just" jaywalking.

Winner, winner chicken dinner.

Austin does get quite rowdy on 6th street, seen a lot of stupid shit there. I guess an area with 99.5% bars/clubs mixed with drugs and a major college campus just around the corner
just might see an elevated (in my opinion justified) level of response from law enforcement. If you aint doing stupid shit carry on.

[Shellback]

Level of resistance, not the offense, dictates the response.

The start of the video is conveniently edited out and is usually a pretty good clue that it wasn't "just" jaywalking.

I get that. What is a person supposed to do when they're rushed from behind and slammed up against a building and not know what the hell is going on? Human nature takes over. Throwing knees and punches when the guy is obviously cowering and confused isn't going to win any sympathy for the officers either. I'm not saying the police were wrong, but it doesn't make them look good, and like it or not that is important.

Austin PD made international news (http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-26332319) last year for arresting a female jogger for jaywalking. Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo quickly came to the defense of the arresting officers, saying they may have been rough with the female college student, but at least they didn’t rape her.

“And quite frankly she wasn’t charged with resisting. She’s lucky I wasn’t the arresting officer, because I wouldn’t have been as generous. … In other cities there’s cops who are actually committing sexual assaults on duty, so I thank God that this is what passes for a controversy in Austin, Texas,” Acevedo said.

[BaiHu]

All I can say is:

1) the 2015 version of a CHiPS pile up is a bunch of bikes strewn about

2) resisting arrest even while in cuffs seems like a bad idea

3) love to see even 10 seconds before the tape is rolled

[voodoo_man]

I get that. What is a person supposed to do when they're rushed from behind and slammed up against a building and not know what the hell is going on? Human nature takes over. Throwing knees and punches when the guy is obviously cowering and confused isn't going to win any sympathy for the officers either. I'm not saying the police were wrong, but it doesn't make them look good, and like it or not that is important.

Austin PD made international news (http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-26332319) last year for arresting a female jogger for jaywalking. Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo quickly came to the defense of the arresting officers, saying they may have been rough with the female college student, but at least they didn’t rape her.

Sure, human nature, that's 1 or 2 seconds until your eye's catch up with your body, then you see they are uniformed police officers, then any resistance is what? Should they be charged with resisting arrest (almost always one grading up from the original charge) or should they just accept the fact police are arresting them and that they should stop resisting.

Not to mention all of this is predicated on the unknown beginning of that interaction which was not (magically) recorded. I've never bum rushed anyone unless they already tried to run/knew they were going be arrested - for summary level offenses like jaywalking its almost always "Police, stop, come over here..." They knew, they didn't care.

[Shellback]

Sure, human nature, that's 1 or 2 seconds until your eye's catch up with your body, then you see they are uniformed police officers, then any resistance is what? Should they be charged with resisting arrest (almost always one grading up from the original charge) or should they just accept the fact police are arresting them and that they should stop resisting.
On the video that's posted the police were silent until roughly 13 seconds in, after punches and knees were thrown, then telling them to get down. How do they know they're being arrested or what's going on when nobody's verbalized anything? I'm not defending the people who were arrested, and I'm not condemning the police, I just think the approach you wrote below would've been a better opening tactic.


I've never bum rushed anyone unless they already tried to run/knew they were going be arrested - for summary level offenses like jaywalking its almost always "Police, stop, come over here..." They knew, they didn't care.

I'm assuming that the penalty for jaywalking is simply a ticket. “Crossed against the light.” Have a good Sunday.

[voodoo_man]

On the video that's posted the police were silent until roughly 13 seconds in, after punches and knees were thrown, then telling them to get down. How do they know they're being arrested or what's going on when nobody's verbalized anything? I'm not defending the people who were arrested, and I'm not condemning the police, I just think the approach you wrote below would've been a better opening tactic.



I'm assuming that the penalty for jaywalking is simply a ticket. “Crossed against the light.” Have a good Sunday.

Hence why that video is not admissible in court. It needs to cover the entire interaction. I can almost guarantee those officers used verbal commands to which the male probably told them to go fuck themselves. They disagreed and went hands on, their call.

[John Hearne]

For jaywalking?

I'm sure. Let's not forget the Michael Brown was shot with his hands up for walking down the middle of the street. :rolleyes:

[TGS]

I wasn't trying to damn anyone.

Sure.


On the video that's posted the police were silent until roughly 13 seconds in, after punches and knees were thrown, then telling them to get down. How do they know they're being arrested or what's going on when nobody's verbalized anything? I'm not defending the people who were arrested, and I'm not condemning the police, I just think the approach you wrote below would've been a better opening tactic.

Opening tactic? What video of the opening interaction do you have to make this judgement? It certainly wasn't the video posted here.

[pablo]

To lighten the mood, a little WTF going on here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVUJTH8i5C0

[voodoo_man]

To lighten the mood, a little WTF going on here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVUJTH8i5C0

Ah yes, classic, loce this one.

[Peally]

His reaction getting out of the car was priceless.

[Al T.]

LOL...

[pablo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEqPQNke8rA

[breakingtime91]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEqPQNke8rA

fuck, background story on this one?

[Luke]

That looks BAD. No way he's alive.

[pablo]

That looks BAD. No way he's alive.

http://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/video-body-cam-footage-from-sand-springs-police-officer-involved-shooting

According to the news the officer had minor injuries. Apparently he stopped to deploy stop sticks and the driver rammed his car. Honestly he would have been better off ramming the SUV with his patrol car, but that was probably not allowed by policy. #restrictivechasepoliciesthatpreventthepolicefrome ffectivelystoppingfleeingfelonsmakeusallsafer

[Hambo]

fuck, background story on this one?

I'll raise you a motherfuck on that one! Gun v. vehicle coming at you is a losing proposition.

[Peally]

When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.

[Hauptmann]

When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.

True, but if the situation allows for enough time to issue verbal commands to potentially deescalate the situation, I would do so. You have three things to protect.......your life during the incident, your freedom after the incident(criminal prosecution), and your money(civil prosecution). If you are in jail, fired, and/or you are sending most of your income to the SOB you had to shoot, life may seem worse than if you had just let him shoot you.

[pablo]

Here's another what not to do video.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9e4_1447425461&use_old_player=1

Video is OK liveleak ads may be NSFW.

[John Hearne]

http://www.fox7austin.com/news/local-news/48267048-story

The above link has two videos. One, the story as it aired and the whole arrest video. I find it extremely telling that the news story repeatedly (3x) shows the most emotionally incendiary portion of the video (dog getting kicked) in such a short story.

Had dude allowed himself to be cuffed none of this would have happened.

[pablo]

http://www.fox7austin.com/news/local-news/48267048-story

The above link has two videos. One, the story as it aired and the whole arrest video. I find it extremely telling that the news story repeatedly (3x) shows the most emotionally incendiary portion of the video (dog getting kicked) in such a short story.

Had dude allowed himself to be cuffed none of this would have happened.

I saw that and thought that the officer at the bottom of that pig pile was going to come out of it with a twisted knee. I got pushed over a first floor balcony rail in a fight and am now very aware of fighting and making arrest on walkways and similar places.

[voodoo_man]

http://youtu.be/YxWMuPgvGDU

[breakingtime91]

http://youtu.be/YxWMuPgvGDU

whats the context of this video? because it looks really bad in the beginning

[voodoo_man]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=40b_1447403823


In short...they did not use the proper level of forces required to overcome that level of resistance until the others escalated force. My opinion.

[Hambo]

I saw that and thought that the officer at the bottom of that pig pile was going to come out of it with a twisted knee. I got pushed over a first floor balcony rail in a fight and am now very aware of fighting and making arrest on walkways and similar places.

Damn right, the one on one near the rail was making me really nervous.

I love the chick with the phone, "Motherfucker, you can't do that, he's a minor." Right. First, it shows she's a classy woman, and second it shows her complete ignorance of the law. Keep the fucking brood out of the fight and they won't go to jail.

[Shellback]

whats the context of this video? because it looks really bad in the beginning

Here ya go: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-police-beating-after-chase-in-san-francisco-20151115-story.html

[pablo]

whats the context of this video? because it looks really bad in the beginning

The "context" is not good. Whether it's justified or not, it's very hard to justify the appearance of those types of baton strikes. You can "beat" someone with a wimpy ass expandable baton and have very little effect on the bad guy and have terrible looking video. Fortunately it's a white guy so it shouldn't draw to much media attention or outrage.

[Kukuforguns]

Video of shooting by officer in Chicago of Lacquan McDonald. http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20151124/archer-heights/laquan-mcdonald-video-shows-police-shooting-him-16-times

[BaiHu]

Video of shooting by officer in Chicago of Lacquan McDonald. http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20151124/archer-heights/laquan-mcdonald-video-shows-police-shooting-him-16-times
Can someone offer an opinion on this? Without sound and without knowing if the cops knew he was a PCP user, I can't quite figure out how bad this is.

From my little knowledge, 10 feet from an officer with a knife out and not responding to an officers commands doesn't sound good to me, but 16 shots on target when the person is down pretty early doesn't look good either.

[Lon]

BaiHu, go here for commentary:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?18091-Chicago-Officer-Charged-With-1st-Degree-Murder-in-Death-of-17-Year-Old-McDonald

[BaiHu]

BaiHu, go here for commentary:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?18091-Chicago-Officer-Charged-With-1st-Degree-Murder-in-Death-of-17-Year-Old-McDonald
Thank you.

