TexasCHLforum.com

C-dub wrote:So, disobeying an order is justification for the use of deadly force? I don't think so. This guy did nothing that we could see from this video that was threatening. Two sets of rules?

He was convicted wasn't he?

C-dub wrote:So, disobeying an order is justification for the use of deadly force? I don't think so. This guy did nothing that we could see from this video that was threatening. Two sets of rules?

I don't think disobeying orders was the officers reason for shooting. It was the movement the biker made with his right arm that triggered the officer to shoot I think. In any case, the officer made a decision and has to live with that now.

My suspicion (speculation) is that the Officer was simply so nervous that he pulled the trigger. No animosity, no malice aforethought, just a reaction to the entire situation in general.
It could happen to the best and the worst of us. Though training, training and training might have have allowed him to stop and think instead of shoot. You have to remember that he was a Reservist, and that has many implications.
NOTE: I was a Reservist for a while in the Military (and Active Duty for much longer). You can certainly lose your edge.

gigag, we watched the Shreveport video in our CHL class.

Clip one was the view of the actual shooting, when the subject was walking away. Instructor stopped the tape and asked: "Good shoot or no?"
Clip two was the end of the chase and the brandishing of the "weapon" through the shoot. Then he asked "Now, good shoot or no?"

Adding information changes the perspective, that's for sure. If all we see is this short piece of video, we're gonna argue all day long about what might have happened, what might have been done. All around this is a bad deal, in the sense that it is unfortunate that the LEO shot, even though he had a reasonable expectation that the biker was up to no good; and that the biker is paralyzed, even though it was because he did something stupid by not keeping his hands out in the open or not shutting off his bike. Sometimes, though, life's lessons are learned the very hard way, and that's what happened here. They both have a lot of time to think about this in the years ahead...

<sarcasm>
What's that "demotivational" poster say? "It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others."
<sarcasm/>

Clearly, here is a case in which the LEO should have shot not for center mass where the spine is unprotected from the rear, but should have gone for a shoulder shot. If a cop can't make that distinction, and can't make that shot from that distance, he should be running around in public with a loaded weapon.

casingpoint wrote:Clearly, here is a case in which the LEO should have shot not for center mass where the spine is unprotected from the rear, but should have gone for a shoulder shot. If a cop can't make that distinction, and can't make that shot from that distance, he should be running around in public with a loaded weapon.

What if he was going for the shot and missed what he was aiming for? Does one poorly placed shot disqualify him from being an LEO?

casingpoint wrote:Clearly, here is a case in which the LEO should have shot not for center mass where the spine is unprotected from the rear, but should have gone for a shoulder shot. If a cop can't make that distinction, and can't make that shot from that distance, he should be running around in public with a loaded weapon.

Don't they "shoot to stop the threat", just like we would if we had to shoot? Perhaps we should start aiming for legs and arms, too, then. No reason to shoot them COM, after all, even though it is the biggest target. It might hurt 'em!

Goose, gander, and all that...

Purplehood wrote:

casingpoint wrote:Clearly, here is a case in which the LEO should have shot not for center mass where the spine is unprotected from the rear, but should have gone for a shoulder shot. If a cop can't make that distinction, and can't make that shot from that distance, he should be running around in public with a loaded weapon.

What if he was going for the shot and missed what he was aiming for? Does one poorly placed shot disqualify him from being an LEO?

In this case, yes.

I'm not advocating running from the cops, nor do I think every officer is trigger happy or jumpy.

I do know for sure that LEOs almost never think it's as funny as you do. (Though I have made a few crack a smile before. )

casingpoint wrote:Clearly, here is a case in which the LEO should have shot not for center mass where the spine is unprotected from the rear, but should have gone for a shoulder shot. If a cop can't make that distinction, and can't make that shot from that distance, he should be running around in public with a loaded weapon.

Dude you have got to be kidding me....now in the stress of losing fine motor skills and the biggest adrenaline dump an individual may ever face you are criticizing shot placement? Hitting center mass under those conditions is the goal...the standard...which was (unfortunately) met quite well. People can shoot IDPA/IPSC and whatever other shooting games they want but the fact of the matter is that when you are entering into an encounter where you think you might end up dead, your body responds to those stakes.

