Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > SPECIALTY FORUMS > Calguns LEOs
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Calguns LEOs LEOs; chat, kibitz and relax. Non-LEOs; have a questions for a cop? Ask it here, in a CIVIL manner.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-07-2013, 8:00 AM
stilly stilly is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Currently in a shanty I made in the river bottom by Eastvale.
Posts: 9,004
iTrader: 44 / 100%
Default Scenario question- How would you handle this story?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...-way-possible/

A father and son got into a dispute over the son wanting cigarettes and the father refusing to buy them, so the son stole the truck and the father thought he would be slick and call the police and report the truck stolen to teach him a lesson.

The son rammed police apparently more than once and they ended up shooting him in the end.

I know, play stupid games...

Now the family is all upset because the police did not need to shoot him.

Things like this, in my opinion only serve to further push police away from warm and friendly people that they can be and many times are. The story seems to be biased in that the police were told to back off and the story of who the perp was and why was put out over the air so why didn't they?

Then my training and past experience tells me that the police, despite looking like bad guys, probably did the correct thing. I was taught that my vehicle was my most deadliest weapon and if I had to use it to take someone out then so be it, from the officer's pov, here is a guy driving crazy, ramming them (I think this might classify as assault with a deadly weapon) and then STILL taking off and I think, ramming them again. If they let him go and he went on to kill people in his crazy driving then the police would have been held at fault for not doing enough. Instead, they were assaulted by the guy and I am sure that in their training they responded appropriately and neutralized the kid. Kid or not, he was behind the wheel of a 2500+lb weapon and was attempting to use it to against the police.

Sadly, one thing I have observed is that the public is NOT privy to LEO training or knowing much about what is taught in those POST classes, so they think that cops can shoot people in the legs or shoot guns out of their hands instead of dealing lethal force. I know that has happened in the past, but it is crazy to expect that, when your life is on the line and you only know to stop someone.

But I am not a LEO, so should this have been handled differently?

BTW, I would say that this kid is no angel by his past, but that might not have been known at the time- not that it matters.

Last edited by stilly; 11-07-2013 at 8:17 AM..
  #2  
Old 11-07-2013, 11:04 AM
9mmepiphany's Avatar
9mmepiphany 9mmepiphany is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: River City
Posts: 7,410
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
BTW, I would say that this kid is no angel by his past, but that might not have been known at the time- not that it matters.
Your right, it doesn't matter. When someone starts using a deadly weapon (truck) and starts using it against other people, it is more than poor judgement, it is malicious intent. When you've crashes and refuse to turn off the engine when ordered, but start revving the engine, any common person can only reasonably believe that the driver intended to continue his deadly attacks

Quote:
But I am not a LEO, so should this have been handled differently?
The father could have not made the false report of a stolen vehicle and he could have taught his son to pull over when LE tries to stop him.
__________________
...because the journey is the worthier part...The Shepherd's Tale

Last edited by 9mmepiphany; 11-07-2013 at 11:09 AM..
  #3  
Old 11-07-2013, 4:11 PM
9mmepiphany's Avatar
9mmepiphany 9mmepiphany is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: River City
Posts: 7,410
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Here is a video of the chase and shooting...the written description didn't do it justice

http://whotv.com/2013/11/07/dash-cam...lved-shooting/
__________________
...because the journey is the worthier part...The Shepherd's Tale
  #4  
Old 11-07-2013, 4:15 PM
riddler408's Avatar
riddler408 riddler408 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Fremont
Posts: 1,756
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 9mmepiphany View Post
Here is a video of the chase and shooting...the written description didn't do it justice

http://whotv.com/2013/11/07/dash-cam...lved-shooting/
Watch the dash cam for sure!
__________________
  #5  
Old 11-07-2013, 5:12 PM
Gnome's Avatar
Gnome Gnome is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,693
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

"Scenario question- How would you handle this story?"

