[Preacherman]

From CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/11/la.shootout/index.html):

L.A. police kill gunman holding baby; child also dies

Monday, July 11, 2005; Posted: 4:02 a.m. EDT (08:02 GMT)

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Police shot and killed a man involved in an hours-long standoff in a South Los Angeles neighborhood after he wounded an officer, police said. A baby he was holding died in the exchange of gunfire.

At 3:50 p.m. (6:50 p.m. EDT), police responded to a report of the man, Jose Raul Lemos, behaving aggressively and erratically -- he was initially barricaded in a house with a number of weapons.

According to police, Lemos fired at police several times over the next several hours before he ran out of the house -- first firing indiscriminately, then directly at officers, hitting one in the shoulder.

At that point, police opened fire on the man, believed to be in his mid-30s.

"We did everything we could to hold our fire. We showed a tremendous amount of restraint, but unfortunately the suspect's actions dictated this," said Los Angeles Assistant Police Chief Jim McDonnell. "It's a true tragedy."

Although the 19-month-old baby died of a gunshot wound, police did not immediately know if the bullet came from police or the man holding her.

"The officers are taking it very hard," McDonnell said. "Anytime you have a baby killed, it takes its toll."

The wounded officer is in stable condition, police said.

[griz]

Just damn. :mad: That is one sad story. For the sake of the officers, I hope they find the BG killed the baby first.

[RavenVT100]

I have an infant son. What a rotten story.

There is never any reason for a completely innocent child to die in one of these incidents. Whoever did it needs to be held accountable.

[armoredman]

Gotta be untrue - we all know Cali's gun laws would have stopped this from happening.

[Old Fuff]

I would have hoped that a sniper could have taken out the father (if he was indeed the father) and missed the child. But what works in theory doesn't always come out in practice. There is only one person that is responsible for what happened. I will let God sort out the rest.

[El Rojo]

This is just a tough one. In our perfect shooting worlds, we would have shot the guy in the head and never hit the baby and the world would be a nice and safe place. In reality, this guy was an imminient threat to everyone in the area and unfortunately he had to be stopped. Could they have taken cover and waited until he ran out of ammo? Maybe. We weren't there. Should we hold the officers accountable for murder? I wouldn't think so. And save the "if this happened to a civilian they would be charged with murder" line. Civilians are not expected to surround and negotiate with hostage takers. The facts are we expect police officers to do this difficult job and sometimes mistakes happen. Did these officers intend to kill this child? Lets not forget the man placed that baby in that situation. He is the one to blame.

[foghornl]

Anyone that would put a (their) child in Harms Way like this (using the child as a shield) deserves only to go down hard and fast.

Is is just me, or is the "Criminal Element" of our society sliding further toward absolute disregard of life? They [The Bad Guys] appear to me to be going towards "No Breathing Witness Left Behind".

[Missashot]

What a very sad and tragic story. I absolutly hate to read about these cowardly people that use innocent people especially children for hostages. I do wish that the stand off would have ended on a better note.(that being the
bad guy getting what he deserved without the death of a child) Or even better, there would have been no stand off to start with.

[Lennyjoe]

I too think a sniper would of been able to take him out. Unless he was a moving target that the sniper couldn't of gotten a clear shot. Maybe the cops should of taken cover until the perp emptied his weapon and then tried to take him out.

Too many variables and I wasn't there to know for sure.

Sad to see that the young child didn't come out of it alive. :(

[Double Naught Spy]

Snipers should/could/would, but things still go wrong. There is some tough footage of an ABQ police sniper killing a hostage held by a suspect.

Ideally, everybody does the best they can, but sometimes that just is not good enough.

[powerstrk]

L.A. Police Kill Gunman, Child in Shootout By ANDREW DALTON, Associated Press Writer
36 minutes ago



LOS ANGELES - A toddler was shot and killed when her father used her as a shield in a gunbattle with police following an hours-long standoff, officials said. The man also died and an officer was wounded.

ADVERTISEMENT

The man killed Sunday night after an hours-long standoff was identified as Jose Raul Lemos, and the girl, about 17 months old, was his daughter, police said. The officer, who was not immediately identified, was shot in the shoulder and was expected to recover.

"He was using the baby as a shield," Assistant Police Chief Jim McDonnell said.

