A different form of Police Shooting Outrage

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.

**OrlandotheTechnicoloured**

From the Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2016/09/12/west-virginia-cop-fired-for-not-killing-a-man-with-an-unloaded-gun/?utm_term=.3d945fc2a192

West Virginia cop fired for not killing a man with an unloaded gun

By Radley Balko

September 12 at 5:23 PM 

We’ve tracked countless cases here where cops were able to keep their jobs after killing unarmed people, killing people after responding to the wrong house, killing people and then lying about it . . . the list goes on.

Give the Weirton, W.Va., police chief some credit. He’s come up with a new spin on the the same problem. He just fired a cop for not killing someone.

After responding to a report of a domestic incident on May 6 in Weirton, W.Va., then-Weirton police officer Stephen Mader found himself confronting an armed man.

Immediately, the training he had undergone as a Marine to look at “the whole person” in deciding if someone was a terrorist, as well as his situational police academy training, kicked in and he did not shoot.

“I saw then he had a gun, but it was not pointed at me,” Mr. Mader recalled, noting the silver handgun was in the man’s right hand, hanging at his side and pointed at the ground.

Mr. Mader, who was standing behind Mr. Williams’ car parked on the street, said he then “began to use my calm voice.”

“I told him, ‘Put down the gun,’ and he’s like, ‘Just shoot me.’ And I told him, ‘I’m not going to shoot you brother.’ Then he starts flicking his wrist to get me to react to it.

“I thought I was going to be able to talk to him and deescalate it. I knew it was a suicide-by-cop” situation.

Mader was responding to a 911 call from Williams’s girlfriend. In that call, she told police that Williams was threatening to kill himself, not anyone else.

What Mader did upon arriving at the scene is a hell of a lot braver course of action than simply opening fire when the suspect doesn’t immediately disarm. What Mader did is in fact exactly what we want cops to do when someone is in crisis. It’s also precisely what law enforcement officers say they do on a daily basis — put themselves at risk in order to save lives. Mader should have been given a medal. Unfortunately, two more cops then showed up, and quickly shot Williams dead.

As it turns out, Williams’s gun wasn’t loaded. There’s no way any of the police officers could have known that. But it does show that Mader had read Williams correctly — he wasn’t actually a threat to anyone but himself. His life could have been saved.

The Weirton police department then refused to name Williams for three days and assigned an investigator to look into the shooting . . . who then promptly left for a weeklong vacation. Then came the punchline.

Mr. Mader — speaking publicly about this case for the first time — said that when he tried to return to work on May 17, following normal protocol for taking time off after an officer-involved shooting, he was told to go see Weirton Police Chief Rob Alexander.

In a meeting with the chief and City Manager Travis Blosser, Mr. Mader said Chief Alexander told him: “We’re putting you on administrative leave and we’re going to do an investigation to see if you are going to be an officer here. You put two other officers in danger.”

Mr. Mader said that “right then I said to him: ‘Look, I didn’t shoot him because he said, ‘Just shoot me.’ ”

On June 7, a Weirton officer delivered him a notice of termination letter dated June 6, which said by not shooting Mr. Williams he “failed to eliminate a threat.”

The city mentioned two other incidents in firing Mader, but it seems clear that his failure to kill Williams was the motivation for his termination. Even the rare cop who gets fired often gets to keep his pension. Mader won’t be getting one.

After he received his termination notice, Mr. Mader sought attorneys to help him fight the city. He was told because he was still a probationary employee in an “at-will” state, he could be fired for any reason and there was no point in fighting the city.

One attorney told him the best he could hope for was to ask to resign instead of being terminated.

“But I told [the attorney] ‘Look, I don’t want to admit guilt. I’ll take the termination instead of the resignation because I didn’t do anything wrong,’ ” Mr. Mader said. “To resign and admit I did something wrong here would have ate at me. I think I’m right in what I did. I’ll take it to the grave.”

Over the weekend, the New York Times ran an article about the longstanding problem in which even the rare bad cops who do get fired are often able to quickly find work at another policy agency. Mader, who served a tour in Afghanistan and has two sons under five-years-old, told the Post-Gazette that he’s now studying for a commercial truck driving license, but he’d consider another job in law enforcement if he were offered one. I hope that happens. I hope he’s given the same second chance that corrupt, trigger-happy cops are given. My hunch is that he’ll be driving trucks.

Officer Mader seemed to be behaving how a police officer would (be expected) to behave in most of Europe, using his skills and training to determine whether the offender was presenting a clear and present danger,

or whether negotiation could be used to achive a non lethal result

now taking the story at face value (dangerous I know as there is mention of 2 other unspecified incidents which could also be significant) that's cost him his job

**djones520**

He should have zero problem getting hired in another police organization.

Kudo's to him for keeping a cool head in that situation.

**LordofHats**

Ain't no reward for doing the right thing as they say.

Any news on whether or not there will be an investigation into why two cops shot a man with an unloaded gun when an officer already on the scene had determined the man wasn't a threat? This seems like such an obvious suicide by cop scenario that I think Office Mader would have needed to be a blatant idiot not to see it. Why didn't the other two?