[voodoo_man]

My opinion is that the charge came from the officers inability to stop shooting. It is a classic legal "past the reasonable point" of force use.

One or two shots? Mybe even 10? Good shoot, 100%.

Its like the battered wife who stabs her husband fifteen times. Once or twice in self defense is good work, ten times now we have a problem.

[Shellback]

Not sure if this is the best thread or maybe a new one's needed for assaults on officers? Be careful out there. VIDEO HERE. (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=de6_1449074088)

Dover, PA - The Northern York County Regional Police Department is releasing the dash cam video that captured the attempted homicide of Officer Lynn Anderson by Trev Bowies Jackson on Sunday November 22, 2015. The release of this video is to aid in locating Trev Bowies Jackson. Jackson is considered to be armed and extremely dangerous.

Jackson has a wounded left hand and the hand may still be bandaged.

The manhunt for Jackson continues and anyone found to be assisting Jackson will be charged to the fullest extent of the law.

Pennsylvania Crime Stoppers has posted up to $5000.00 in reward money for information leading to the capture of Jackson.


If you know where Trev Bowies Jackson can be located, or if you have seen him since November 22, 2015 please call PA Crime Stoppers at 1-800-4-PA-TIPS. You may also report any sightings or information to 911 or 717.292.3647.

[Kukuforguns]

http://youtu.be/qmK8Ify3vi8
Skip the first 20 seconds of the video. The DA's office concluded that officer Patrick Feaster negligently discharged his weapon, but decided not to charge the officer with criminal negligence because the DA did not believe he had sufficient evidence to satisfy the burden of proof. The officer acknowledged that he had been trained not to put his finger on the trigger until he formed the intention to fire and stated he never intended to fire. Given: (1) the officer acknowledged his training not to put his finger on the trigger until he formed the intent to fire, (2) he never intended to fire; and (3) he put his finger on the trigger, I think the DA probably had all the evidence he needed to prosecute. I'm not saying the DA should have prosecuted, I just don't buy his explanation for why he didn't prosecute. More information here (http://www.actionnewsnow.com/news/da-plays-dash-cam-video-in-accidental-shooting-no-charges-will-be-filed/).

[BaiHu]

[urlhttp://youtu.be/qmK8Ify3vi8[/url]
Skip the first 20 seconds of the video. The DA's office concluded that officer Patrick Feaster negligently discharged his weapon, but decided not to charge the officer with criminal negligence because the DA did not believe he had sufficient evidence to satisfy the burden of proof. The officer acknowledged that he had been trained not to put his finger on the trigger until he formed the intention to fire and stated he never intended to fire. Given: (1) the officer acknowledged his training not to put his finger on the trigger until he formed the intent to fire, (2) he never intended to fire; and (3) he put his finger on the trigger, I think the DA probably had all the evidence he needed to prosecute. I'm not saying the DA should have prosecuted, I just don't buy his explanation for why he didn't prosecute. More information here (http://www.actionnewsnow.com/news/da-plays-dash-cam-video-in-accidental-shooting-no-charges-will-be-filed/).

At 1:06-:10 it looks really bad. It looks like he strolls up, sees the whackamole pop up out of the window and places a double tap on him and then reholsters. If I just saw that (which I did) with no audio, commands or knowing that he just killed 8 nuns in a school bus carrying St Mary's school children for the blind, that's be hard not to prosecute. JMHO as a MMQB. Hope there's more to this...

[Kukuforguns]

There's some more info, which is in the link I provided. Short story, the guy in the lead car is drunk and the LEO observes reckless driving and pursues. Drunk driver flips the car, ejecting his wife (who dies). LEO sees the ejection and considers this to be a felony stop. LEO exits car, draws sidearm (felony stop), and negligently shoots drunk driver once in the neck (paralyzed, perhaps permanently). Other first responders arrive and LEO fails to mention he shot drunk driver for several minutes until he's asked why drunk driver has a GSW to the neck. There's no dispute regarding the shooting . . . it was negligent. The video is a good reminder to exercise caution when muzzling the subject and trigger discipline. I suspect LEO was pumped on adrenaline after a short car chase and seeing the wife ejected and forgot some of his training.

[HCM]

A Grand Jury recently No-Billed two Bedar County Sheriffs Deputies in the shooting of. Gilbert Flores. The initial video obtained by news outlets was poor quality. A second video, filmed by the deceased neighbors with better detail was released today.


http://youtu.be/Dq6JzzJ1OLQ

[BaiHu]

There's some more info, which is in the link I provided. Short story, the guy in the lead car is drunk and the LEO observes reckless driving and pursues. Drunk driver flips the car, ejecting his wife (who dies). LEO sees the ejection and considers this to be a felony stop. LEO exits car, draws sidearm (felony stop), and negligently shoots drunk driver once in the neck (paralyzed, perhaps permanently). Other first responders arrive and LEO fails to mention he shot drunk driver for several minutes until he's asked why drunk driver has a GSW to the neck. There's no dispute regarding the shooting . . . it was negligent. The video is a good reminder to exercise caution when muzzling the subject and trigger discipline. I suspect LEO was pumped on adrenaline after a short car chase and seeing the wife ejected and forgot some of his training.
Gotchya. Didn't know the wife ejected already. I should've read through your other link. Thanks for clarifying.

[Lon]

http://youtu.be/qmK8Ify3vi8

Wow. Just wow. He can't really say he was surprised that the driver popped out of the car. The guy was out of the car for a bit before he shot him. I'd love to have been a fly on the wall in the DA's Office when they were discussing this case.

[BaiHu]

Wow. Just wow. He can't really say he was surprised that the driver popped out of the car. The guy was out of the car for a bit before he shot him. I'd love to have been a fly on the wall in the DA's Office when they were discussing this case.
Maybe I don't know how I would react unless I was in that situation, but I agree, that still looks jacked up to me.

[BaiHu]

A Grand Jury recently No-Billed two Bedar County Sheriffs Deputies in the shooting of. Gilbert Flores. The initial video obtained by news outlets was poor quality. A second video, filmed by the deceased neighbors with better detail was released today.


http://youtu.be/Dq6JzzJ1OLQ
The amusing part of watching the first 10 minutes (I didn't bother after that) was listening to a couple bicker about the male/female approach to watching/video taping a law enforcement engagement with an ex-con. Hilarious and the only reason why I could get through that much of it.

[TheRoland]

Withdrawn as too uncharitable for the holidays.

[Hauptmann]

http://youtu.be/qmK8Ify3vi8


Not to be overly morbid, but it looks rather comical in that he strolls up, draws and fires, and then returns the weapon to the holster like it was no big deal.

[Lon]

A Grand Jury recently No-Billed two Bedar County Sheriffs Deputies in the shooting of. Gilbert Flores. The initial video obtained by news outlets was poor quality. A second video, filmed by the deceased neighbors with better detail was released today.


http://youtu.be/Dq6JzzJ1OLQ

WTF??? Gonna watch that again on a bigger screen. There a link to a story somewhere?

[HCM]

WTF??? Gonna watch that again on a bigger screen. There a link to a story somewhere?

http://www.kens5.com/story/news/crime/2015/12/11/video-released-da-shows-new-angle-gilbert-flores-shooting/77160484/

Read the story and listen to the 911 calls.

The best story is in the San Antonio Express-news but it's behind a pay wall.

Here is a good summary from the time of the incident: http://heavy.com/news/2015/08/gilbert-flores-san-antonio-bexar-county-texas-man-shot-killed-by-police-sheriff-deputies-arms-hands-up-raised-armed-video-photo-record-domestic-death-dead-shooting/

[Hauptmann]

WTF??? Gonna watch that again on a bigger screen. There a link to a story somewhere?

Whoa.....that looked like a genuine "hands up don't shoot"

[HCM]

Whoa.....that looked like a genuine "hands up don't shoot"

Look again.

[Hauptmann]

Look again.

What am I missing? I blew the video up to the point where he puts his hands in the air and the shooting starts. Given the distance from the camera to the incident, you can tell there is a slight sound delay.......so, it appears the first shot occurred with hands up, and he bend over after the impact.

[HCM]

What am I missing? I blew the video up to the point where he puts his hands in the air and the shooting starts. Given the distance from the camera to the incident, you can tell there is a slight sound delay.......so, it appears the first shot occurred with hands up, and he bend over after the impact.

It's hard to see but he has a knife in hand and starts to bring the knife down right about the time you hear the sirens of the first back up unit.

The call was for a domestic in which Flores slashed a woman's head with the knife. She was holding a baby when she was slashed and it was initially reported Flores had slashed the Baby also but it turned out to be the mothers blood. Flores himself called 911 and said he would force a suicide by cop. There was about ten minutes of confrontation prior to the start of the second video. During that time, Flores charged the Deputies and slashed the ballistic shields they were holding. This, combined with the failed taser deployment on the video as well as the original assault and the 911 calls all lead to the Deputies decision.

[Lon]

The call was for a domestic in which Flores slashed a woman's head with the knife. She was holding a baby when she was slashed and it was initially reported Flores had slashed the Baby also but it turned out to be the mothers blood. Flores himself called 911 and said he would force a suicide by cop. There was about ten minutes of confrontation prior to the start of the second video. During that time, Flores charged the Deputies and slashed the ballistic shields they were holding. This, combined with the failed taser deployment on the video as well as the original assault and the 911 calls all lead to the Deputies decision.

Let me play devils advocate for a second.