I don't know. I wasn't there. Not a fan of video (including dash cams). They never show the whole story.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by E Pluribus Unum View Post
During Y2K my neighbor and I were talking and he said he had a basement full of water and canned food. He asked if I had stocked up and I said that I had. I told him I bought a 12 guage shotgun, a .308 rifle and several bricks of .22 ammo.

He is an anti-gun guy and he said. "Well, you can't eat ammunition". I replied with "When I'm starving to death with a case of ammunition, who's door do you think I am going to knock on?"
  #6  
Old 11-07-2013, 9:42 PM
WyattandDoc WyattandDoc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Below is quote from a guy who was bashing the involved cops. Then apparently he watched the tapes.

"Upon seeing the release of this video I change my stance. Nice work officer Mcpherson. My mistake. I shouldn’t have jumped to conclusions before reviewing all the facts".

Gnomes correct. The whole story is never told. The only ones that know are the ones involved.

Something VERY important is to see is the guys TOTAL DISREGARD FOR HUMAN LIFE. He blew that intersection and somehow, miraculously didn't kill another motorist or ped. Also look at the people running for their lives in the park. The guy had to go. If not, somebody innocent dies that day.
__________________
Knives don't stab people, cars don't drive drunk, eating utensils don't make you fat and pencils don't mis-spell words.
  #7  
Old 11-07-2013, 10:03 PM
TRICKSTER's Avatar
TRICKSTER TRICKSTER is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 10,759
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnome View Post
"Scenario question- How would you handle this story?"

I don't know. I wasn't there. Not a fan of video (including dash cams). They never show the whole story.
Many times they don't, but they can be used to substantiate statements of the involved parties, and in this case, they disproved a bunch of the irresponsible comments that some people were making and backed up the law enforcement side of the story.

The truth of the matter is in this case, like many others, the person who was shot by the police is the one responsible for the event and the outcome. He could have just pulled over and stopped but he chose not to. It amazes me that on this forum, where most members preach personal responsibility and holding individuals responsible for their decisions and actions, that they throw that belief out the window the second that law enforcement is involved.
__________________


Ignorance can be educated.
Crazy can be medicated.
But there is no cure for stupid.


Police Brutality? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRd5oucG114

NRA Benefactor Member
  #8  
Old 11-07-2013, 11:05 PM
stilly stilly is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Currently in a shanty I made in the river bottom by Eastvale.
Posts: 9,004
iTrader: 44 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 9mmepiphany View Post
Here is a video of the chase and shooting...the written description didn't do it justice

http://whotv.com/2013/11/07/dash-cam...lved-shooting/
Good find on that video.

Wow. I am filled with a lot of anger after seeing that. I know it is not the whole video but I sure hope they cited the father for not using a condom that night.

When I saw them go through the intersection I was thinking, I bet those guys wish that those sirens were louder and their lights were brighter. I was surprised to see that a lot of folks pulled over or out of the way.

All that I had heard was the audio at first so I thought, oh he was shot 6 times? Back East? Was the guy only shot 6 times because the officer only had a revolver? I was shocked to see the semi auto, Glock perhaps? I did not stop the video to look at all angles of the gun.

Well, I was wrong about a few things too but after watching the video, man, I wanna slap the crap out of that father. AND inline with the other comments, yes, the complete disregard for all others on the road and for life and property was a dealbreaker for being anyone's kid. I prolly would have shot him after he rammed me the first time. Then again, I am not as trained as the officers that were involved.

Crazy...
  #9  
Old 11-08-2013, 12:33 AM
9mmepiphany's Avatar
9mmepiphany 9mmepiphany is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: River City
Posts: 7,410
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Now you know why this thread is still on the 1st page and the one in OT is on page 5
__________________
...because the journey is the worthier part...The Shepherd's Tale
  #10  
Old 11-08-2013, 12:36 AM
Off the Roster's Avatar
Off the Roster Off the Roster is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,363
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

cop was in the right, turd kid is dead. hope the officer is sleeping soundly.
  #11  
Old 11-08-2013, 1:11 AM
SonofWWIIDI's Avatar
SonofWWIIDI SonofWWIIDI is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Santa Clara county
Posts: 18,422
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Okay,

1st, did anyone else see the 5-6 second green light at the first intersection. WTH, how many cars are really gonna make it through that light without running it?

