Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Orlanth..The kid was by himself at a bus stop. All of the other people had left. There did not appear to be any imminent danger to anyone. He had no hostages, no one was around that he could threaten, except starsky and hutch when they pulled up to him.

I can't tell from the video, but for all we know, the kid was pulling the gun out to give it to them?

I think you are defending the wrong people here.

GG

You post like someone who never played Cops & Robbers as a kid. The police pulled up, stepped out of the car, and shot him, according to the eye-witnesses. They did not even *attempt* to ascertain the ID of the suspect, despite the 911 caller advising the dispatcher that it might be a child with a toy gun.

If you still don't consider this murder, then it would also exonerate anyone who, in the perceived defense of their life and property, kills a cop during a NKW. If one "thinks" that guy in the dark has a gun and is going to kill you or others, and thus one shoots first before confirming who the target is, and end up wasting a cop performing a NKW (on what may be the wrong house entirely), then you were acting based on what you thought the situation was.

 Psienesis wrote:
You post like someone who never played Cops & Robbers as a kid. The police pulled up, stepped out of the car, and shot him, according to the eye-witnesses. They did not even *attempt* to ascertain the ID of the suspect, despite the 911 caller advising the dispatcher that it might be a child with a toy gun.

If you still don't consider this murder, then it would also exonerate anyone who, in the perceived defense of their life and property, kills a cop during a NKW. If one "thinks" that guy in the dark has a gun and is going to kill you or others, and thus one shoots first before confirming who the target is, and end up wasting a cop performing a NKW (on what may be the wrong house entirely), then you were acting based on what you thought the situation was.

Eye-witnesses also said Michael Brown was running away when he was shot, yet all forensic evidence says that was impossible.

Lets not muddy the waters by bringing in that specific debate - I think we can all reasonably agree that eyewitness testimony, as a rule, is generally unreliable.

 Psienesis wrote:
They did not even *attempt* to ascertain the ID of the suspect.

Yeah, I'd certainly wait for someone who is in possession of a gun to reach in his pockets and pull out the ID. Duh.

 djones520 wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
You post like someone who never played Cops & Robbers as a kid. The police pulled up, stepped out of the car, and shot him, according to the eye-witnesses. They did not even *attempt* to ascertain the ID of the suspect, despite the 911 caller advising the dispatcher that it might be a child with a toy gun.

If you still don't consider this murder, then it would also exonerate anyone who, in the perceived defense of their life and property, kills a cop during a NKW. If one "thinks" that guy in the dark has a gun and is going to kill you or others, and thus one shoots first before confirming who the target is, and end up wasting a cop performing a NKW (on what may be the wrong house entirely), then you were acting based on what you thought the situation was.

Eye-witnesses also said Michael Brown was running away when he was shot, yet all forensic evidence says that was impossible.

But in this case there is a video. Did you watch the video?

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
They did not even *attempt* to ascertain the ID of the suspect.

Yeah, I'd certainly wait for someone who is in possession of a gun to reach in his pockets and pull out the ID. Duh.

No, but he could have drawn his weapon, stayed behind the cover of his car door and ordered the kid to drop the suspected weapon. Which he did not do. If the kid had been armed and dangerous he would have probably killed both cops when they drove up on him. They didn't take control of the situation. They just acted. Why is that OK? They did their job poorly and killed a kid. I don't understand the free pass. Would you want that idiot policing your streets?

 Psienesis wrote:
If you still don't consider this murder, then it would also exonerate anyone who, in the perceived defense of their life and property, kills a cop during a NKW.

There rightfully have been acquittals and even failed indictments of homeowners who have killed police officers serving no-knock warrants, which are a legal device that should really not exist. The idea is incredibly dangerous for everyone involved.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
They did not even *attempt* to ascertain the ID of the suspect.

Yeah, I'd certainly wait for someone who is in possession of a gun to reach in his pockets and pull out the ID. Duh.