"We showed a tremendous amount of restraint, but unfortunately the suspect's actions dictated this," he said. "It's a true tragedy."

The child's mother, Lorena Lopez, said she pleaded with officers to hold their fire.

"He had problems with depression, his business was not doing well," Lopez told KNBC-TV. "I told them that he needed help, he needs a psychologist, but please don't shoot. They didn't understand, and the police fired, like, 300 shots."

It was unclear who fired the shot that hit the girl, but officers were struggling with the thought that they killed a baby, McDonnell said.

"The officers are taking it very hard," he said. "Anytime you have a baby killed, it takes its toll."

The standoff began at around 3:50 p.m. when officers responded to an area in South Los Angeles west of Watts after residents reported an armed man standing near an intersection with a toddler and behaving erratically and aggressively.

There were three exchanges of gunfire between police and Lemos, who was about 35, McDonnell told reporters. In the final exchange, at around 6:20 p.m., Lemos held the girl as he shot.

"We did everything we could to hold our fire," McDonnell said.

At one point, Lemos retreated into an apartment building, where police said he held the girl hostage.

Police called in a SWAT team and tried to speak with the man; when they at one point attempted to help a neighbor escape the area, he fired at them and they fired back, McDonnell said.

Under police regulations, officers may only fire "when it reasonably appears necessary" to protect themselves or others from death or serious injury.

The man had a 9 mm handgun and a shotgun and was intoxicated on drugs and alcohol, police said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050711/ap_on_re_us/police_shooting

[hillbilly]

The guy came running out of the house firing his weapon and using the baby as a shield.

Even a highly trained sniper would have found that an incredibly difficult target to cope with under those situations.

And this is the type of thing that police have to deal with as their friggin' jobs.

Damn........just damn...........

hillbilly

[HighVelocity]

Very sad story. :(

LOS ANGELES -- A toddler was shot and killed when her father used her as a shield in a gunbattle with police following an hours-long standoff, officials said. The man also died, and an officer was wounded.

The man killed Sunday night after the standoff was identified as Jose Raul Lemos, and the girl, about 17 months old, was his daughter, police said. The officer, who was not immediately identified, was shot in the shoulder and was expected to recover.

"He was using the baby as a shield," Assistant Police Chief Jim McDonnell said.

"We showed a tremendous amount of restraint, but unfortunately the suspect's actions dictated this," he said. "It's a true tragedy."

The child's mother, Lorena Lopez, said she pleaded with officers to hold their fire.

"He had problems with depression, his business was not doing well," Lopez told KNBC-TV. "I told them that he needed help, he needs a psychologist, but please don't shoot. They didn't understand, and the police fired, like, 300 shots."

It was unclear who fired the shot that hit the girl, but officers were struggling with the thought that they killed a baby, McDonnell said.

"The officers are taking it very hard," he said. "Anytime you have a baby killed, it takes its toll."

The standoff began at around 3:50 p.m. when officers responded to an area in South Los Angeles west of Watts after residents reported an armed man standing near an intersection with a toddler and behaving erratically and aggressively.

There were three exchanges of gunfire between police and Lemos, who was about 35, McDonnell told reporters. In the final exchange, at around 6:20 p.m., Lemos held the girl as he shot.

"We did everything we could to hold our fire," McDonnell said.

At one point, Lemos retreated into an apartment building, where police said he held the girl hostage.

Police called in a SWAT team and tried to speak with the man; when they at one point attempted to help a neighbor escape the area, he fired at them and they fired back, McDonnell said.

Under police regulations, officers may only fire "when it reasonably appears necessary" to protect themselves or others from death or serious injury.

The man had a 9 mm handgun and a shotgun and was intoxicated on drugs and alcohol, police said.

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/12106307.htm

[centac]

Tragic for all involved

[jlwatts3]

What a terrible thing. The only thing I can think of would be a headshot before the situation deteriorated to this. However that is both a hard decision to make as well as a difficult task to accomplish.

[Nitram68]

Tragic. Too bad a sniper didn't take him out with a head shot.

[torpid]

If the story is accurate...