Seriously, that little douche ran, used his vehicle as a battering ram more than once, blew through that intersection at high speed, without regard to the lives of motorists/pedestrians, generally causing havoc on the streets.

Not a tear shed here for him.

I think the LEO's did exactly what they should have done. He was a danger, used his vehicle as a weapon, and they responded in kind.

If his family tries to sue, it should be laughed out of court.
__________________
=iii=<(
🎺

Dear autocorrect, I'm really getting tired of your shirt!
Quote:
Originally Posted by LugerDevil666 View Post
No more stupid threads. you have my word
Quote:
Originally Posted by LugerDevil666 View Post
Rule 1 I'll admit I'm a jerk when I post stupid thread.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmut Shmacher View Post
I'll do the picking.. Name wise .. if you don't mind...
Formerly lugerdevil666
  #12  
Old 11-08-2013, 9:37 AM
P5Ret P5Ret is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SF Ebay
Posts: 2,722
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Surprise the first article doesn't match the video.
  #13  
Old 11-08-2013, 11:23 AM
HoMa506's Avatar
HoMa506 HoMa506 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 156
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Why does the blame from the public always fall on the officers? Be it failing to yield to the red light and siren or verbal commands about dropping a weapon and the aftermath for failing to follow either.
  #14  
Old 11-08-2013, 12:19 PM
1CavScout's Avatar
1CavScout 1CavScout is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: SoCal / AZ
Posts: 3,263
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The driver decided to use his vehicle as a weapon. The dash game on the #2 car in the pursuit shows the officer retreating away from the vehicle as it is being driven towards him. Good shoot...
__________________
  #15  
Old 11-08-2013, 1:04 PM
stilly stilly is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Currently in a shanty I made in the river bottom by Eastvale.
Posts: 9,004
iTrader: 44 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonofWWIIDI View Post
Okay,

1st, did anyone else see the 5-6 second green light at the first intersection. WTH, how many cars are really gonna make it through that light without running it?

Seriously, that little douche ran, used his vehicle as a battering ram more than once, blew through that intersection at high speed, without regard to the lives of motorists/pedestrians, generally causing havoc on the streets.

Not a tear shed here for him.

I think the LEO's did exactly what they should have done. He was a danger, used his vehicle as a weapon, and they responded in kind.

If his family tries to sue, it should be laughed out of court.
That is my point. Reading this story, then listening to the audio, I figured that SOMETHING was not matching up, The story did seem rather biased in how it reported the hmmm, "facts". I was under the impression from reading the story that maybe the officers took it all a little serious, but then when I read that he rammed them and I saw the photos I figured that there was a few things that we were not privy to. I am NOT saying that the police were wrong, I hope I NEVER came across like that because after reading the story all I thought about was how it seemed that once again the cops are being poked at for not being warm and fuzzy. I was kinda irritated that the story said that the cops were told to back it off a bit since "they knew who it was" or whatever it was that the dispatcher said. That seems like the only place where anyone could pick at, but then again, the person behind the mic at a desk in a basement is not privy to what the person behind the wheel with the gun is seeing and I think had they backed it off then it could have possibly gotten worse and possibly someone else hurt (besides the kid). I was curious, I did not watch the video more then once or twice but where did that guy come from that the truck seemed to almost chase in the grass towards the end after it tore down a sign or two? Some guy just out for a stroll almost gets ran over?

Anyways, I posted this because I had a problem with the story that I was picturing vs what was printed and the damage to the vehicles and the way in which it was presented. Glad my hunch was right.