**MrDwhitey**

Fortunately the real policemen turned up and did their duty.

**LethalShade**

MrDwhitey wrote:
Fortunately the real policemen turned up and did their duty.

I can't tell if you're being serious or sarcastic.

**LordofHats**

I had that same problem earlier today lol

**Frazzled**

Thats pretty damning.

**purplefood**

LethalShade wrote:
MrDwhitey wrote:
Fortunately the real policemen turned up and did their duty.

I can't tell if you're being serious or sarcastic.

It's Whitey, of course he's serious.

**Future War Cultist**

I'm absolutely gobsmacked at this. I think this proves without a shadow of a doubt that in America the police really are trained to shot first and ask questions later. It's a disgrace.

**Iron_Captain**

Wow. Russia doesn't even need to make up anti-US propaganda anymore.

On a serious note. This is bad. Really bad. Please tell me that Americans are just as outraged at this as Europeans would be...

**Frazzled**

Iron_Captain wrote:
Wow. Russia doesn't even need to make up anti-US propaganda anymore.

On a serious note. This is bad. Really bad. Please tell me that Americans are just as outraged at this as Europeans would be...

The difference of course, if our police don't do it with a T-80 tank (which admittedly Americans have to respect that level of overkill), or stab them with a radioactive pellet from an umbrella...

**Dreadwinter**

Are you fething kidding me? Is there an investigation in to this shooting at all? If he said "Just shoot me" it is pretty clear what he was intending. I just.... I cant come up with a reason for..... wait no, guys I got it. I FIGURED IT OUT! This is an M. Night Shyamalan plot twist! HIS IQ WAS TOO HIGH THE WHOLE TIME! That is why he got fired!

But no seriously, our justice system is a clown fiesta.

**feeder**

Well, it's good to know a toy gun and a one-way ticket to West Virginia is a good way out if you can't afford the fees at Dignitas.

**Vaktathi**

Iron_Captain wrote:
Wow. Russia doesn't even need to make up anti-US propaganda anymore.

On a serious note. This is bad. Really bad. Please tell me that Americans are just as outraged at this as Europeans would be...

many of us are, and that's why partially why police actions face far more scrutiny now than they did 5/10/25 years ago (also the spread of cameras and social media means everything is recorded and shared so they cant hide things the way they used to).

That said, police like this are generally employees of local governments as opposed to state or federal level agencies the way most European police agencies are, and tend to have the most variability in quality as standards and pay vary wildly.

**Mario**

Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
Wow. Russia doesn't even need to make up anti-US propaganda anymore.

On a serious note. This is bad. Really bad. Please tell me that Americans are just as outraged at this as Europeans would be...

The difference of course, if our police don't do it with a T-80 tank (which admittedly Americans have to respect that level of overkill), or stab them with a radioactive pellet from an umbrella...

Is a "who has it worse" competition the right approach to this type of problem? Is everything okay as long as one can point at some other country that has it worse in some way? It's not like people are praising Putin for how he's handling Russia… well, Trump does occasionally think highly of him but on average nobody's really saying that Russia is the epitome of democracy or civil liberties (at least from western social democratic/capitalistic countries). Besides, US police forces got quite militarized beyond anything they should need to do their job.

I know everything is relative but that just doesn't sound like an attitude that should lead to improvements. They have, to some degree, the power to self-select the people who work with them and if they just get to push out nonconformists time and time again then things will never get better.

**Future War Cultist**

Which is why I think eventually the time will have to come to scrap county and city level police and bump it all up to state level.

**Frazzled**

Future War Cultist wrote:
Which is why I think eventually the time will have to come to scrap county and city level police and bump it all up to state level.

Why would that be better? Our federal police (DEA) helped popularize the use of SWAT to make simple arrests, and seizing assets for forfeiture and resale.

**Vaktathi**

Yeah those are the downsides of federal LE, there's definitely issues both ways.

**Future War Cultist**

@ Frazzled

I would assume that state level police are going to better trained and organised than the county bumpkins.

As for the DEA, things like that are probably why those sorts of agencies should probably leave the actual arrests to the ordinary police. It's why here in the U.K. for example MI5 stick to counter intelligence only and leave the actual investigations and arrests to the special branch of the police.

**Frazzled**

Future War Cultist wrote:
@ Frazzled

I would assume that state level police are going to better trained and organised than the county bumpkins.

Why? They have no proven themselves better.

As for the DEA, things like that are probably why those sorts of agencies should probably leave the actual arrests to the ordinary police. It's why here in the U.K. for example MI5 stick to counter intelligence only and leave the actual investigations and arrests to the special branch of the police.

But then the DEA wouldn't GET THE MONEY. [i][u]

**Future War Cultist**

Well one other thing you need to do is to give the job of policing the police to another organisation. Because asking a police department to investigate itself is ridiculous. Here we have separate organisations who deal with matters of police misconduct and it works out pretty well.