No.... what you do is stop a reasonable distance away from the perp, and use your car as defensive wall, while ordering the perp to get on the ground or some such method. Instead these idiots choose to drive right up to the kid, jump out and gave them selves and the kid no room for error.

GG

I also have to say this thread title is super flamebaity and borderline trollish. The idea that a police officer might be lawfully investigated for shooting a child who was in possession of a toy gun within 2 seconds of arriving at the scene - facts not in dispute by anyone - is akin to "throwing some cops to the mob" is just kind of ridiculous.

if a cop shoots anyone it should be investigated, no matter how righteous it is

if a cop shoots a kid with a toy it might need a little more scrutiny



super simple stuff

 Orlanth wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:


Did you see the video?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/11/26/officials-release-video-names-in-fatal-police-shooting-of-12-year-old-cleveland-boy/

At what point did the cop say stop? he leaped out of the car and shot the kid without ever saying a word to him.

Thats because there is no sound.
however what we see is a kid with a gun, a kid not dropping the gun when asked and the kid them dropping.
Perhaps you would be quite fine if th cops decided to do every action with three second pause.
If you do, ask yourself how long it takes to pull a trigger.

If the parents allowed their kid to play out on the streets to a real looking gun, they should claim responsibility for the consequences, as well as the kid. Not the police officer who didnt know if this was his time to die or not and had no choice but to answer a call on his radio about an armed person in public.

Ask yourself how cops can find an hour or more to keep themselves safe when a white guy is waving gun around in the streets, or just holding an assault rifle at the ready. There is a huge racial problem in the states and it needs to be addressed, either equally start shooting every white guy waving a gun, or stop killing black people with guns or as is more often the case, stop killing unarmed black people.

We don't see the cop saying anything to the kid, nor giving him a chance to respond. Nor is there any proof he said anything to the kid, that's just something you're making up to justify what happened.

 Ouze wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
If you still don't consider this murder, then it would also exonerate anyone who, in the perceived defense of their life and property, kills a cop during a NKW.

There rightfully have been acquittals and even failed indictments of homeowners who have killed police officers serving no-knock warrants, which are a legal device that should really not exist. The idea is incredibly dangerous for everyone involved.

Rightfully so (for the record, a NKW is a terribly stupid, stupid idea that seems specifically designed to get people, police and civilian, killed) but what we have in this case is a police officer (and possibly a dispatcher) with every opportunity to control the flow of this encounter, and moving directly to gunfire. I'm interested in what the investigation of the actual dispatch call pulls up. Did the original caller, indeed, claim that they suspected it was a kid with a toy gun? Was this info passed to the officers? If so, why do they not appear to have taken this into account? If not, why not? That would be rather pertinent information.

Loehmann was at the most vulnerable point as he is coming out the vehicle. His weapon is on his right hip and Amir did have the "advantage" of a kill shot.

 Jihadin wrote:
Loehmann was at the most vulnerable point as he is coming out the vehicle. His weapon is on his right hip and Amir did have the "advantage" of a kill shot.

Which makes me wonder A, why the vehicle was driven to that spot, and B, why he exited the vehicle in that manner. Intent aside, those were horrible tactical decisions, that would have gotten him killed if the kid was a real threat. It makes me wonder what kind of training these guys had.

 WellSpokenMan wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Loehmann was at the most vulnerable point as he is coming out the vehicle. His weapon is on his right hip and Amir did have the "advantage" of a kill shot.

Which makes me wonder A, why the vehicle was driven to that spot, and B, why he exited the vehicle in that manner. Intent aside, those were horrible tactical decisions, that would have gotten him killed if the kid was a real threat. It makes me wonder what kind of training these guys had.

Frackman(sp?) was the SGT so no idea why he was driving instead of the new guy (Loehmann) but I'm bias because I am use to having my own driver. I think they went for the "Shock and Awe" approach that took a double flush downhill. Also thinking they were going off piss poor information. I can understand Loehmann reacting the way he did. Hell, he did not have enough room for a combat roll out the vehicle with Amir right there. As for training I believe a ROE needs to be implemented and adhered to. Will have to re-train the entire LEO force and make mandatory to wear body armor at all time regardless of weather. Best justification for deadly force when one is positively engage by someone with intent to opt (LEO) out

Oh and implement a Risk Assessment. Matrix

 generalgrog wrote:
Orlanth..The kid was by himself at a bus stop. All of the other people had left. There did not appear to be any imminent danger to anyone. He had no hostages, no one was around that he could threaten, except starsky and hutch when they pulled up to him.

I can't tell from the video, but for all we know, the kid was pulling the gun out to give it to them?

I think you are defending the wrong people here.

GG

There were eyewitnesses from what I have read, so there were people around.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Psienesis wrote:
You post like someone who never played Cops & Robbers as a kid. The police pulled up, stepped out of the car, and shot him, according to the eye-witnesses. They did not even *attempt* to ascertain the ID of the suspect, despite the 911 caller advising the dispatcher that it might be a child with a toy gun.

If you still don't consider this murder, then it would also exonerate anyone who, in the perceived defense of their life and property, kills a cop during a NKW. If one "thinks" that guy in the dark has a gun and is going to kill you or others, and thus one shoots first before confirming who the target is, and end up wasting a cop performing a NKW (on what may be the wrong house entirely), then you were acting based on what you thought the situation was.

I wouldn't bank my life on the word "might".

They didn't need to bank on anything. If they had done their jobs properly instead of acting like it was some kind of bad buddy cop movie, the incident would have been resolved with no loss of life.

Roll up to a safe distance, use loud speaker or shout for kid to drop the weapon. I can think of several better ways to handle that, and I'm not a cop.

 WellSpokenMan wrote:
They didn't need to bank on anything. If they had done their jobs properly instead of acting like it was some kind of bad buddy cop movie, the incident would have been resolved with no loss of life.

Roll up to a safe distance, use loud speaker or shout for kid to drop the weapon. I can think of several better ways to handle that, and I'm not a cop.

Its easy arm chairing after the fact when everything is known.

For all we know it might be a "Suicide by Cops"

Do we really have all the facts in this case yet?

 whembly wrote:
Do we really have all the facts in this case yet?

Nope we've just got an OP who can write an inflammatory title but doesn't understand the forensic definition of "Homicide".

All of the facts are never known. Doesn't stop the interwebz rage machine though.

I try not to cast judgement in these cases. I will admit I tend to feel a bias towards the cops favor, but I attribute that towards also being in an armed profession.

As long as the legal system that we have in place is being used properly, then I'm satisfied with that. People are always quick to attack how our system sends innocent people to jail, but people are also incredibly quick to send folks to jail before the system even has a chance to work.

 whembly wrote:
Do we really have all the facts in this case yet?

Case of beer says Loehmann justified in the shooting but the NCO is at fault for the aggressive approach

 Jihadin wrote:

 WellSpokenMan wrote:
They didn't need to bank on anything. If they had done their jobs properly instead of acting like it was some kind of bad buddy cop movie, the incident would have been resolved with no loss of life.

Roll up to a safe distance, use loud speaker or shout for kid to drop the weapon. I can think of several better ways to handle that, and I'm not a cop.

Its easy arm chairing after the fact when everything is known.

For all we know it might be a "Suicide by Cops"

Confronting a possibly armed individual should be the police equivalent of a battle drill, and we will never know what would have happened because these guys apparently watched Lethal Weapon too many times. They are at best, stunningly incompetent. These incidents keep piling up, and I'm not talking about race. I'm talking about incompetent and/or overly aggressive police behavior leading to civilian loss of life. What is going on? LA County officers trying to intimidate the FBI. The stunning number of officer involved shootings in New Mexico. As isolated incidents they are easy to shrug off, but all together they are indicative of a larger problem.

Also, as a side note. These actions are putting other LEO in danger. Based on that video, any armed person would think that a police car rolling up means death.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Do we really have all the facts in this case yet?