Based on what you've said happened prior to the second video, they had plenty of justification for shooting him when they were up close and personal and he was slashing their shields. But why shoot him when they did? They could hear more units coming, perhaps with another taser? He had a knife, not a gun so he had to be close enough to stab them.. So there's a difference in lowering his hand with a knife vs. lowering his hand with a gun. They'd been letting him chase them away for a few minutes like it was no big deal, so what suddenly changed their mind to we have to shoot this guy NOW?

I'm positive they were justified in shooting him at some point during that encounter, just curious what suddenly made them shoot him at that point when it seems they were more than justified in shooting him earlier.

Justification for deadly force can come and go during any encounter. I'll be interested in what happens with a civil suit down the road and whether the court decides the "objective reasonableness" window for shooting him had passed by the time they actually shot him.

[HCM]

Let me play devils advocate for a second.

Based on what you've said happened prior to the second video, they had plenty of justification for shooting him when they were up close and personal and he was slashing their shields. But why shoot him when they did? They could hear more units coming, perhaps with another taser? He had a knife, not a gun so he had to be close enough to stab them.. So there's a difference in lowering his hand with a knife vs. lowering his hand with a gun. They'd been letting him chase them away for a few minutes like it was no big deal, so what suddenly changed their mind to we have to shoot this guy NOW?

I'm positive they were justified in shooting him at some point during that encounter, just curious what suddenly made them shoot him at that point when it seems they were more than justified in shooting him earlier.

Justification for deadly force can come and go during any encounter. I'll be interested in what happens with a civil suit down the road and whether the court decides the "objective reasonableness" window for shooting him had passed by the time they actually shot him.

This may literally be the million dollar question.

[voodoo_man]

not crazy UOF but you'll see what the deal is..


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=90c_1450137787

[BaiHu]

not crazy UOF but you'll see what the deal is..


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=90c_1450137787
Infantilization of mankind. Suck it up. The officer was nice to you and you were resisting exactly at the point you said you were cooperating. Bag of dicks! I'm so tired of pusillanimous crap like this.

[voodoo_man]

Infantilization of mankind. Suck it up. The officer was nice to you and you were resisting exactly at the point you said you were cooperating. Bag of dicks! I'm so tired of pusillanimous crap like this.

Every LEO has dealt with this...

"Stop resisting!"
"I'm not resisting!"
"Well then put your hands behind your back."

If there is anything else other than them complying they are resisting.

[Dagga Boy]

not crazy UOF but you'll see what the deal is..


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=90c_1450137787

Start subpoenaing these idiots into court every time they show up on one of these as witnesses. They either get a warrant issued for not showing up, or get to sit in court for several days waiting around for the wheels of justice to spin in their normal slow fashion. They ll decide quickly that maybe they don't want to be so involved.

[Hambo]

Start subpoenaing these idiots into court every time they show up on one of these as witnesses. They either get a warrant issued for not showing up, or get to sit in court for several days waiting around for the wheels of justice to spin in their normal slow fashion. They ll decide quickly that maybe they don't want to be so involved.

Now that would be justice. ;)

[Lyonsgrid]

Saw this today. Mentally ill WWE fan charges officers and gets shot.

http://www.policeone.com/police-products/firearms/training/articles/46351006-Video-Mentally-ill-WWE-fan-charges-Fla-police-gets-shot

[Shellback]

Indianapolis. According to videographer dude was tased multiple times prior to being shot for charging at officer with a knife. *WARNING: A few swear words.


https://youtu.be/0qnWSc5v3uA

[Gadfly]

http://www.policeone.com/police-products/traffic-enforcement/articles/54261006-Video-Suspect-tries-to-grab-Wis-officers-gun-during-traffic-stop

Officers are dealing with resisting driver, when passenger reaches out the window and tries to yank a gun out of a holster. They are lucky to be alive... Unnecessary escalation on their part that could have earned one of them a bullet in the ass.

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/15/07da95a98a70e61cad667fade6ce305d.jpg


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Dagga Boy]

This is how fast knife attacks happen. Suicide by cop, but look how close this was including the officer toppling over backwards.

http://www.keyt.com/news/video-camarillo-officerinvolved-shooting/37001602

[LSP552]

This is how fast knife attacks happen. Suicide by cop, but look how close this was including the officer toppling over backwards.

http://www.keyt.com/news/video-camarillo-officerinvolved-shooting/37001602

Great example for the folks who think people with knives aren't dangerous, and there is no need to shoot them.

[Peally]

This is how fast knife attacks happen. Suicide by cop, but look how close this was including the officer toppling over backwards.

http://www.keyt.com/news/video-camarillo-officerinvolved-shooting/37001602

Why are the people taking these videos always retarded?

[voodoo_man]

Ive said it before....walking backwards to make distance when you should be shooting isn't going to win you any awards.

[psalms144.1]

This is how fast knife attacks happen. Suicide by cop, but look how close this was including the officer toppling over backwards.

http://www.keyt.com/news/video-camarillo-officerinvolved-shooting/37001602I'm super uncoordinated - I can trip on air pockets on the best of days - trying to run backwards while being charged by a knife-wielding attacker would definitely end up with me on my butt.

This is an interesting training point, though. We have, for years, trained folks to move laterally off the "X," instead of running backwards, just circling away from the line of approach. That might not have been possible here (looks like a wall to the officer's left, and active traffic to the right). Is this the "Kobiashi Maru" of knife responses? Doesn't look like any good answer - standing and shooting would likely have ended up with a carved up officer...

[voodoo_man]

I'm super uncoordinated - I can trip on air pockets on the best of days - trying to run backwards while being charged by a knife-wielding attacker would definitely end up with me on my butt.

This is an interesting training point, though. We have, for years, trained folks to move laterally off the "X," instead of running backwards, just circling away from the line of approach. That might not have been possible here (looks like a wall to the officer's left, and active traffic to the right). Is this the "Kobiashi Maru" of knife responses? Doesn't look like any good answer - standing and shooting would likely have ended up with a carved up officer...

Its not, its the perfect example of when the best defense is a strong offense.

[HCM]

Why are the people taking these videos always retarded?

If they weren't they would be calling 911, trying to help or something productive rather than shooting video so they can be on World Star Hip Hop.

[RoyGBiv]

Friday tangent.....

10 police officers who went the extra mile this year (http://www.aol.com/article/2015/12/16/10-police-officers-who-went-the-extra-mile-this-year/21284546/?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000058&intcmp=hplnws)

Couldn't figure out how to embed the video... Sorry.

/tangent

[Shellback]

Interesting video. Background article. (http://www.ocweekly.com/news/new-video-footage-shows-noel-aguilar-shot-from-behind-by-la-county-sheriff-deputy-in-long-beach-6844726)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjLkZpot_JA&feature=youtu.be

[voodoo_man]

Interesting video. Background article. (http://www.ocweekly.com/news/new-video-footage-shows-noel-aguilar-shot-from-behind-by-la-county-sheriff-deputy-in-long-beach-6844726)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjLkZpot_JA&feature=youtu.be

fast forward to 2:14

Officer 1 holstered his gun, officer 2 is holstering his gun and there is clearly a gun between the two officers that magically appeared from under the doer and you can clearly see the guy grab officer 2's gun when it discharged.

GTFO out of here with all that other jazz, UOF looks to be totally justified.

[Shellback]

fast forward to 2:14

Officer 1 holstered his gun, officer 2 is holstering his gun and there is clearly a gun between the two officers that magically appeared from under the doer and you can clearly see the guy grab officer 2's gun when it discharged.

GTFO out of here with all that other jazz, UOF looks to be totally justified.
@ 1:37 is the first time the gun appears from what I can tell. It looks like the officer on the left pulls it out of the front of his belt, and proceeds to fingerfuck it on the ground turning it around multiple times instead of securing it, which seems rather odd to me.

Re-watched the video and at :28 - :30 it appears officer 1 sticks the handgun in his waistband and pulls it out later at 1:37. But, I could be wrong.

[Hambo]

@ 1:37 is the first time the gun appears from what I can tell. It looks like the officer on the left pulls it out of the front of his belt, and proceeds to fingerfuck it on the ground turning it around multiple times instead of securing it, which seems rather odd to me.

Re-watched the video and at :28 - :30 it appears officer 1 sticks the handgun in his waistband and pulls it out later at 1:37. But, I could be wrong.

That's what it looked like to me. When officer 1 started saying he'd been shot my first thought was that the pistol he jammed is his belt had popped him during the struggle. I couldn't tell if there was a gun grab on officer 2.

[Shellback]

Here's the official shooting review: http://www.scribd.com/doc/293642998/NOEL-AGUILAR-Wrongful-Death-Report

[voodoo_man]

Here's the official shooting review: http://www.scribd.com/doc/293642998/NOEL-AGUILAR-Wrongful-Death-Report

I like to see these types of factual documents posted to compare to statements of conjecture and non-official reports.

[Shellback]

I like to see these types of factual documents posted to compare to statements of conjecture and non-official reports.

I do too. There are several "factual statements" in that document that don't jive with the video posted. I do think that the video referenced for the report is a different one from this video as well.

[voodoo_man]

I do too. There are several "factual statements" in that document that don't jive with the video posted. I do think that the video referenced for the report is a different one from this video as well.

So the obvious statement to make here is that the officer's judgments and actions are not based on a video which is seen at a later time and may be examined, frame by frame to show some sort of "ha! see you fucked up there!" moment but by a reasonable officer standard based on the information, knowledge and experience the officer has at that moment and that moment alone.

edit - evidence would have to exist that clearly shows some sort criminal act which could be attributed to the officer's actions that they knew and disregarded or caused - such actions do not exist in this video.