**LordofHats**

Future War Cultist wrote:
Well one other thing you need to do is to give the job of policing the police to another organisation. Because asking a police department to investigate itself is ridiculous. Here we have separate organisations who deal with matters of police misconduct and it works out pretty well.

I think one of the problems with police forces in the US is that the Blue Wall has gone from being an informal arrangement between officers to standard operating procedure. Many police organizations, as bodies, seem to protect and serve themselves more than the public to me.

**Vaktathi**

More to the point, they are obligated neither to protect nor serve anyone legally speaking, but rather to dispense fines or arrest for trial those who have potentially broken the law, which is not necessarily the same thing as serving and protecting the public.

**Prestor Jon**

Future War Cultist wrote:
@ Frazzled

I would assume that state level police are going to better trained and organised than the county bumpkins.

As for the DEA, things like that are probably why those sorts of agencies should probably leave the actual arrests to the ordinary police. It's why here in the U.K. for example MI5 stick to counter intelligence only and leave the actual investigations and arrests to the special branch of the police.

Local and municipal police departments are more responsive to the will of the people just like state police departments are more responsive to the will of the people than the federal govt agencies. Disbanding local police departments would make the police less accountable and make it harder for people and politicians to change police policies and procedures.

Here in NC in addition to police departments having their own internal affairs officers we also have the State Bureau of Investigation which is like a state level version of the FBI so it's an investigative agency independent from state and local police departments.

**SomeRandomEvilGuy**

People trying to commit "suicide by cop" can still shoot at and kill cops in the process.

**Relapse**

To play devil's advocate, I see the other side of this in that if he was wrong, it could have gotten him and the other two officers injured or killed.

**Prestor Jon**

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:
People trying to commit "suicide by cop" can still shoot at and kill cops in the process.

Except this guy had an unloaded gun and wasn't pointing it at anyone or overtly threatening anyone.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Relapse wrote:
To play devil's advocate, I see the other side of this in that if he was wrong, it could have gotten him and the other two officers injured or killed.

But he wasn't wrong and the two other officers weren't in any danger. Even if the gun was loaded the man was pointing it in a safe direction and was engaged in a conversation with the fired cop in a manner that was deescalating the situation. Unles the man pointed the unloaded gun at the other cops there wasn't an immediate threat to them even if the gun was loaded.

**Henry**

So, an ex-marine tried to de-escelate the situation using military and police training and it was two other idiots who slaughtered the person who needed help. I thought part of the problem was the police hiring all these psycho killer butcher-snipers from the army.

**Relapse**

Prestor Jon wrote:
SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:
People trying to commit "suicide by cop" can still shoot at and kill cops in the process.

Except this guy had an unloaded gun and wasn't pointing it at anyone or overtly threatening anyone.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Relapse wrote:
To play devil's advocate, I see the other side of this in that if he was wrong, it could have gotten him and the other two officers injured or killed.

But he wasn't wrong and the two other officers weren't in any danger. Even if the gun was loaded the man was pointing it in a safe direction and was engaged in a conversation with the fired cop in a manner that was deescalating the situation. Unles the man pointed the unloaded gun at the other cops there wasn't an immediate threat to them even if the gun was loaded.

Someone who is potentially hostile with a gun pointed in a "safe" direction can very quickly put a bullet through a person. There is a huge spike in police being murdered this year. This memorial page gives a rundown of officer deaths in 2016 and how they died. A large portion was from being shot: https://www.odmp.org/search/year

A story from the link of an officer who opted to taser a suspect and ended up getting shot and killed: https://www.odmp.org/officer/22739-sergeant-jason-goodding

**d-usa**

Relapse wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:
People trying to commit "suicide by cop" can still shoot at and kill cops in the process.

Except this guy had an unloaded gun and wasn't pointing it at anyone or overtly threatening anyone.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Relapse wrote:
To play devil's advocate, I see the other side of this in that if he was wrong, it could have gotten him and the other two officers injured or killed.

But he wasn't wrong and the two other officers weren't in any danger. Even if the gun was loaded the man was pointing it in a safe direction and was engaged in a conversation with the fired cop in a manner that was deescalating the situation. Unles the man pointed the unloaded gun at the other cops there wasn't an immediate threat to them even if the gun was loaded.

Someone who is potentially hostile with a gun pointed in a "safe" direction can very quickly put a bullet through a person. There is a huge spike in police being murdered this year. This memorial page gives a rundown of officer deaths in 2016 and how they died. A large portion was from being shot: https://www.odmp.org/search/year

If three officers are on scene, one of them is talking to the guy and two of them being afraid of the guy, then it may just be possible that two of the officers could have their weapon drawn and aim at the suspect ready to fire if he made an actual aggressive movement such as raising the weapon to point it at them. This would let the officer that made the initial contact and who has already established a relationship with the guy continue with his current approach while the other officers provide backup and the ability to quickly neutralize any thread as it develops.

But if we pretend that the only two solutions are "kill the guy that is holding a gun and who is not pointing it at anybody" and "keep your weapon in your holster while talking to the armed guy so that if he decided to raise his weapon you cannot respond and have to let yourself get killed", then there really is no point to keep the discussion going.