Last edited by stilly; 11-08-2013 at 1:06 PM..
  #16  
Old 11-08-2013, 1:28 PM
yzernie's Avatar
yzernie yzernie is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Oak Hills/Hesperia, Ca.
Posts: 5,084
iTrader: 540 / 100%
Default

Whoever it was that said 'I know who it is, we should probably back off' over the radio is the only one I question in this entire scenario.
__________________
My Commercial Sales Ad >>> http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=257865

TinStarSupply@aol.com

The satisfaction of a job well done is to be the one who has done it
  #17  
Old 11-08-2013, 1:59 PM
SoldierLife7's Avatar
SoldierLife7 SoldierLife7 is offline
AD IUDICIUM
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,678
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

I bet he won't do that again....
__________________
-SL7


Quote:
Originally Posted by nad24LA View Post
"If you do somebody right they may tell 2 or 3 other people, but if you screw somebody they will tell everybody they can"
  #18  
Old 11-08-2013, 6:18 PM
9mmepiphany's Avatar
9mmepiphany 9mmepiphany is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: River City
Posts: 7,410
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
but where did that guy come from that the truck seemed to almost chase in the grass towards the end after it tore down a sign or two? Some guy just out for a stroll almost gets ran over?
It was a college campus, I'd think it was just a guy walking across the grass to get to a class
__________________
...because the journey is the worthier part...The Shepherd's Tale
  #19  
Old 11-08-2013, 9:26 PM
CaptMike CaptMike is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 1,034
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Clean shoot
  #20  
Old 11-08-2013, 10:07 PM
wattspd wattspd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 68
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

If the suspect was known and the only crime was vehicle theft not really sure why they pursued him.
  #21  
Old 11-08-2013, 11:35 PM
TRICKSTER's Avatar
TRICKSTER TRICKSTER is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 10,759
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wattspd View Post
If the suspect was known and the only crime was vehicle theft not really sure why they pursued him.
Not sure if serious.
__________________


Ignorance can be educated.
Crazy can be medicated.
But there is no cure for stupid.


Police Brutality? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRd5oucG114

NRA Benefactor Member
  #22  
Old 11-09-2013, 7:53 AM
wattspd wattspd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 68
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRICKSTER View Post
Not sure if serious.
If your not a LEO I could understand why you think I'm joking.

In my area at the moment that driver blew the red light the way he did the pursuit would have been over. A LEO's job is to arrest the bad guys but not at the expense of the public's safety. That driver showed no regard for his own safety or the safety of others.

Hypothetically if the driver were to crash into a car after he ran the red light the way he did, Who would be responsible? Officer/Deparment or the Criminal?

Not to mention that the only crime at this point was a stolen car / property crime. Is pursuing a criminal at high speeds on the public roads worth you getting your truck back that's more than likely going to be destroyed when the criminal crashes it?
  #23  
Old 11-09-2013, 8:24 AM
1CavScout's Avatar
1CavScout 1CavScout is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: SoCal / AZ
Posts: 3,263
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wattspd View Post
If your not a LEO I could understand why you think I'm joking.

In my area at the moment that driver blew the red light the way he did the pursuit would have been over. A LEO's job is to arrest the bad guys but not at the expense of the public's safety. That driver showed no regard for his own safety or the safety of others.

Hypothetically if the driver were to crash into a car after he ran the red light the way he did, Who would be responsible? Officer/Deparment or the Criminal?

Not to mention that the only crime at this point was a stolen car / property crime. Is pursuing a criminal at high speeds on the public roads worth you getting your truck back that's more than likely going to be destroyed when the criminal crashes it?
You definitely have to evaluate the situation and decide if terminating is the right call. I terminated a 10851 pursuit with an unknown suspect because the driver was headed towards a school zone at very high speed. It's the officer's / supervisors call. At my agency traffic conditions and pedestrian traffic was always requested by the Comm Center.
__________________
  #24  
Old 11-09-2013, 1:08 PM
caferacer's Avatar
caferacer caferacer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 154
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Seems like an open and shut case to me. LEOs did their job and that punk kid is no longer a threat to public safety.
  #25  
Old 11-09-2013, 3:34 PM
tyrist tyrist is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,551
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wattspd View Post
If your not a LEO I could understand why you think I'm joking.

In my area at the moment that driver blew the red light the way he did the pursuit would have been over. A LEO's job is to arrest the bad guys but not at the expense of the public's safety. That driver showed no regard for his own safety or the safety of others.