[Shellback]

So the obvious statement to make here is that the officer's judgments and actions are not based on a video which is seen at a later time and may be examined, frame by frame to show some sort of "ha! see you fucked up there!" moment but by a reasonable officer standard based on the information, knowledge and experience the officer has at that moment and that moment alone.

edit - evidence would have to exist that clearly shows some sort criminal act which could be attributed to the officer's actions that they knew and disregarded or caused - such actions do not exist in this video.

I'm cool with that and agree. What do you think the reasoning is behind securing the guy's weapon in the officer's belt and then pulling it back out and placing it on the ground?

[voodoo_man]

I'm cool with that and agree. What do you think the reasoning is behind securing the guy's weapon in the officer's belt and then pulling it back out and placing it on the ground?

Lack of training.

I've done that before when fighting with a guy over a gun, hell I've done it with my own gun even though I knew I had a holster...

High adrenaline situation like this are very rarely experienced (if at all, ever by most officers). I'd bet a paycheck that neither one of them had over two possibly three fights of this nature.

Even if they were getting their heads wrapped around the situation, once that gun went off and one of them got shot, throw all that out the window. That would be the moment all the crazy stuff happens - audio/visual/sensory inclusion/exclusion, temporary partial amnesia, etc etc etc....

So speaking as someone who has been through a very similar situation (minus getting shot), rapid adrenaline dumps in short time will create a situation as you saw, all sorts of messed up happenings that the person may or may not be doing consciously.

I'd also bet that that the officer who was shot could not recall a lot of what he did until well after, like a week or two...

[pablo]

I'm cool with that and agree. What do you think the reasoning is behind securing the guy's weapon in the officer's belt and then pulling it back out and placing it on the ground?

The gun probably didn't stay in the officer's waist band for the same that the it didn't stay in the suspect's waistband, a waistband is not a holster.

If any normal person told you that they were going to carry a handgun in their waistband and they didn't need a holster, you would think they're an idiot, right? It's not secure and they are much higher risk of shooting themselves, and that's just doing normal everyday activities. Yet somehow it seems like a good idea for a police officer, in a fight with a suspect, with a handgun in unknown mechanical condition, to shove it in his waistband?

Dealing with suspects' handguns is always a problem, there rarely a good way to secure them in a hurry. A handgun in a waistband is never secure, and it's in a convenient place for the suspect to grab it and shoot the officer. Or for the officer to accidentally shoot himself. There's no good place for it, but on the ground and close enough that someone else can't come and pick it up, is the least terrible of the available options.

[John Hearne]

Maybe I missed them but these ND's videos are "interesting."

The first is from Miami (on-line searches will find multiple copies of this action from slightly different angles):
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=969_1449466343

The second is from California:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZBS_p-NVFI

[Shellback]

If any normal person told you that they were going to carry a handgun in their waistband and they didn't need a holster, you would think they're an idiot, right? It's not secure and they are much higher risk of shooting themselves, and that's just doing normal everyday activities. Yet somehow it seems like a good idea for a police officer, in a fight with a suspect, with a handgun in unknown mechanical condition, to shove it in his waistband?

I am a firm believer in using a quality holster. I just thought it was odd that he stuck it behind his duty belt, until his partner shot him, and when asked "Where's the gun?", then he pulls the gun out, looks like he's trying to stick it under the dude's body, and then puts it to the side. After dude gets smoked he then puts it back behind his duty belt, although, the second time he puts it in the back rather than in front.

[Lon]

Maybe I missed them but these ND's videos are "interesting."

The first is from Miami (on-line searches will find multiple copies of this action from slightly different angles):
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=969_1449466343

Not sure this was an ND. Is there an article that says it is? The article I read sounded like it was intentional cuz he wouldn't drop a straight razor and had just robbed someplace.

[Shellback]

The second is from California:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZBS_p-NVFI

Here's the whole video with audio, which doesn't sound good to me. The guy ended up dying.

“I’ve got a non-responsive female and a male refusing to get out,” he speaks into his radio... That's because you shot him!

After 12:30 in the video “I think I shot him,” Feaster said. “I wasn’t even pointing at him but the gun did go off.”

“Oh my fucking God, are you serious?” the supervisor responds and the video ends.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZkGx8ZVy4k

[John Hearne]

Not sure this was an ND. Is there an article that says it is? The article I read sounded like it was intentional cuz he wouldn't drop a straight razor and had just robbed someplace.

Not 100% that it was an ND but: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/miami-beach/article48720630.html

[Shellback]

Nut goes after officer with knife and gets lit up. Not criticizing the officer, but as been mentioned many times, he takes a tumble backpedaling away from the threat.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3dicW7gdvs

[voodoo_man]

Already been posted...I should do a write up of things to consider...

[voodoo_man]

http://www.khq.com/story/30822517/spokane-police-release-body-cam-footage-of-october-hillyard-shooting

Two vimeo vids on that link.

[wilco423]

Here's the whole video with audio, which doesn't sound good to me. The guy ended up dying.

Holy crap, what a cluster. I'm still trying to figure out if the cop had any conscious thought about shooting the guy beforehand, or if he was on auto pilot. Really looks like the latter, until he starts looking around, presumably for his shell casing. I just saw in the DA's statement (http://www.krcrtv.com/blob/view/-/36962772/data/1/-/14sifqbz/-/Paradise-OIS-final-report.pdf) there was some speculation from investigators about a Surefire DG type switch (don't know if it was an actual SF or SL, but he talks about a remote switch) and 'finger confusion,' although the officer says that was not the case. I wonder how much drawing to the ready they do in their training. I'll be interested to see if the cop gets charged now that the driver died from his injuries, as the DA was fairly specific that he couldn't be charged since there was no actual homicide, and they couldn't prove he intended to pull the trigger.

Also noted one of the other cops saying she's "gasping for breath." Ah, that's called agonal breathing, and it means she's dying.

[voodoo_man]

http://calibrepress.com/2015/12/dashcam-fatal-kansas-city-ois-released/

Two videos (in one) showing two completely different angles and circumstances.

[voodoo_man]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3c3_1451579545

I don't know what happened before the video started and I don't know her history but judging from the response of the officer's holding her arms and not letting her go, they probably should have committed her for an eval.

[voodoo_man]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8NCHivf5wu9VjVyVFdlTU4waGM/view

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=37978148&nid=148&title=police-identify-man-in-alleged-arson-incident-in-west-jordan&fm=home_page&s_cid=topstory

[Nephrology]

Another:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b1e_1451660843

[voodoo_man]

Another:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b1e_1451660843

http://www.kgw.com/news/local/central-coast/newport-officer-justified-in-shooting-hammer-wielding-man-district-attorney-says/9648200

Justified in the shooting per the media.

I'll have to say that I don't really care much for allowing people to roam around, especially with a weapon.

Dude is an EDP, clearly, 4 seconds of talking to him you realize that, yet they give him all sorts of room, time to talk, etc... I'd suggest a more hands on approach.

[Nephrology]

http://www.kgw.com/news/local/central-coast/newport-officer-justified-in-shooting-hammer-wielding-man-district-attorney-says/9648200

Justified in the shooting per the media.

I'll have to say that I don't really care much for allowing people to roam around, especially with a weapon.

Dude is an EDP, clearly, 4 seconds of talking to him you realize that, yet they give him all sorts of room, time to talk, etc... I'd suggest a more hands on approach.

That one seems like a case where pepper spray could have been effective. The clothes the guy was wearing clearly weren't permissive for taser deployment but pepper spray might have been helpful to incapacitate him before going hands on.

[voodoo_man]

That one seems like a case where pepper spray could have been effective. The clothes the guy was wearing clearly weren't permissive for taser deployment but pepper spray might have been helpful to incapacitate him before going hands on.

I mean, he's not exactly the worlds strongest man either, spray or electric, a good distraction could probably go a long way.

[Nephrology]

I mean, he's not exactly the worlds strongest man either, spray or electric, a good distraction could probably go a long way.

Fair point.

I am amazed he refused medical treatment. Being shot 3 times in the lower extremities is probably not very comfortable.

[voodoo_man]

Fair point.

I am amazed he refused medical treatment. Being shot 3 times in the lower extremities is probably not very comfortable.

He didn't have the right to refuse medical treatment after being shot, technically speaking no one does and doctors can/should compel you to seek medical attention/treatment.

[Nephrology]

He didn't have the right to refuse medical treatment after being shot, technically speaking no one does and doctors can/should compel you to seek medical attention/treatment.

Really? In the ED that I work in we often have patients refuse medical treatment and they are 100% within their right to do so. However, I have never seen this happen to anyone who has been shot - they are usually unconscious or very willingly consent to treat. Not sure that I've even heard anyone ask someone with a GSW or any other traumatic injury if they are OK with us taking care of them. The refusals I have seen are usually for a painful procedure like an LP or something.

[voodoo_man]

Really? In the ED that I work in we often have patients refuse medical treatment and they are 100% within their right to do so. However, I have never seen this happen to anyone who has been shot - they are usually unconscious or very willingly consent to treat. Not sure that I've even heard anyone ask someone with a GSW or any other traumatic injury if they are OK with us taking care of them. The refusals I have seen are usually for a painful procedure like an LP or something.

GSW's and head trauma are two of the "cannot be refused" and "forced by doctor" when refused.

For us, specifically, it falls under a huge liability aspect, if we allow him to refuse treatment for a GSW or an obviously serious head wound if left untreated may cause death or SBI, and if we accept their "refusal" then we are doing what? Something that will result in their death and we don't do that.

I've had to handcuff people before who were shot, stabbed and/or serious head trauma and fighting to get them medical treatment.

[Nephrology]

GSW's and head trauma are two of the "cannot be refused" and "forced by doctor" when refused.

For us, specifically, it falls under a huge liability aspect, if we allow him to refuse treatment for a GSW or an obviously serious head wound if left untreated may cause death or SBI, and if we accept their "refusal" then we are doing what? Something that will result in their death and we don't do that.

I've had to handcuff people before who were shot, stabbed and/or serious head trauma and fighting to get them medical treatment.

Interesting. I did not know this. Is this a state law? Federal?

[voodoo_man]

Interesting. I did not know this. Is this a state law? Federal?

It might be state inspired but definitely something we do in my city.

I don't really understand how anyone can be allowed to refuse medical treatment for a GSW, stab wound, or serious head trauma...

[Nephrology]

It might be state inspired but definitely something we do in my city.

I don't really understand how anyone can be allowed to refuse medical treatment for a GSW, stab wound, or serious head trauma...

Well, legally speaking (as a non-lawyer baby doc), what I have always understood is that medical care is something for which the patient must be able to make the voluntary choice to accept or refuse treatment. For example, if we receive a patient who is designated as DNR (do not resuscitate) by medical record, life alert, family/hospice provided information, etc, no matter their condition we will not provide medical treatment beyond what measures we can take to improve comfort and reduce pain.

I haven't ever seen anyone who is DNR present with traumatic injury but I presume it would be the same. I know that for incapacitated patients without legal surrogates we always presume consent to treat on the grounds that a reasonable person would want to be treated for a life threatening emergency, but for competent individuals I have never seen people not given a choice. I definitely know of competent, full-code patients who have refused treatment that would have probably been essential to their continued survival and whom we discharged the same day. It happens.

[voodoo_man]

Well, legally speaking (as a non-lawyer baby doc), what I have always understood is that medical care is something for which the patient must be able to make the voluntary choice to accept or refuse treatment. For example, if we receive a patient who is designated as DNR (do not resuscitate) by medical record, life alert, family/hospice provided information, etc, no matter their condition we will not provide medical treatment beyond what measures we can take to improve comfort and reduce pain.

I haven't ever seen anyone who is DNR present with traumatic injury but I presume it would be the same. I know that for incapacitated patients without legal surrogates we always presume consent to treat on the grounds that a reasonable person would want to be treated for a life threatening emergency, but for competent individuals I have never seen people not given a choice. I definitely know of competent, full-code patients who have refused treatment that would have probably been essential to their continued survival and whom we discharged the same day. It happens.

Once in the hospital I totally get it, but I am talking about right there and at or about the time of occurrence. After they are in the hospital it is sort of outside of my professional purview, but given the nature of a trauma that would obviously result in death or SBI our policy isn't to care if they consent to treatment or not, its our job to get them there.

[Nephrology]

Once in the hospital I totally get it, but I am talking about right there and at or about the time of occurrence. After they are in the hospital it is sort of outside of my professional purview, but given the nature of a trauma that would obviously result in death or SBI our policy isn't to care if they consent to treatment or not, its our job to get them there.

Ohh, I see. you mean pre-hospital (something that is likewise outside my purview). That makes sense. I know that we have pleeeenty of patients who get brought to the ED more or less against their will, usually after they are in LE custody and usually after our friends with EMS give them a healthy dose of Versed to help them relax a little bit.

[voodoo_man]

Ohh, I see. you mean pre-hospital (something that is likewise outside my purview). That makes sense. I know that we have pleeeenty of patients who get brought to the ED more or less against their will, usually after they are in LE custody and usually after our friends with EMS give them a healthy dose of Versed to help them relax a little bit.

If someone is in police custody they do not have the right to refuse medical treatment.

[pablo]

If someone is in police custody they do not have the right to refuse medical treatment.

The problem we run into on a regular basis is the giant disconnect between our jail nurses and the county hospital.

One night I had homeless bum that had been shredded with a box cutter during a failed robbery attempt, lots of superficial cuts. We take him to the county hospital and he refuses medical care. The doctor at the hospital decides the injuries were not life threatening, states that he will not force treatment on the patient and discharges the patient AMA. We get to the jail and the nurse rejects the bum because he's cut up. I can't hold a gun to either of their heads and force them to accept the prisoner.

Right now our brilliant plan is to file the case at large, field release the prisoner at the hospital, cross our fingers and hope nothing goes wrong.

[Nephrology]

The problem we run into on a regular basis is the giant disconnect between our jail nurses and the county hospital.

One night I had homeless bum that had been shredded with a box cutter during a failed robbery attempt, lots of superficial cuts. We take him to the county hospital and he refuses medical care. The doctor at the hospital decides the injuries were not life threatening, states that he will not force treatment on the patient and discharges the patient AMA. We get to the jail and the nurse rejects the bum because he's cut up. I can't hold a gun to either of their heads and force them to accept the prisoner.

Right now our brilliant plan is to file the case at large, field release the prisoner at the hospital, cross our fingers and hope nothing goes wrong.

This is interesting. I don't really get to see this side of things. Thanks for the perspective.

[Gadfly]

If they are in our custody, we are responsible for their health and safety. They don't get a choice. Once released, they can do as they please. IF they are on the street with a serious head trauma, are they capable of making an informed and rational choice to refuse treatment. If drunk or high, can they make an informed decision to refuse treatment?

[Nephrology]

If they are in our custody, we are responsible for their health and safety. They don't get a choice. Once released, they can do as they please. IF they are on the street with a serious head trauma, are they capable of making an informed and rational choice to refuse treatment. If drunk or high, can they make an informed decision to refuse treatment?

The people who present with altered mental status usually end up having their healthcare decisions made by us until they are sober enough for re-evaluation.

[peterb]

https://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/fstems/ems/advlifesup/documents/2015patientcareprotocols.pdf

Link is for our EMS protocols. See 8.13 for police custody, 8.14 for refusals.

In theory, an unimpaired, competent adult not in police custody could refuse treatment for any injury, including a gunshot wound.

[TGS]

IF they are on the street with a serious head trauma, are they capable of making an informed and rational choice to refuse treatment.


If drunk or high, can they make an informed decision to refuse treatment?

Yes and no.

Consent is implied if the person is without their faculties, or if the provider can articulate that the person is a danger to themself or others (suicidal/homicidal tendencies), an adjudicated psych, or a minor. In a pre-hospital setting, altered mental status is commonly assessed and documented as whether the patient was alert and oriented to 3 different situational factors...usually being time, place, location, and other stuff is also thrown in for good measure such as events or whether they're a poor historian. With a drunk, we would usually have them display whether they were able to reasonably care for themselves as well, by standing on their own and walking without falling.

However, courts have ruled (http://www.wilsonelser.com/news_and_insights/client_alerts/1529-new_yorks_highest_court_finds_er_physician_and) that the ultimate responsibility is still on the individual. If you choose to elope from medical care while drunk or high after reasonable attempts have been made to keep you in care......tough shit. It's on you if you get whacked by a car because you're drunk/high/whatever, and you won't get a payout from the medical provider.

__________________________________________________ _


Re: GSWs in the pre-hospital, pre-incarceration setting: Healthcare providers have zero fucking legal authority, whatsogoddamnever, to force a patient into treatment simply because they have a GSW. If they have a GSW and present with an altered mental status, that's implied consent. If I get shot in the leg and I say, "Nope. I don't want treatment" and I'm A&Ox3, then you cannot force me to get treatment.

If you're police you can force me to the hospital by placing me in custody and making reasonable efforts to ensure my care.....but whether or not I'm treated is between myself and the medical provider....and no, you cannot force the medical provider to treat an otherwise competent person. Same in the prehospital setting.....police can detain me and wait for EMS to show up and even transport me; but if I'm not altered I can tell EMS I don't want treatment, and they cannot treat me.

Here's another explanation (http://www.firelawblog.com/2011/05/28/diminished-capacity-protective-custody-and-refusing-aid/)of such and the difference between forcing treatment and placing a person in protective custody.

That's a human right, and it doesn't matter whether you agree with it or think it's stupid. Feel free to violate someone's rights (http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/16/justice/new-mexico-search-settlement/) though abuse of authority.

[TGS]

Unable to edit anymore....

Was re-reading and realized I wrote "time, place and location" in the first paragraph...two of which are the same. :)

That should read person, place and time.

[Nephrology]

Yes and no.

Consent is implied if the person is without their faculties, or if the provider can articulate that the person is a danger to themself or others (suicidal/homicidal tendencies), an adjudicated psych, or a minor. In a pre-hospital setting, altered mental status is commonly assessed and documented as whether the patient was alert and oriented to 3 different situational factors...usually being time, place, location, and other stuff is also thrown in for good measure such as events or whether they're a poor historian. With a drunk, we would usually have them display whether they were able to reasonably care for themselves as well, by standing on their own and walking without falling.

However, courts have ruled (http://www.wilsonelser.com/news_and_insights/client_alerts/1529-new_yorks_highest_court_finds_er_physician_and) that the ultimate responsibility is still on the individual. If you choose to elope from medical care while drunk or high after reasonable attempts have been made to keep you in care......tough shit. It's on you if you get whacked by a car because you're drunk/high/whatever, and you won't get a payout from the medical provider.

__________________________________________________ _


Re: GSWs in the pre-hospital, pre-incarceration setting: Healthcare providers have zero fucking legal authority, whatsogoddamnever, to force a patient into treatment simply because they have a GSW. If they have a GSW and present with an altered mental status, that's implied consent. If I get shot in the leg and I say, "Nope. I don't want treatment" and I'm A&Ox3, then you cannot force me to get treatment.

If you're police you can force me to the hospital by placing me in custody and making reasonable efforts to ensure my care.....but whether or not I'm treated is between myself and the medical provider....and no, you cannot force the medical provider to treat an otherwise competent person. Same in the prehospital setting.....police can detain me and wait for EMS to show up and even transport me; but if I'm not altered I can tell EMS I don't want treatment, and they cannot treat me.

Here's another explanation (http://www.firelawblog.com/2011/05/28/diminished-capacity-protective-custody-and-refusing-aid/)of such and the difference between forcing treatment and placing a person in protective custody.

That's a human right, and it doesn't matter whether you agree with it or think it's stupid. Feel free to violate someone's rights (http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/16/justice/new-mexico-search-settlement/) though abuse of authority.

Thank you for the post. It was informative.

[Shellback]

Spokane PD OIS bodycam. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b2e_1452737336

I was impressed with how they conducted themselves and how quickly they flipped the switch from stopping the threat to lifesaving measures.

[Nephrology]

Spokane PD OIS bodycam. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b2e_1452737336

I was impressed with how they conducted themselves and how quickly they flipped the switch from stopping the threat to lifesaving measures.

Would you all (LEOs) consider that a good shoot? He seemed pretty compliant (ish...) towards right before shots were fired. Hard to tell of course but wanted to ask the question.

[TheRoland]

Would you all (LEOs) consider that a good shoot? He seemed pretty compliant (ish...) towards right before shots were fired. Hard to tell of course but wanted to ask the question.

I'm not a LEO, but it looks to me like he was trying to open the door to an occupied car containing innocent bystanders. If that's indeed the case, it's not just a good shoot, but commendable.

EDIT: In video 2, you can see that there's a kid in the car, and you can see the guy try the door handle.

[Chuck Haggard]

Would you all (LEOs) consider that a good shoot? He seemed pretty compliant (ish...) towards right before shots were fired. Hard to tell of course but wanted to ask the question.

Under Graham and Tenn v Garner doctrine this is the very definition of a reasonable police shooting.

[TGS]

Would you all (LEOs) consider that a good shoot? He seemed pretty compliant (ish...) towards right before shots were fired. Hard to tell of course but wanted to ask the question.

Failure to drop a knife
Making furtive movements
Target glancing
Shifting weight
Presenting opportunity, ability and jeapordy to not only the officers but innocent bystanders

...all textbook reasons to articulate shooting someone.

[BaiHu]

Well done and a reminder to the uninitiated/BLM type folk that just because someone is shot doesn't make them done, dead or out of the fight. He still needed reminding to dump the knife. Oh and cops also take care of you after you threaten the public and have shot you down. But I'm preaching to the choir.

[Coyotesfan97]

I work with a guy who used to work for fire and was a flight nurse. He still keeps his paramedic certificate. He's saved at least two shot suspects that I know of.

[Nephrology]

Under Graham and Tenn v Garner doctrine this is the very definition of a reasonable police shooting.

Can you elaborate?

Again, not trying to debate or say it was/wasn't a good shoot - genuinely want a more informed perspective than my own.

[11B10]

Can you elaborate?

Again, not trying to debate or say it was/wasn't a good shoot - genuinely want a more informed perspective than my own.



The case (Tenn v Garner) Mr. Haggard refers to is online and very clear. Also:

Failure to drop a knife
Making furtive movements
Target glancing
Shifting weight
Presenting opportunity, ability and jeapordy to not only the officers but innocent bystanders

...all textbook reasons to articulate shooting someone.

[Chuck Haggard]

Can you elaborate?

Again, not trying to debate or say it was/wasn't a good shoot - genuinely want a more informed perspective than my own.

Under Garham, a police officer must use a level of force that is "reasonable" under the circumstances known to the officer at the time. 20/20 hindsight is never a part of the equation. In this case I think everyone here gets that knives are an instrument of deadly force, just as guns are, so an officer can use gunfire to stop a knife armed suspect.

In the Tenn v Garner case; http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/471/1.html

......we have a landmark ruling by SCOTUS on shooting at fleeing felons, with non-violent felonies being something that the police could no longer shoot suspects for fleeing from. In the case in question have have PC to believe we have a man armed with a knife (robbery suspect I think, I forget right now...), running from the cops, multiple verbal commands to stop, he tries to get into a vehicle, said vehicle has innocent bystanders in it. Cops can not safely go hands on, they have no time to do a team tactic thing such as try to Taser him while lethal cover stands by.... all other options are off the table, making shooting this dude the right thing to do, legally, morally, tactically.

One of my favorite SCOTUS quotes has to do with "the court can not demand detached reflection in the face of an upraised knife". Seems very appropriate in this case.

[Coyotesfan97]

Can you elaborate?

Again, not trying to debate or say it was/wasn't a good shoot - genuinely want a more informed perspective than my own.

Graham vs Connor is the gold standard for K9 deployments. I literally use it every night deploying my dog. It's the determination for us to justify a dog biting a suspect.

We use a three pronged test:
-the severity of the crime
-imminent danger to Officers and Citizens
-is the suspect resisting arrest or evading arrest by flight.

Just briefly for this shooting:
-severity of the crime: Multiple attempts of armed robbery/carjacking
-imminent danger: suspect armed with a knife, not obeying commands to drop it, suspect tries to get into car with innocents who he can stab or take hostage.
-evading arrest by flight: Disobeyed commands and ran from Officers. Is attempting to gain entry into vehicle which he can use to flee

Another consideration for us whether we can use some other type of less lethal force (OC, Taser, beanbags, batons). Everything except OC is on the same level of force. Chuck already touched on why less lethal wasn't practical in this case.

The nifty thing is while we use to make decisions about using our dogs to apprehend suspects I'm so used to it I use it writing every use of force.

From the Supremes in Graham "The calculus of reasonableness must embody [490 U.S. 386, 397] allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments - in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving - about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation."

I love throwing the scene was tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving in a report.

[11B10]

From the Supremes in Graham "The calculus of reasonableness must embody [490 U.S. 386, 397] allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments - in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving - about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation."

This ^^^^ should be included in every "news" report re: 'police use of force' in ANY situation. Everybody seems to think LEO has a 'pause' button or super slo-mo for real life.

[John Hearne]

http://www.policeone.com/officer-shootings/articles/68113006-Video-Minn-officer-accidentally-shoots-wounds-suspect-after-pursuit?nlid=&utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_content=TopNewsMainTitle&utm_campaign=P1Member&cub_id=usr_tm8TH4ijYhLFZ1Mh

[TCinVA]

http://www.policeone.com/officer-shootings/articles/68113006-Video-Minn-officer-accidentally-shoots-wounds-suspect-after-pursuit?nlid=&utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_content=TopNewsMainTitle&utm_campaign=P1Member&cub_id=usr_tm8TH4ijYhLFZ1Mh

I know of departments where "Well, nobody got hurt!" has been used to paper over gross negligence with firearms. I have to wonder if something similar was at play here.

[Nephrology]

I know of departments where "Well, nobody got hurt!" has been used to paper over gross negligence with firearms. I have to wonder if something similar was at play here.

I am not a lawyer but it seems like this guy could easily sue the officer's Dept.

[TC215]

Hostage rescue shot:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/29/watch-a-texas-police-officer-make-an-incredible-headshot-on-hostage-taking-robber-video/

[eyemahm]

Hostage rescue shot:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/29/watch-a-texas-police-officer-make-an-incredible-headshot-on-hostage-taking-robber-video/
+1 for patrol rifles.

Can't imagine most cops taking that 7-10 yard shot with a handgun. Trivial with an AR.

Anyone figure out what the other officer was doing crouched down behind the white car?

[breakingtime91]

Was he using iron sights?

[Drang]

Anyone figure out what the other officer was doing crouched down behind the white car?
Distracting the dirtbag?

[Hambo]

http://www.policeone.com/officer-shootings/articles/68113006-Video-Minn-officer-accidentally-shoots-wounds-suspect-after-pursuit?nlid=&utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_content=TopNewsMainTitle&utm_campaign=P1Member&cub_id=usr_tm8TH4ijYhLFZ1Mh

The king line: "Oh, shit! Fuck!" In the linked article he says that recent range training caused him to accidentally let one go. :rolleyes:

[Dagga Boy]

Hostage rescue shot:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/29/watch-a-texas-police-officer-make-an-incredible-headshot-on-hostage-taking-robber-video/

These are my local guys. Great job! I ll try to get details on sights.

[Shellback]

Cincinnati, OH - Dude goes for an airsoft pistol while surrounded by officers. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f5a_1455821569

Cayce, SC - Officers attempt arrest, dude pulls gun, shoots officer... http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ce0_1455604007

[Kukuforguns]

http://youtu.be/qmK8Ify3vi8
Skip the first 20 seconds of the video. The DA's office concluded that officer Patrick Feaster negligently discharged his weapon, but decided not to charge the officer with criminal negligence because the DA did not believe he had sufficient evidence to satisfy the burden of proof. The officer acknowledged that he had been trained not to put his finger on the trigger until he formed the intention to fire and stated he never intended to fire. Given: (1) the officer acknowledged his training not to put his finger on the trigger until he formed the intent to fire, (2) he never intended to fire; and (3) he put his finger on the trigger, I think the DA probably had all the evidence he needed to prosecute. I'm not saying the DA should have prosecuted, I just don't buy his explanation for why he didn't prosecute. More information here (http://www.actionnewsnow.com/news/da-plays-dash-cam-video-in-accidental-shooting-no-charges-will-be-filed/).
Update (http://www.chicoer.com/article/NA/20160210/NEWS/160219997)on this shooting. The victim ended up dying and the officer, who was fired, has been charged with manslaughter.