Are you really advocating moving to a smaller target region? Maybe cops should just train to shoot the gun/knife/bat/grenade/bomb trigger right out of the subjects hand? Then no one gets injured.

The fact that this comment starts with "clearly" is almost comical.


BTW - casingpoint - I am not attacking you in this post...I think we are still supposed to have a beer from some earlier spat in a thread somewhere. I just find this comment absurd so that is where I'm coming from. (not a personal attack)

Purplehood wrote:My suspicion (speculation) is that the Officer was simply so nervous that he pulled the trigger. No animosity, no malice aforethought, just a reaction to the entire situation in general.
It could happen to the best and the worst of us. Though training, training and training might have have allowed him to stop and think instead of shoot. You have to remember that he was a Reservist, and that has many implications.
NOTE: I was a Reservist for a while in the Military (and Active Duty for much longer). You can certainly lose your edge.

I tend to agree w/ Purplehood. I think the LEO had his booger hook on the trigger and freaked. The biker paid the price.
A couple of points not yet covered. For the Leo, strategy? Seems like the Leo's cruiser afords more adequate cover than a
"naked" biker. Shut off the siren, issue commands through the PA. If the biker was a huge threat to Leo safety then angle the body
of the car, stay behind it and use the PA to issue commands. Also, the right arm "pulling back"? If you're right handed, and shoot right handed, try rotating to the right while sitting on a bike. You have very limited upper torso flexibility. Much easier to pull right and swing left, as in over or around your left shoulder. Same with pass shooting ducks. Swing left, you can actually shoot slightly behind your left shoulder. Swing right, and you're restricted to a lesser angle. My point being, that the biker presented no immediate threat
as shown on the video clip. At least none that a street officer could not anticipate and control, sans putting a bullet in the back of a unarmed man.
I ride, and yes, a full or 3/4 helmet definitely restricts your hearing. No helmet on the victim, just a loud bike and louder siren.

Whatever the consensus here about this shoot, the best place for your hands after running from the cops is up in the air no doubt.

Yep, convicted.

http://toledoblade.com/article/20100515 ... 01/-1/NEWS

A jury Friday night found an Ottawa Hills police officer guilty of felonious assault for shooting a motorcyclist in the back during a traffic stop.

The Lucas County Common Pleas Court jury reached its decision six hours after beginning deliberations in the case of Thomas White, 27, who was indicted on one count of felonious assault with a firearms specification for the May 23, 2009, shooting of Michael McCloskey, Jr.

Officer White, standing next to his attorney, Jerry Phillips, showed no emotion as the verdict was read.

My apologies to all. I did forget that this officer was found guilty.

If he honestly thought there was a gun then he did the right thing, but the jury didn't buy it. Maybe there wasn't anything more to it than what we saw in the video.

gigao4 wrote:That definitely sucks for all involved. I can see where the officer saw a furtive movement - more recent training says to scan to the whole body and then close in on the hands - and this may have prevented the ofc from shooting. I and others could armchair quarterback but at the end of the day he made a split second decision and is now paying a hefty price for it. To me, this is one of the greatest dangers in police work, I can accept that I may get in fights and get cut up dealing with "clients." However, the bigger danger is in making a split second decision which could never be replicated and being wrong, with huge results. That is a bigger risk of the job.

I understand it's extremely difficult for folks who haven't lived through the sharp disconnect between what you expect to deal with in a common law enforcement encounter and how some of those situations turn deadly in a nanosecond. I'd just ask that consideration be given to the fact that the emotional reality is a whole lot different than a dispassionate after action review done after multiple rewinds of the video that the officer involved had to live through in real time.

From the limited view of this incident seen through the dash camera, I couldn't defend what the officer did in this particular case. However, Giga04 makes a strong point. Every officer who pins on a badge has to make and live with thousands of high stress, high consequence split second decisions throughout his career, and any one could end either his life or his freedom. Think about what it's like to live on that edge all day every day for 25 or 30 years, when every one of those decisions has to be right, even when he's tired, aggravated, sick, or personally hurting from something that happened at home.

Keep in mind also that the mistakes made in some of those split second decisions go both ways. In most of the cases I saw, officers paid for those mistakes in pain and blood much more often than the times when a citizen was injured in error.