Hypothetically if the driver were to crash into a car after he ran the red light the way he did, Who would be responsible? Officer/Deparment or the Criminal?

Not to mention that the only crime at this point was a stolen car / property crime. Is pursuing a criminal at high speeds on the public roads worth you getting your truck back that's more than likely going to be destroyed when the criminal crashes it?
I don't know about the state law of the agency involved but in the state of California the criminal is 100% responsible. The Department and Officers have complete civil immunity for any traffic collision caused by the suspect.
  #26  
Old 11-09-2013, 3:52 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 7,222
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

After the suspect rammed the first unit with the trailer knocking him 90 degrees to the left, how could they terminate the pursuit...

The driver was a felony ADW suspect at that time, so do you just let him go?

To me there is just as much "liability" letting him go as there is chasing him... As it turned out the officers made the right decision. They were able to stop the suspect, with the only injuries / fatalities being the suspect...
That may sound harsh, however it was the suspects actions which caused the officers to react with deadly force... At any time he could have simply stopped the truck and surrendered...

His choices the officers reacting to those choices....

All choices have consequences. The consequences of this suspects choices were his own death.....
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.


  #27  
Old 11-09-2013, 4:35 PM
wattspd wattspd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 68
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tyrist View Post
I don't know about the state law of the agency involved but in the state of California the criminal is 100% responsible. The Department and Officers have complete civil immunity for any traffic collision caused by the suspect.


I think you should read the appropriate codes and educate yourself. After that go and talk to your city manager, Mayor, & Chief and ask what he thinks about your statement.

Many people have sued and have won or settled regarding pursuit traffic collisions where the suspect was party #1 and responsible for the primary collision factor.

If Leo's thought more like the lawyers that are going to cross examine them in court, situations like the above case study could be avoided and handled differently.

Last edited by wattspd; 11-09-2013 at 4:53 PM..
  #28  
Old 11-09-2013, 4:52 PM
wattspd wattspd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 68
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
After the suspect rammed the first unit with the trailer knocking him 90 degrees to the left, how could they terminate the pursuit...

The driver was a felony ADW suspect at that time, so do you just let him go?

To me there is just as much "liability" letting him go as there is chasing him... As it turned out the officers made the right decision. They were able to stop the suspect, with the only injuries / fatalities being the suspect...
That may sound harsh, however it was the suspects actions which caused the officers to react with deadly force... At any time he could have simply stopped the truck and surrendered...

His choices the officers reacting to those choices....

All choices have consequences. The consequences of this suspects choices were his own death.....
Ramming the patrol car in reverse from a short distance would not likely result in great bodily injury or death IF the officer is inside the vehicle with his seat belt on. IF the officer were standing outside of the vehicle and the suspect did that we would be talking ADW. Any lawyer worth his salt would argue this point easily.

The officer can terminate the pursuit at any time even if he were a victim of a crime.

I honestly believe that while this pursuit took place the officers were more concerned with catching the suspect than public safety or officer safety.

All I saw in the video at the time of the OIS was poor tactics. They are very lucky that the suspect didn't run them over when they both exited from their patrol cars while the truck was still moving.
  #29  
Old 11-09-2013, 5:11 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 7,222
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

The impact knocked the unit 90 degrees to the left... A very major impact....

The "If's" don't matter... The intent of the suspect is clear... Do anything to stop the officers including using his vehicle as a weapon....

Lawyers always argue BS... Thats their job, to mitigate their client choices, and to try and show just what a misunderstood angel their client is...

Here the suspects intent is very clear... Do anything to stop the pursuing officers, including intentionally ramming their cars, and risking the lives of every other motorist on the road, as well as everyone on foot on the campus where the pursuit was stopped....

Once again someone complaining about the "poor tactics" of the officers involved...

While ignoring the FACT that the officers were at all times reacting in real time to the actions of the suspect...

In the end the out come was as good as it could be... Based on the suspects actions...Suspect stopped from hurting officers, or any other persons....

