Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: “A secret. A search warrant. A veteran. A trap.”

  1. #1

    “A secret. A search warrant. A veteran. A trap.”

    Lengthy article on the incident last year where 7 officers were shot, two fatally, in Florence, SC.

    https://www.postandcourier.com/news/...de1999a5d.html

    On Oct. 3, two days after the park meeting, Farrah secures a search warrant, then gathers a team to head for the Hopkins’ house. But first, she runs a routine computerized program that assesses potential dangers to deputies based on such factors as the incident location and the history of the people involved.

    It identifies no need for particular caution.

    As the team heads out, none of them thinks much about Seth’s father, Frederick Hopkins, a 74-year-old Vietnam combat veteran and sharpshooter with well over 100 firearms in his home collection.
    You’d be hard pressed to find better reasoning for LE to have armored vehicles than this incident.

  2. #2
    I hope this is not interpreted negatively.

    As a veteran and a computer analyst, I read this as a tragic case of officers being let down by their institutional training systems. Just looking at the photo of the house at the end of the cul-de-sac sets off my “dis gonna be Trouble” detector. I’m guessing the young officers who rolled on that call never trigged to the danger, and a computer program sure as heck isn’t gonna know either.

    From what I’ve read, these investigators were sharp people - but they were not trained to recognize a prepared adversary in a military sense, and technology has its limitations. A guy who buys a home at the end of a road with barricades and a single point of entry with 100 guns on record = phone the SWAT team. I’d wager the grey haired people who’d also know that are exactly the people PDs are showing the door to. With a PD composed of younger folks, led by administrators who trust software and their political bosses , it is too easy for new officers to roll into a dangerous situation no one’s prepared them for.

    It used to be the scene in “Demolition Man” where the SAPD officers get thrashed by Wesley Snipes after listening to a computerized box was satire . I fear it’s becoming a reality.
    The Minority Marksman.
    "When you meet a swordsman, draw your sword: Do not recite poetry to one who is not a poet."
    -a Ch'an Buddhist axiom.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Western Ohio
    nvrmnd
    Last edited by Alpha Sierra; 04-20-2019 at 01:09 PM.

  4. #4
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by GardoneVT View Post
    I hope this is not interpreted negatively.

    As a veteran and a computer analyst, I read this as a tragic case of officers being let down by their institutional training systems. Just looking at the photo of the house at the end of the cul-de-sac sets off my “dis gonna be Trouble” detector. I’m guessing the young officers who rolled on that call never trigged to the danger, and a computer program sure as heck isn’t gonna know either.

    From what I’ve read, these investigators were sharp people - but they were not trained to recognize a prepared adversary in a military sense, and technology has its limitations. A guy who buys a home at the end of a road with barricades and a single point of entry with 100 guns on record = phone the SWAT team. I’d wager the grey haired people who’d also know that are exactly the people PDs are showing the door to. With a PD composed of younger folks, led by administrators who trust software and their political bosses , it is too easy for new officers to roll into a dangerous situation no one’s prepared them for.

    It used to be the scene in “Demolition Man” where the SAPD officers get thrashed by Wesley Snipes after listening to a computerized box was satire . I fear it’s becoming a reality.
    You are WAY the fuck out of your lane.

    The “breathless” dramatic style and inaccuracies in the article aren’t helping either.

    This had nothing to do with a computer program. It had to do with 1) a worst case scenario and 2) officers not doing their homework.

    It is standard practice in LE today to use a “risk matrix” for planned operations to determine if a Tactical / SWAT team should be used. “Risk matrix” is a fancy word for a score sheet. You put in known potential issues, add up the points and with a score of “X” or above you normally use SWAT. Regardless of the score, the Officers and their command staff have the final say based on articulable facts. The matrix is merely a guide. It helps provide consistency, avoiding both over and under utilization of SWAT, and it helps articulate decisions later. However, whether on a computer or a paper score sheet it is a “garbage in = garbage out” situation.

    With that background:

    Child molestation / pornography suspects, in general are high risks for suicide / Homicide due to the social stigma and consequences associated with these offenses.