[Shellback]

liveleak video link -> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=066_1445960413

Second video, right after the above video ends, shows life-saving efforts -> http://www.wyff4.com/news/2nd-dashcam-video-shows-what-happened-after-officer-kills-teen/36072754

Officer who shot Zach Hammond may face federal charges, motion says. (http://www.wyff4.com/news/Officer-who-shot-Zach-Hammond-may-face-federal-charges-motion-says/38581058)

On Thursday, Tiller's attorney filed a motion Thursday asking that his video deposition in connection to a lawsuit filed by Hammond’s parents, which is scheduled for next Wednesday, be postponed for 90 days.

The motion says: “Due to the open and active criminal investigation, requiring Mr. Tiller’s participation in his deposition for this matter will force him to confront the troubling prospect of either waiving his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, or repeatedly invoking this privilege to the detriment of his interest in the instant litigation …

“Mr. Tiller faces the prospect of profound criminal exposure as a result of the ongoing criminal investigation. As a result, the active investigation profoundly and detrimentally impacts Mr. Tiller’s ability to participate in his upcoming deposition …

“The likelihood of a forthcoming indictment is more than mere speculation, as the federal investigation remains active with criminal investigative activity having occurred within the last 10 days.”

Judge denied postponement. (http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/pickens-county/2016/03/17/tiller-requests-postponement-deposition-avoid-criminal-incrimination/81946334/)

If he testifies in a deposition, he would have to plead the Fifth Amendment repeatedly to avoid incriminating himself in the criminal case, which would be detrimental to his chances to defend himself in the civil case, his attorneys argued.

[LockedBreech]

http://www.kgw.com/news/local/central-coast/newport-officer-justified-in-shooting-hammer-wielding-man-district-attorney-says/9648200

Justified in the shooting per the media.

I'll have to say that I don't really care much for allowing people to roam around, especially with a weapon.

Dude is an EDP, clearly, 4 seconds of talking to him you realize that, yet they give him all sorts of room, time to talk, etc... I'd suggest a more hands on approach.

Man, am I glad I have the desk job end of things. That was nerve-wracking and a really tough situation.

[Shellback]

Officer who shot Zach Hammond may face federal charges, motion says. (http://www.wyff4.com/news/Officer-who-shot-Zach-Hammond-may-face-federal-charges-motion-says/38581058)


Judge denied postponement. (http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/pickens-county/2016/03/17/tiller-requests-postponement-deposition-avoid-criminal-incrimination/81946334/)
$2.15 million settlement paid out. (http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-30/family-of-unarmed-white-teen-zachary-hammond-settles-for-215m)

[HCM]

Apparently this occurred in January 2015 but the video was just released after a settlement in the case.

Albuquerque Police Release Video Showing Officer Shooting Undercover Cop


Jarring videos showing the moments when an Albuquerque police officer was shot several times by his own lieutenant during an undercover operation were released Thursday, following the settlement of a lawsuit that awarded the wounded officer $6.5 million.

"I didn't know it was you!" says Albuquerque Police Department Lt. Greg Brachle moments after putting at least eight bullets into APD Officer Jacob Grant in January 2015.

Video from Brachle's lapel shows him running up to a vehicle that Grant was sitting in with suspects and yelling "gun," then promptly firing his weapon.

"Oh s---, that was Jacob! F--- me!" Brachle is heard saying. "Are you OK?" Brachle asks Grant. "No," Grant answers.

An officer is heard yelling "Jacob hang in there man!" after the accident. The lawsuit later filed by Grant said the officer lost 80 percent of the blood in his body.



The policies include mandatory attendance at all briefings, increased training for officers and a change of leadership for Grant's former unit. Brachle retired from the department March 7, according to KOB.


http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/albuquerque-police-release-video-showing-officer-shooting-undercover-cop-n549461

[voodoo_man]

Apparently this occurred in January 2015 but the video was just released after a settlement in the case.

Albuquerque Police Release Video Showing Officer Shooting Undercover Cop







http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/albuquerque-police-release-video-showing-officer-shooting-undercover-cop-n549461

Lots of fucked up things had to occur in order for this type of thing to happen.

[voodoo_man]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=345_1459513554


Midwest City, OK - There are new developments in a deadly officer-involved shooting that
happened in Midwest City last October. The DA cleared the officer who fired the shots, and released dash cam video that shows why the officer used deadly force.

The dash cam video is from the car of Midwest City Sgt. Scott Primo who assisted fellow officer James Hill on a burglary call during the early morning hours of October 5. They responded to a home in a neighborhood near Rose State College.

“The officers go around the back of the house,” said Oklahoma City District Attorney David Prater as he views the dash-cam video. The suspects notice the officers and they both hit the back fence.”From there the chase was on, with Officer Hill on the ground and Sgt. Primo in his car.

They all ended up on the Rose State College campus and Hill spotted 18-year-old Charles Pettit Jr. by a dumpster.

“And he began to yell, come up with your hands up, show me your hands show me your hands show me your hands,” said Prater,” You have two independent witnesses, Rose State employees, who were there at the time and heard and saw everything happen.”

Officer Primo's dash cam captured what happened next with Hill shooting at Pettit, and Pettit falling to the ground. It all happened in the blink of an eye. But when you slow down the video you can see a pistol fall from Pettit's hand down to the ground. Prater said it was stolen and fully loaded.“Hill had two choices, he could have been murdered that moment Pettit was pointing a gun at his head or he could have used deadly force to defend himself,” said Prater. “And he used deadly force to defend himself thankfully.

”Pettit was still alive moments after the shooting but died days later at the hospital. Pettit’s partner in crime got away and is yet to be arrested or even identified.

[Hauptmann]

No video, but interesting 9th Circuit Court decision regarding the use of bite dogs:

http://www.latimes.com/local/crime/la-me-dog-bite-appeal-20160402-story.html

[HCM]

No video, but interesting 9th Circuit Court decision regarding the use of bite dogs:

http://www.latimes.com/local/crime/la-me-dog-bite-appeal-20160402-story.html

This part may be relevant to StraiR's GSD dog thread.


Nulton testified in a deposition that police dogs are not trained to differentiate between "a young child asleep or ... a burglar standing in the kitchen with a butcher knife," and will typically bite the first person they find. He said it is usually up to the officer to decide when it is appropriate to allow the dog off its leash.

[El Cid]

Apparently this occurred in January 2015 but the video was just released after a settlement in the case.

Albuquerque Police Release Video Showing Officer Shooting Undercover Cop

I've never been a UC but I've been involved in plenty of controlled buys. I'm curious, did the LT see a gun? He yelled gun and then engaged. Was the UC holding a gun? Because that seems like a really bad idea in that role to draw your weapon as the arrest team hits the car.





http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/albuquerque-police-release-video-showing-officer-shooting-undercover-cop-n549461

[John Hearne]

No video but a news story:
http://www.officer.com/news/12190410/las-vegas-police-k-9-was-killed-by-friendly-fire

Another example of how not all shots are easy shots. Who has a qual course that tests the ability to thread a round past a canine being drug by a fleeing suspect?

[El Cid]

Weird - somehow I screwed the pooch and put my questions inside the quote of HCM. I can't seem to edit the post, so I'll repost it here to avoid confusion.

With regards to the ABQ UC Blue on Blue: I've never been a UC but I've been involved in plenty of controlled buys. I'm curious, did the LT see a gun? He yelled gun and then engaged. Was the UC holding a gun? Because that seems like a really bad idea in that role to draw your weapon as the arrest team hits the car.

[TC215]

Weird - somehow I screwed the pooch and put my questions inside the quote of HCM. I can't seem to edit the post, so I'll repost it here to avoid confusion.

With regards to the ABQ UC Blue on Blue: I've never been a UC but I've been involved in plenty of controlled buys. I'm curious, did the LT see a gun? He yelled gun and then engaged. Was the UC holding a gun? Because that seems like a really bad idea in that role to draw your weapon as the arrest team hits the car.

From what I've read, the UC had drawn his gun on the two bad guys sitting in front of him. This was, for whatever reason, the plan and was discussed at the briefing.

However, the lieutenant did not go to the briefing, he just showed up to the bust. He moves up, sees the gun, and starts shooting.

This is why, when we do things like this, if you miss the briefing you DON'T GO.

[Lon]

This is why, when we do things like this, if you miss the briefing you DON'T GO.

Was on a buy bust when an FBI SAC almost got smoked. Wasn't at the briefing and showed up during the bust running across the parking lot with a gun out and no visible badge. Only thing that really saved him was he was wearing a business suit and not street clothes.

[El Cid]

From what I've read, the UC had drawn his gun on the two bad guys sitting in front of him. This was, for whatever reason, the plan and was discussed at the briefing.

However, the lieutenant did not go to the briefing, he just showed up to the bust. He moves up, sees the gun, and starts shooting.

This is why, when we do things like this, if you miss the briefing you DON'T GO.
Damn. Thanks for the explanation. Hope the UC continues to recover.

[Shellback]

3/29/16


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVe7bx_CaSU&feature=youtu.be

[voodoo_man]

3/29/16


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVe7bx_CaSU&feature=youtu.be

One shot, low stomach...

I'd argue he wasn't trying to kill him.

[Shellback]

One shot, low stomach...

I'd argue he wasn't trying to kill him.

I think the officer showed a lot of restraint and made good use of space.

[El Cid]

I think the officer showed a lot of restraint and made good use of space.

By walking backwards into traffic where a driver who was too busy with a cell phone could've run over him? No thank you.

And what's the protocol for turning off a body camera after an incident? He was talking too much about the incident for my liking.

[Shellback]

By walking backwards into traffic where a driver who was too busy with a cell phone could've run over him? No thank you.

And what's the protocol for turning off a body camera after an incident? He was talking too much about the incident for my liking.

Part of the problem with the video is it's a chest mounted camera. If he's looking right with his head, sees traffic has stopped, and then proceeds... @ 2:23 it appears that all traffic had stopped a safe distance away. But, it's not my call to make.

[voodoo_man]

Part of the problem with the video is it's a chest mounted camera. If he's looking right with his head, sees traffic has stopped, and then proceeds... @ 2:23 it appears that all traffic had stopped a safe distance away. But, it's not my call to make.

#1 rule about traffic is that it won't stop for anything or anyone and will absolutely, positively, hit you as you are on the road.

I've seen way too many LEO's hurt and killed because of them walking into traffic thinking its either not moving or assuming they will see them in the road.

Good use of space, sure, maybe. He made contact without backup which was an issue. The only saving factor for the officer was that the guy didn't move and draw at the same time because if he had we might we watching a completely different video.

[voodoo_man]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K97LXc4O-r4

not quite LE using force but a dude running from LE....looks like NJ.

[voodoo_man]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=77a_1459830059

http://www.fox9.com/news/117016549-story


EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. (KMSP) - On Feb. 7 of 2014, 11 officers responded to a police chase turned standoff on Highway 212 in Eden Prairie. Four officers fired shots at Matthew Serbus, who died after the second volley of shots. And one officer fired at Dawn Pfister, who also died.

A grand jury cleared the officers, but the family for Pfister believes the one officer who shot the 34-year-old woman was in the wrong. And they believe video supports their argument.

While the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) released video of the moments leading up to the shooting, Pfister’s family, through their attorney, provided Fox 9 with the video of the actual shooting — as seen from two different dash cameras (one with sound, one without sound).


The incident began as a police chase. Officers received reports of a car involved in a hit and run, and drivers called 911 complaining about a reckless driver. Inside the car were Pfister and Serbus. The car was stolen and its hood was up. The pair eventually crashed into a wall.



At first, no one emerged from the car. But eventually, Serbus came out, and then, so did Pfister. However, Serbus’s hands were on Pfister. It was difficult to tell exactly what was happening, but eventually an officer concluded it was a hostage situation, saying into his radio, “looks to be a hostage situation.” However, an attorney for the officer who would shoot Pfister, wrote in a legal filing that the pair “danced together and then exchanged a kiss.”

While the incident unfolded, one officer is heard saying “show me your hands sir; nobody wants you to die right now. You’re gonna though.” As the pair moves, standing and tangled together, Serbus waves his hand and a single shot is heard. An officer says “get down” and Pfister complies, but then either is pulled up or gets back up.

About ten seconds later, officers realize Serbus is holding a knife, and an officer is heard saying, “It’s a knife, he’s got a knife.” Shortly after that, officers worry Serbus may be stabbing or harming Pfister, one officer yelling, “don’t do that to her!” Another officer says, “I gotta drop him guys.”



As shots broke out, a semi-circle of eleven officers — seven with pistols and four with rifles — surrounded Serbus and Pfister. Several shots are heard, and several seconds pass before Serbus and Pfister fall to the ground. At this point, only Serbus had been struck by bullets.

On the ground, Pfister takes the knife from Serbus, and an officer is heard saying, “suspect down, she’s holding knife.” One police officer, Officer Brady Juell, of the Chaska Police Department, shoots and kills Pfister, who was struck by four bullets. Four officers then shoot and kill Serbus, who appears to be grabbing back the knife and standing up.

Hostage or Threat?

Pfister’s family believes Juell shot her while she was trying to escape her hostage-taker and get the knife away from him. But Juell told a BCA investigator that he believed Pfister was coming at the officers with the knife.

In an interview with the BCA, Juell said, “And she’s got the meanest, angriest look on her face…And she looked up at us and she started comin’ up at us. She posted her arm and she started comin’ up at us with that knife and I, I knew right then and there she’s gonna try and kill us with that knife. And she had this knife in her hand and she came up at us and I knew I was the only one with the rifle and I knew how [Serbus] acted drugged out, wasn’t going down. I thought she was gonna be the same.”

But Bob Bennett, the attorney for Pfister’s family, believes Pfister was simply trying escape the man holding her hostage, and he believes the actions of the other officers prove it, telling Fox 9 the video “shows ten officers had clear lines of sight and the ability to shoot, and didn’t shoot the woman hostage.”

Pfister’s family filed a lawsuit against Officer Juell and the city of Chaska. Bennett says he has no problems with the actions of the officers who shot at Serbus, who Bennett believes was a genuine threat.

Joe Dutton, a use of force expert who defends officers, reviewed the video for Fox 9, and said he could see why the officer shot her: she had the knife and appeared to be getting back on her feet.


The BCA, the state agency tasked with providing independent investigations of deadly police shootings, handled the investigation for the Highway 212 shooting. But Bennett, a prominent civil rights attorney, believes the BCA “ignored” the video — calling the agency’s investigation a “shield” rather than “sword.”

In a deposition of a senior special agent, Bennett asked, “did you look at the videotape evidence before the shooters were interviewed?” The agent answered, “I looked at it after I conducted the interviews.” Bennett followed up by asking, “so basically you take these officers’ statements about what they perceived at complete face value?” The agent answered, “yes.” Bennett believes the agent would have benefited from watching the video before the interviews because “they would use the video evidence to contradict and say to the witness, ‘I know you’re lying, we can see you’re lying on the videotape.’”

“I've certainly learned you cannot reliably trust the BCA to investigate officer involved shootings or other conduct impartially. And I don't know what the answer to that is. That needs to be dealt with systematically at the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension,” Bennett told Fox 9.

However, Susan Gaertner, former Ramsey County attorney, told Fox 9 she has faith in the BCA’s independence. “Obviously, independence is in the eye of the beholder. And no matter who is investigating, no matter what law enforcement entity was investigating, someone is going to say they protect their own. That doesn't mean it's true.”



“The BCA is an independent fact finder and does not decide or determine the outcome of a case. The BCA conducts conflict investigations in the same way it does all investigations. BCA agents interview witnesses and the people involved in the incident; collect, analyze and review evidence; and conduct follow-up interviews as needed to ultimately find all of the facts of a case. The agency involved in the incident has no input regarding the investigative direction of the case. As it does in all investigations, the BCA then presents its findings without recommendations to a county attorney who can choose to review the findings or impanel a grand jury.”

Attorney for Chaska & Officer Juell Response to Fox 9

"The jurors heard all of the witnesses' testimony, reviewed all of the physical evidence, and they even had the opportunity to ask the witnesses questions...Video evidence can be critical to helping investigations, but, as was the case here, since the video does not show what Officer Juell actually saw during this rapidly evolving and very tense situation, the grand jury turned to his testimony and the testimony of the other officers at the scene in choosing not to indict him.”


Pretty messed up situation.

I first thought the BG discharged at the officers but it was the officer, who I assume had a rifle (from the sound) and then him taking shots at the guy after discovering it was a knife.....then seeing he didn't have an optic......yeahhhhh

[Nephrology]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=77a_1459830059

http://www.fox9.com/news/117016549-story




Pretty messed up situation.

I first thought the BG discharged at the officers but it was the officer, who I assume had a rifle (from the sound) and then him taking shots at the guy after discovering it was a knife.....then seeing he didn't have an optic......yeahhhhh

Seems like a cluster.

[voodoo_man]

Seems like a cluster.

Iron sight hostage headshot at least 10y?

No fucking thank you.

[HCountyGuy]

Don't bring a battle-axe to a gun fight:

http://unclesamsmisguidedchildren.com/axe-wielding-woman-shot-tennessee-police-dies/

[VT1032]

Don't bring a battle-axe to a gun fight:

http://unclesamsmisguidedchildren.com/axe-wielding-woman-shot-tennessee-police-dies/

Damn, I'd really hate to be the guys on the other side of her if those rounds over penetrated...

[voodoo_man]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3jJEGIH55k&feature=youtu.be

Nashville project.

Brave guy going in there by himself and starting a fight.

Brave, but really fucking stupid.

[voodoo_man]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGqz5_AtInQ

Check this out, has it all.

Pay attention at 1:30

Taser deployment non-functional

Good info over radio

Limitations of body worn cameras

Cardio? Yeah, do some cardio.

[JM Campbell]

Needs a secondary light, wml and muzzles his back up at the end. I know, I know..I know monday morning qbing.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

What's up with the gansta lean on the pistol?

[psalms144.1]

I couldn't tell, I thought the officer in that last video had a hand held light, which led to the one-handed gangsta carry of the Glock through most of the video. I might be wrong, though...