The reason the suspect didn't "run over them", was because the officer who fired on the suspect acted in a quick and decisive and reasonable manner and ended the threat.
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.



Last edited by SVT-40; 11-09-2013 at 6:57 PM..
  #30  
Old 11-09-2013, 6:37 PM
trob's Avatar
trob trob is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,846
iTrader: 99 / 100%
Default

during that pursuit, i was thinking to my self, "what an A-HOLE".

Good shoot.
  #31  
Old 11-09-2013, 7:03 PM
wattspd wattspd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 68
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
The impact knocked the unit 90 degrees to the left... A very major impact....

The "If's" don't matter... The intent of the suspect is clear... Do anything to stop the officers including using his vehicle as a weapon....

Lawyers always argue BS... Thats their job, to mitigate their client choices, and to try and show just what a misunderstood angel their client is...

Here the suspects intent is very clear... Do anything to stop the pursuing officers, including intentionally ramming their cars, and risking the lives of every other motorist on the road, as well as everyone on foot on the campus where the pursuit was stopped....

Once again someone complaining abot the "poor tactics" of the officers involved...

While ignoring the FACT that the officers were at all times reacting in real time to the actions of the suspect...

In the end the out come was as good as it could be... Based on the suspects actions...Suspect stopped from hurting officers, or any other persons....

The reason the suspect didn't "run over them", was because the officer who fired on the suspect acted in a quick and decisive and reasonable manner and ended the threat.
The IF's do matter and when it comes to a jury making a decision on the officer's / departments actions or reactions it matters greatly. I am almost certain that the same father that filed the b/o report is suing at this very moment.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that the situation worked out in the favor for the officers. I just don't think they used good tactics.

There is one rule in pursuits. If the suspect drives with no regard for his own life, you don't chase him. Use other methods of capture. When he ran that red light he clearly did not a give a for his own life.

Playing bumper cars in the grass with a 3/4 pickup is a not so bright idea. The truck has a clear advantage in that situation. The reason why the secondary officer exited his vehicle is because his plan failed in ramming the truck head on, then ran his car into the tree getting his car stuck with his back to the suspect.

Who approaches a suspect that they just used deadly force on with their gun at low ready while talking on the radio?

Who walks between the suspect's vehicle that was just a "ADW" tool and his patrol car without knowing the state of the suspect?

Who approaches the suspect vehicle with what looks like only two officers?

They didn't seem all that scared to me. They just looked like they didn't know to effectively handle the situation. They have to live with killing the suspect and think everyday if they could or should have done it differently.

Last edited by wattspd; 11-09-2013 at 7:06 PM..
  #32  
Old 11-09-2013, 7:23 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 7,222
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Bottom line is they did the best with what they had, and ended a very dangerous situation with no injuries to anyone other than the suspect, even while the suspect was trying his hardest to injure or kill the officers.

There is always room to "critique" any incident... Thats how improvements to tactics and policies occur. However these situations happen very quickly, and are so very fluid. So give the officers a break. They were there. You were not.....

So what if Daddy running to the ambulance chasers... That should never be a concern while a situation is unfolding.....
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.


  #33  
Old 11-09-2013, 8:26 PM
yzernie's Avatar
yzernie yzernie is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Oak Hills/Hesperia, Ca.
Posts: 5,084
iTrader: 540 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wattspd View Post
The IF's do matter and when it comes to a jury making a decision on the officer's / departments actions or reactions it matters greatly. I am almost certain that the same father that filed the b/o report is suing at this very moment.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that the situation worked out in the favor for the officers. I just don't think they used good tactics.

There is one rule in pursuits. If the suspect drives with no regard for his own life, you don't chase him. Use other methods of capture. When he ran that red light he clearly did not a give a for his own life.

Playing bumper cars in the grass with a 3/4 pickup is a not so bright idea. The truck has a clear advantage in that situation. The reason why the secondary officer exited his vehicle is because his plan failed in ramming the truck head on, then ran his car into the tree getting his car stuck with his back to the suspect.