    As such doing checks for LE contacts at a target location and with the people likely to be at that location are good practice. Such a check would have revealed the prior assault on the county employee and the fact that it was motivated by apparent sovereign citizen ideology. That would have been a big red flag.

    Social media or human source checks might have revealed the suspects father was a Vietnam vet or a competitive shooter as he and his wife were apparently well known in the community and political circles (Shades Of Rodger Stone). The father was not the suspect but in child sex assault cases, the offense is sometimes learned behavior perpetuated by former victims so the father would have been of investigative interest.

    In short the original offense, combined with the sovereign citizen aspects of the fathers prior assault arrest would have been a big red flag for me but hindsight is always 20/20. Did the lead investigator know about the dads assault arrest ? If so did she just see it on the rap sheet or did she pull the report ? We don’t know, at least not from the article.

    The placement of the house was fortuitous for the suspect but brick houses are common in SC as are cranky old white dudes with lots of guns. Speaking of, outside commie states like NJ, IL etc, there is no where that this guys guns or gun purchases are “on record” other that a hundred different paper 4473s at multiple FFLs. Regardless, the number of guns is irrelevant. The issue was unlike most crooks,in fact most of the CONUS civilian population, this suspect was tactically proficient, had been stress inoculated and could actually hit what he was shooting at. As your own prior comments about people on public ranges attest, good marksmanship alone is rare.

    For an example of the difference stress inoculation and tactical proficiently make the Deputy Dinkheller video says more than any words on a screen. The offender in that case was also a Vietnam vet.
    Last edited by HCM; 04-20-2019 at 01:44 PM.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by HCM View Post
    You are WAY the fuck out of your lane.

    The “breathless” dramatic style and inaccuracies in the article aren’t helping either.

    This had nothing to do with a computer program. It had to do with 1) a worst case scenario and 2) officers not doing their homework.
    So be it.

    I’ll go shut up and color now
    The Minority Marksman.
    "When you meet a swordsman, draw your sword: Do not recite poetry to one who is not a poet."
    -a Ch'an Buddhist axiom.

  6. #6
    @HCM, or anyone else who remembers, I just want to make sure I have my facts straight. I believe I read that the Frederick Hopkins spouse was called by someone in the department due to fears of litigation prior to warrant being executed, (I recall having read it some where but can't find the article). Am I thinking of the right case? If this is the case I am thinking of there were more than failures to plan, and in execution. Some of this also rides on the command, some on the idiot that called and warned the wife, (if that happened) the rest falls on the piece of shit Hopkins. If Hopkins did get a heads up from the spouse this shit was completely premeditated and I hope he fucking burns, PTSD my ass. He should have his BS stripped and be fucking executed. All he's done is detract from service members who legitimately suffer from PTSD and will just increase the social stigma and the number of people not seeking help, neither of which are good. It also gives credence to Napolitano's comments and other political figureheads about Combat Vets being potential issues/terrorists or whatever. This shit pisses me off on so many levels I hope that piece of crap burns for what he did to those officers.

  7. #7
    Site Supporter Erick Gelhaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Wasatch Front
    Quote Originally Posted by GardoneVT View Post
    I hope this is not interpreted negatively.
    I don't have a problem with your thoughts. I agree that it - background, case, history - should have tripped every bell imagineable. I read the article but I've no idea what matrix / score sheet they use. Am aware of events were the case/location/suspect more than justified SWAT and yet afterwards people whined about SWAT being used. Do a web search on Fresno County's Minkler incident for another example of being needed but not used and the tragic aftermath (including why you don't stick your head up in the V of the door at the A pillar during a barricade).

    Unfortunately, it seems we as a profession need to re-learn these lessons far too often because we forget, then we appease those who'll never understand or accept it, then we get re-taught the lesson often quite painfully
    Last edited by Erick Gelhaus; 04-20-2019 at 05:23 PM.