Case of beer says Loehmann justified in the shooting but the NCO is at fault for the aggressive approach

Suspended with pay?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Do we really have all the facts in this case yet?

I find it hard to imagine there being something that would negate my impression of that video.

 WellSpokenMan wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 WellSpokenMan wrote:
They didn't need to bank on anything. If they had done their jobs properly instead of acting like it was some kind of bad buddy cop movie, the incident would have been resolved with no loss of life.

Roll up to a safe distance, use loud speaker or shout for kid to drop the weapon. I can think of several better ways to handle that, and I'm not a cop.

Its easy arm chairing after the fact when everything is known.

For all we know it might be a "Suicide by Cops"

Confronting a possibly armed individual should be the police equivalent of a battle drill, and we will never know what would have happened because these guys apparently watched Lethal Weapon too many times. They are at best, stunningly incompetent. These incidents keep piling up, and I'm not talking about race. I'm talking about incompetent and/or overly aggressive police behavior leading to civilian loss of life. What is going on? LA County officers trying to intimidate the FBI. The stunning number of officer involved shootings in New Mexico. As isolated incidents they are easy to shrug off, but all together they are indicative of a larger problem.

Also, as a side note. These actions are putting other LEO in danger. Based on that video, any armed person would think that a police car rolling up means death.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Do we really have all the facts in this case yet?

Case of beer says Loehmann justified in the shooting but the NCO is at fault for the aggressive approach

Suspended with pay?

You don't pay the Reaper but you do need to pay the guy below....

I don't care for myself, but if someone kills my kid, mistake or not, cop or not. I swear to every god ever worshiped that they will wish they had never been born. That's probably the PTSD talking, but still...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eilif wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Do we really have all the facts in this case yet?

Nope we've just got an OP who can write an inflammatory title but doesn't understand the forensic definition of "Homicide".

I understand well enough the intent of a news article that leads off with "homicide" in big letters.

I'm on my phone and can't figure out how to delete.

 WellSpokenMan wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 WellSpokenMan wrote:
They didn't need to bank on anything. If they had done their jobs properly instead of acting like it was some kind of bad buddy cop movie, the incident would have been resolved with no loss of life.

Roll up to a safe distance, use loud speaker or shout for kid to drop the weapon. I can think of several better ways to handle that, and I'm not a cop.

Can't argue with an expert opinion like yours.

Since you nothing about me, I suppose not.. You don't have to be an expert to know that was done poorly.

That's why I deleted. Felt rude to say it.

 WellSpokenMan wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 WellSpokenMan wrote:
They didn't need to bank on anything. If they had done their jobs properly instead of acting like it was some kind of bad buddy cop movie, the incident would have been resolved with no loss of life.

Roll up to a safe distance, use loud speaker or shout for kid to drop the weapon. I can think of several better ways to handle that, and I'm not a cop.

Deleted .

Since you nothing about me, I suppose not.. You don't have to be an expert to know that was done poorly.

Experts are predictable. Its the damn amateurs that will kill or wound you
Being complacent though will also get you killed or wounded

I seem to remember people telling me that the range of a handgun being even halfway close to hitting the broadside of a barn (possibly slight exaggeration there) was around 15 feet, if fired by someone trained in firing handguns.

 WellSpokenMan wrote:
I don't care for myself, but if someone kills my kid, mistake or not, cop or not. I swear to every god ever worshiped that they will wish they had never been born. That's probably the PTSD talking, but still...

But are you a responsible enough parent to not let your kid play with a realistic looking toy gun in the street?

This is a tragedy but when it comes down to it, it was not a smart thing to do, even for a 12 year old.
The cops who show up after a call is made don't know if hey will survive the encounter, but have to turn up anyway to protect that street.
I have no ethical problems with the cops trying to minimise personal risk when being forced to engage with a erratically behaving member of the public who is reportedly armed. It is not for me to say how this is best done tactically.