Who approaches a suspect that they just used deadly force on with their gun at low ready while talking on the radio?

Who walks between the suspect's vehicle that was just a "ADW" tool and his patrol car without knowing the state of the suspect?

Who approaches the suspect vehicle with what looks like only two officers?

They didn't seem all that scared to me. They just looked like they didn't know to effectively handle the situation. They have to live with killing the suspect and think everyday if they could or should have done it differently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wattspd View Post
If the suspect was known and the only crime was vehicle theft not really sure why they pursued him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wattspd View Post


I think you should read the appropriate codes and educate yourself. After that go and talk to your city manager, Mayor, & Chief and ask what he thinks about your statement.

Many people have sued and have won or settled regarding pursuit traffic collisions where the suspect was party #1 and responsible for the primary collision factor.

If Leo's thought more like the lawyers that are going to cross examine them in court, situations like the above case study could be avoided and handled differently.
Are you a currently employeed LEO?
__________________
My Commercial Sales Ad >>> http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=257865

TinStarSupply@aol.com

The satisfaction of a job well done is to be the one who has done it
  #34  
Old 11-09-2013, 9:44 PM
wattspd wattspd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 68
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yzernie View Post
Are you a currently employeed LEO?
Affirmative.
  #35  
Old 11-10-2013, 8:59 AM
tyrist tyrist is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,551
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wattspd View Post


I think you should read the appropriate codes and educate yourself. After that go and talk to your city manager, Mayor, & Chief and ask what he thinks about your statement.

Many people have sued and have won or settled regarding pursuit traffic collisions where the suspect was party #1 and responsible for the primary collision factor.

If Leo's thought more like the lawyers that are going to cross examine them in court, situations like the above case study could be avoided and handled differently.
17004.7. (a) The immunity provided by this section is in addition to any other immunity provided by law. The adoption of a policy by a public agency pursuant to this section is discretionary.

(b) A public agency employing peace officers that adopts a written policy on vehicular pursuits complying with subdivision (c) is immune from liability for civil damages for personal injury to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from the collision of a vehicle being operated by an actual or suspected violator of the law who is being, has been, or believes he or she is being or has been, pursued in a motor vehicle by a peace officer employed by the public entity.

(c) If the public entity has adopted a policy for the safe conduct of vehicular pursuits by peace officers, it shall meet all of the following minimum standards:

(1) It provides that, if available, there be supervisory control of the pursuit.

(2) It provides procedures for designating the primary pursuit vehicle and for determining the total number of vehicles to be permitted to participate at one time in the pursuit.

(3) It provides procedures for coordinating operations with other jurisdictions.

(4) It provides guidelines for determining when the interests of public safety and effective law enforcement justify a vehicular pursuit and when a vehicular pursuit should not be initiated or should be terminated.

(d) A determination of whether a policy adopted pursuant to subdivision

(c) complies with that subdivision is a question of law for the court.

(e) This section shall become inoperative on July 1, 2007, and, as of January 1, 2008, is repealed, unless a later enacted statute that is enacted before January 1, 2008, deletes or extends the dates on which it becomes inoperative and is repealed.


AND DONE
  #36  
Old 11-10-2013, 12:48 PM
9mmepiphany's Avatar
9mmepiphany 9mmepiphany is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: River City
Posts: 7,410
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wattspd View Post
Affirmative.
You sound a lot like a supervisor I used to have who went overboard after he attended Vicarious Liability training.

It might have gone better for him if he'd had any street creditability, but it only went downhill when he didn't even try to get buy-in from the line troops. For some reason, whenever he tried to get on the radio during a pursuit, his transmissions were always garbled...even in the best of times he was hard to understand as he never grasped the concept of the repeater powering up.