  8. #8
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by Erick Gelhaus View Post
    Unfortunately, it seems we as a profession need to re-learn these lessons far too often because we forget, then we appease those who'll never being, then we get re-taught the lesson.
    I'm not sure if it applies to this incident and won't speculate as to whether it will, but in general I think there's a peer-pressure aspect to this work as well. Lots of departments out there have cultures where you'll be "that guy" if you call additional units prior to something breaking bad for assistance on felony arrests. We had an office policy of never having less than 5 for an arrest (unless it was a transfer of custody), preferably 8, + a local representative. My best friend was a prior local with 6 years in plainclothes interdiction on a small-ish PD, so his unit did narcotics, gangs, vice, fugitives, etc all rolled up into one unit. He was happy with our policy, but surprised. In his old PD the culture was that you handled your own arrests on the street, and warrants were usually served by the investigator and a marked unit.....otherwise you'd be that guy.

    So, here we have a low-risk warrant being served by 3 LEOs with 2 forensic specialists sitting outside. All the stuff that HCM wrote sounds on point and really hits on the root/causative issue, but I can't help but think if there were at least 2 dudes outside from a cover position, preferably at least 1 with access to a long rifle, that the outcome after boom would have been positively influenced.

    I've only served 10 warrants, so I'm curious to hear from you other guys who have more non-SWAT warrant experience. Does your agency fall into the category of "1 riot, 1 ranger" or do you actually bring some ass even when you're not expecting to need it?
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  9. #9
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C View Post
    @HCM, or anyone else who remembers, I just want to make sure I have my facts straight. I believe I read that the Frederick Hopkins spouse was called by someone in the department due to fears of litigation prior to warrant being executed, (I recall having read it some where but can't find the article). Am I thinking of the right case? If this is the case I am thinking of there were more than failures to plan, and in execution. Some of this also rides on the command, some on the idiot that called and warned the wife, (if that happened) the rest falls on the piece of shit Hopkins. If Hopkins did get a heads up from the spouse this shit was completely premeditated and I hope he fucking burns, PTSD my ass. He should have his BS stripped and be fucking executed. All he's done is detract from service members who legitimately suffer from PTSD and will just increase the social stigma and the number of people not seeking help, neither of which are good. It also gives credence to Napolitano's comments and other political figureheads about Combat Vets being potential issues/terrorists or whatever. This shit pisses me off on so many levels I hope that piece of crap burns for what he did to those officers.
    The warning call was alleged - I don’t know if that was ever confirmed. Sheriffs offices are inherently political (it’s an elected office) so it is certainly plausible.

  10. #10
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    I'm not sure if it applies to this incident and won't speculate as to whether it will, but in general I think there's a peer-pressure aspect to this work as well. Lots of departments out there have cultures where you'll be "that guy" if you call additional units prior to something breaking bad for assistance on felony arrests. We had an office policy of never having less than 5 for an arrest (unless it was a transfer of custody), preferably 8, + a local representative. My best friend was a prior local with 6 years in plainclothes interdiction on a small-ish PD, so his unit did narcotics, gangs, vice, fugitives, etc all rolled up into one unit. He was happy with our policy, but surprised. In his old PD the culture was that you handled your own arrests on the street, and warrants were usually served by the investigator and a marked unit.....otherwise you'd be that guy.

    So, here we have a low-risk warrant being served by 3 LEOs with 2 forensic specialists sitting outside. All the stuff that HCM wrote sounds on point and really hits on the root/causative issue, but I can't help but think if there were at least 2 dudes outside from a cover position, preferably at least 1 with access to a long rifle, that the outcome after boom would have been positively influenced.

    I've only served 10 warrants, so I'm curious to hear from you other guys who have more non-SWAT warrant experience. Does your agency fall into the category of "1 riot, 1 ranger" or do you actually bring some ass even when you're not expecting to need it?
    One thing you have VERY wrong here - search and arrest warrants for child sex and child porn offenses are NOT. “low risk.” These suspect are always high risk for both suicide and Homicide. Not because of the inherent violence of the offense itself but because of the social and moral stigma associated with it.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.orl...story,amp.html

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fox...th-us-marshals
    Last edited by HCM; 04-20-2019 at 06:34 PM.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •