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.
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — A jury at a coroner's inquest determined Wednesday that a Montana police officer was justified in shooting and killing an unarmed man high on methamphetamine during a traffic stop.
The ruling came after Billings Police Officer Grant Morrison testified he feared for his life when he fired the three shots that killed 38-year-old Richard Ramirez.
The five-year police veteran said he became convinced that Ramirez had a gun after the man reached for his waistband during their 30-second encounter last April in a high-crime area of Montana's most populous city.
"I knew in that moment, which later was determined to be untrue, but I knew in that moment that he was reaching for a gun," Morrison said. "I couldn't take that risk. ... I wanted to see my son grow up."
The seven-person jury deliberated about an hour before delivering its decision.
Yellowstone County Attorney Scott Twito said he does not expect to file any charges given the jury's decision.
Coroner's inquests are mandatory under Montana law whenever someone is killed by law enforcement or dies in custody.
The inquest was held as police killings of unarmed suspects in Ferguson, Missouri and New York City have heightened scrutiny of law enforcement nationwide.
Ramirez family members said they were disappointed by the ruling and intend to file a lawsuit against Morrison and the Billings Police Department alleging excessive use of force, said Julie Ramirez, a sister of Richard Ramirez.
Billings Police Chief Rich St. John said it was the fifth officer-involved shooting in his eight years as head of the department. Each shooting was ruled to be justified, he said.
"That tells us we're doing the right thing in the right way," St. John said.
Police video showed Morrison repeatedly ordered Ramirez and other occupants of the vehicle to raise their hands. Ramirez's actions were largely obscured in the video. But Morrison said Ramirez dropped his left hand to his side — out of the officer's view — and "started to jiggle it up and down" just before he was shot.
Morrison shot and killed another man in 2013. He was cleared of any wrongdoing in that case.
Ramirez's family wanted criminal charges against the officer and said Ramirez was a victim of racial profiling.
Another sister, Renee Ramirez, criticized the inquest as one-sided. She said testimony that her brother was a drug user was irrelevant.
All but three of the 15 people called to testify during the two-day inquest were from law enforcement. Several police officers spoke at length about their prior dealings with Ramirez and others in his family.
"I don't care what things my brother did in the past," Renee Ramirez said. "What does that have to do with shooting my brother?"
Billings Police Detective Brad Tucker, who investigated the case, testified Tuesday that Ramirez might have been trying to stash something when he was shot. A small amount of methamphetamine and a syringe were later found near Ramirez's seat.
An autopsy determined Ramirez had enough methamphetamine in his bloodstream at the time of the shooting to kill a person not accustomed to the drug, forensic pathologist Tom Bennett testified.
Twito defended the proceedings as a fair presentation of the facts.
"The videos speak for themselves," he said.
Morrison was placed on paid administrative leave immediately after the shooting and has since been assigned to a task force investigating prescription drug crimes, St. John said.
A bit creepy that the victim has the same name as the LA Nightstalker.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Meth screws you up man. Nothing of note here.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
" Morrison said. "I couldn't take that risk. ... I wanted to see my son grow up."
Ergh! If that's the way he feels then perhaps he should consider a different occupation, before he kills more people. I personally don't think the whole "He 'might' have had a weapon" is good enough. There are far too many stories of police "jumping the gun" as it were. I think police who shoot unarmed people should go to jail. Saying "I thought he had a weapon" is about as compelling as "Oh, I thought weed was legal?" -- You thought wrong.
Yes it's dangerous and scary to show restraint, but if someone isn't able to to do that, and prefers to err on the side of 'shooting unarmed civilians', then perhaps that person shouldn't be a police officer.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/01/08 23:14:00
Ramirez's family wanted criminal charges against the officer and said Ramirez was a victim of racial profiling.
Black people feel entitled to riot when a scumbag is shot by a white cop. White cop shoots a non-black hispanic/mexican and where are the riots?
I thought it was clearly established in the zimmerman case that hispanic people were white?
White Hispanic
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
" Morrison said. "I couldn't take that risk. ... I wanted to see my son grow up."
Ergh! If that's the way he feels then perhaps he should consider a different occupation, before he kills more people. I personally don't think the whole "He 'might' have had a weapon" is good enough. There are far too many stories of police "jumping the gun" as it were. I think police who shoot unarmed people should go to jail. Saying "I thought he had a weapon" is about as compelling as "Oh, I thought weed was legal?" -- You thought wrong.
Yes it's dangerous and scary to show restraint, but if someone isn't able to to do that, and prefers to err on the side of 'shooting unarmed civilians', then perhaps that person shouldn't be a police officer.
" Morrison said. "I couldn't take that risk. ... I wanted to see my son grow up."
Ergh! If that's the way he feels then perhaps he should consider a different occupation, before he kills more people. I personally don't think the whole "He 'might' have had a weapon" is good enough. There are far too many stories of police "jumping the gun" as it were. I think police who shoot unarmed people should go to jail. Saying "I thought he had a weapon" is about as compelling as "Oh, I thought weed was legal?" -- You thought wrong.
Yes it's dangerous and scary to show restraint, but if someone isn't able to to do that, and prefers to err on the side of 'shooting unarmed civilians', then perhaps that person shouldn't be a police officer.