Quote:
There is one rule in pursuits. If the suspect drives with no regard for his own life, you don't chase him. Use other methods of capture. When he ran that red light he clearly did not a give a for his own life.
That might be a policy in your department, but it certainly isn't universal in CA. Many of our pursuits start with a driver running a red light

Quote:
Playing bumper cars in the grass with a 3/4 pickup is a not so bright idea. The truck has a clear advantage in that situation. The reason why the secondary officer exited his vehicle is because his plan failed in ramming the truck head on, then ran his car into the tree getting his car stuck with his back to the suspect.
I thought it was to get a clear shot at the driver

Quote:
Who approaches a suspect that they just used deadly force on with their gun at low ready while talking on the radio?
Wasn't that after the initial shots had been fired?

Keeping your gun up promotes tunnel vision, lowering it slightly allows better situational awareness while not excessively affecting the ability to respond...that is why many Response Team members don't search with their sights.

Quote:
Who walks between the suspect's vehicle that was just a "ADW" tool and his patrol car without knowing the state of the suspect?
An officer who is limited by the terrain, but who wants to end the confrontation as soon as possible. You deal with the terrain that is offered

Quote:
Who approaches the suspect vehicle with what looks like only two officers?
An officer is restricted by the immediacy of the situation in his ability to wait for additional officers...we don't even know if there were more officers available. Perhaps an officer who doesn't want the confrontation to go mobile again and endanger addition bystanders.

It is the same mindset that brought about the adoption of the Active Shooter policies
__________________
...because the journey is the worthier part...The Shepherd's Tale

Last edited by 9mmepiphany; 11-10-2013 at 12:54 PM..
  #37  
Old 11-10-2013, 2:06 PM
CBR_rider CBR_rider is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,644
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wattspd View Post
There is one rule in pursuits. If the suspect drives with no regard for his own life, you don't chase him. Use other methods of capture. When he ran that red light he clearly did not a give a for his own life.
You must be one of the field commanders at my agency..... nice to see you sir.

If the suspect drives with no regard for his own safety and crashes his own car and dies, that's on him/her. Sounds to me like you are advocating never chasing any reckless drivers, regardless of wants? All you are doing is creating a system whereby: a) bad guys get away and b) bad guys learn that driving reckless = a good chance of getting away and thus more do it. I agree that not everything that runs is worth chasing (believe me, I have called off several of my own pursuits and I freakin hate it) but I also believe that there are some crimes that should be pursued till the wheels come off (ADW on officers being one of them).
  #38  
Old 11-10-2013, 2:25 PM
E.T.'s Avatar
E.T. E.T. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 122
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Since the trigger of events was the son's desire for cigarettes, I expect the tobacco companies to be liable.
  #39  
Old 11-10-2013, 3:11 PM
fullrearview's Avatar
fullrearview fullrearview is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Carson Valley, NV
Posts: 9,377
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
After the suspect rammed the first unit with the trailer knocking him 90 degrees to the left, how could they terminate the pursuit...

The driver was a felony ADW suspect at that time, so do you just let him go?


To me there is just as much "liability" letting him go as there is chasing him... As it turned out the officers made the right decision. They were able to stop the suspect, with the only injuries / fatalities being the suspect...
That may sound harsh, however it was the suspects actions which caused the officers to react with deadly force... At any time he could have simply stopped the truck and surrendered...

His choices the officers reacting to those choices....

All choices have consequences. The consequences of this suspects choices were his own death.....
Spot on as usual.
__________________
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest."~M.Twain~
  #40  
Old 11-10-2013, 4:55 PM
tyrist tyrist is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,551
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBR_rider View Post
You must be one of the field commanders at my agency..... nice to see you sir.

If the suspect drives with no regard for his own safety and crashes his own car and dies, that's on him/her. Sounds to me like you are advocating never chasing any reckless drivers, regardless of wants? All you are doing is creating a system whereby: a) bad guys get away and b) bad guys learn that driving reckless = a good chance of getting away and thus more do it. I agree that not everything that runs is worth chasing (believe me, I have called off several of my own pursuits and I freakin hate it) but I also believe that there are some crimes that should be pursued till the wheels come off (ADW on officers being one of them).
I would agree since it sounds like he is more concerned with the agency being sued and how it would look rather than what the law actually says and the suspect did.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:09 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.