I suggest you watch this:
I really applaud his willingness to undergo that experience. I mean seriously, that was huge of him to do that.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Don't use Meth because that crazed look is a huge indicator that your getting ready to do something stupid or you did something stupid.
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
djones520 wrote: I really applaud his willingness to undergo that experience. I mean seriously, that was huge of him to do that.
I guess it was, but there's stuff about even his behavior that bothered me. Maybe it's a cultural thing. But there seemed to be too much gun involved in all three scenarios.I would have thought someone who was against the use of unnecessary force would have tried a bit harder.
The first scenario seemed to be pretty much unwinnable. The last two scenarios are encountered by British police all the time, and they manage fine without guns.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/08 23:45:31
djones520 wrote: I really applaud his willingness to undergo that experience. I mean seriously, that was huge of him to do that.
I guess it was, but there's stuff about even his behavior that bothered me. Maybe it's a cultural thing. But there seemed to be too much gun involved in all three scenarios.I would have thought someone who was against the use of unnecessary force would have tried a bit harder.
The first scenario seemed to be pretty much unwinnable. The last two scenarios are encountered by British police all the time, and they manage fine without guns.
Or maybe you should take from it that until you are in that position, you don't really know how you will react.
Maybe some take a Caucasian getting killed granted? Don't do Meth? Legalize Meth?
Train LEO to adhere to a ROE
Skirt the issue its a militarization training?
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
djones520 wrote: Or maybe you should take from it that until you are in that position, you don't really know how you will react.
I know that if I didn't have a gun then I certainly couldn't react by shooting. Which means I would have done just as well as the two guys in the video, if not better, since I wouldn't have been able to shoot the unarmed man in scenario two.
djones520 wrote: Or maybe you should take from it that until you are in that position, you don't really know how you will react.
I know that if I didn't have a gun then I certainly couldn't react by shooting. Which means I would have done just as well as the two guys in the video, if not better, since I wouldn't have been able to shoot the unarmed man in scenario two.
I'll point out that you are looking at scenario two with that famous 20/20 hindsight to know the guy is unarmed. I'll also point out unarmed folks can do a lot of damage and (surprise) have even been known to kill folks.
djones520 wrote: Or maybe you should take from it that until you are in that position, you don't really know how you will react.
I know that if I didn't have a gun then I certainly couldn't react by shooting. Which means I would have done just as well as the two guys in the video, if not better, since I wouldn't have been able to shoot the unarmed man in scenario two.
I'll point out that you are looking at scenario two with that famous 20/20 hindsight to know the guy is unarmed. I'll also point out unarmed folks can do a lot of damage and (surprise) have even been known to kill folks.
Dronze wrote: Unless that officer can verify, or at least have reasonable grounds to assume, that this individual was armed, why is he breaking leather?
Maybe he heard of stuff like this happening?
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
Dronze wrote: Unless that officer can verify, or at least have reasonable grounds to assume, that this individual was armed, why is he breaking leather?
Because your line of thinking would just result in more dead police officers.
That was staged to end that way.
Scenario setup to give no options.
Why no stab vest, wheres his night stick/truncheon, pepper spray. wheres his partner.
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
djones520 wrote: Or maybe you should take from it that until you are in that position, you don't really know how you will react.
I know that if I didn't have a gun then I certainly couldn't react by shooting. Which means I would have done just as well as the two guys in the video, if not better, since I wouldn't have been able to shoot the unarmed man in scenario two.
I'll point out that you are looking at scenario two with that famous 20/20 hindsight to know the guy is unarmed. I'll also point out unarmed folks can do a lot of damage and (surprise) have even been known to kill folks.
Don't bother. He'll continue to find excuses.
If by 'excuses' you mean holes in your argument then, yes, I will. As I have already pointed out UK police don't carry guns, and they probably encounter aggressive people all the time. The gun did nothing in scenario 2 except make the situation more dangerous for everyone involved. Police should really be in pairs, and deploying pepper spray or a batton would have been an appropriate amount of force in that scenario. The gun being drawn actually became a liability. Neither guy appeared to want to use it, but the situation was rapidly escalating into "use it or lose it".
Here we go again. UK LEO vs US LEO
At stake the 2nd Amendment
Does a LEO who feels imminent danger is justified in shooting the individual who, to the LEO, made a move as if reaching for a weapon.
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
loki old fart wrote: That was staged to end that way.
Scenario setup to give no options.
Why no stab vest, wheres his night stick/truncheon, pepper spray. wheres his partner.
Where was the partner of the cop in the second video I posted?
(not all cops have a partner....)
Automatically Appended Next Post: A very good and relevant book:
It covers why truncheons/night stick use is frowned upon by many US LE agencies.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/09 00:46:36
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
Dronze wrote: Unless that officer can verify, or at least have reasonable grounds to assume, that this individual was armed, why is he breaking leather?
Because your line of thinking would just result in more dead police officers.
and notably fewer civilian deaths. Let's face it, cops aren't long on being granted trust, and rightly so, given the long list of abuses of power that seem to be racking up.
Things I've gotten other players to admit...
Foldalot: Pariahs can sometimes be useful