Jose Raul Lemos, I may just end up in Hell, just to kick your evil a** for eternity.
:fire:

[winstonsmith]

What is this, a video game? They said he retreated into an apartment building, tough to get a headshot through walls, can't even do that in counterstrike. If you're thinking of it now, the police probably thought of it then. They probably didnt do it because they couldn't... He probably wasnt standing still much.


This is just one sad gangrape of a situation... I feel worst for the cops.

[ghostrider07]

300 shots at a man holding a hostage with a SWAT Team and trained sniper on the scene. :confused: Fire discipline problem at best, at its worst......... It was LAPD, he could have started a fire, said he was rioting and they would have all been pulled out of there.

[HighVelocity]

I feel worst for the cops.

I feel worst for the mother of the child. I'm sure it's hard for the cops to go home to their families knowing they took part in the death of an infant but they will go on with their lives. The cops made a choice based on the situation presented. They did what they had to do to protect themselves and unfortunately the ending was a tragic one. The mother could do nothing but plead and watch, her life will never be the same.

[psyopspec]

300 shots at a man holding a hostage with a SWAT Team and trained sniper on the scene.

I have severe doubts about the statement regarding the "like 300 shots" that were fired. Regardless, it became a tragedy because of one bullet in particular, and I feel for those involved.

[Gunsnrovers]

I too have serious doubts about "300 rounds", however a lot of rounds were fired during the incident leading up to his and the babies death.

The police did have to lay down cover fire as they tried to get some local residents out of the area as the now deceased moron tried to use them as target practice.

[duckslayer]

Sad, indeed.

[No_Brakes23]

That's just crappy.

[RavenVT100]

Look, if you're firing at someone, innocent bystanders are not "fair game." If I shoot someone who is an immediate threat to my life and rounds go through the wall and kill a five year old next door, I'm liable for that person's death despite the situation at hand. The power of your weapon comes with the mantle of responsibility. It's the SWAT team's job to diffuse these types of situations without killing innocent bystanders, especially children. If you have someone being used as a shield, you need to pick another option. That's my opinion.

[PinnedAndRecessed]

Interesting comments here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1440533/posts#16

[centac]

"It's the SWAT team's job to diffuse these types of situations without killing innocent bystanders, especially children. If you have someone being used as a shield, you need to pick another option. That's my opinion."

Which was precisely the tactic, wait for SWAT, employed at Columbine, to everyone's chagrin.

These are highly fluid, rapidly changing situations in which the "best" option is typically really the "least worst" option. I'm not gonna literally monday-morning quarterback something like this based on a short media account.

Bad things happen no matter how hard they are avoided. All prayers get answered, but sometimes the answer is no.

[Hawkmoon]

The 300-round comment came from the mother of the child. I doubt very much that she was either counting the shots, or picking up the brass to count later.

How can you expect a sniper to get a clean head shot on a guy who (according to the account) runs out of a building shooting indiscriminately? Be realistic. This was a no-win situation for the officers.

[roo_ster]

Sometimes there just is no "Good" option. You get your pick of "Bad," "Worse," and "Truly ?????ty."

You got to play the hand you're dealt the best that you can.

[Vernal45]

I will, as usual, point out where I think the LEO's went wrong. In this instance, The LEO's did nothing wrong. It was a lose, lose situation, the cops did what they had to do.

[Joejojoba111]

I get the impression that it's not cool to say that shooting at the man holding baby was wrong, so I'll just say that it has to be the worst possible option and not surprisingly it lead to the worst possible outcome.

I'm probably full of shat, but in theory, just in theory (I don't know how I'd feel IRL), but in theory everything humanly possible should be done to preserve the babies life.

On the other hand you don't want to spawn copy-cats, if that would happen. So you can't give them what they want. But on the other hand you can't shoot through a hostage, especially an infant one...

[El Rojo]

On the other hand you don't want to spawn copy-cats, if that would happen. So you can't give them what they want. But on the other hand you can't shoot through a hostage, especially an infant one...To be a little bit of a devil's advocate, why not? Whose life is worth more? Two or three police officers or that baby's? I know it is crapy thing to say, but what if it were your family that this guy charged at? What if he was shooting at your wife and kids? Would you let him kill your family in order to save that one child? I guess you could say that police sign up knowing they might die and they might have to die to serve and protect, but that is bullcrap. If I were a cop, I wouldn't sign up to die and leave my kids as bastards and my wife as a widow. If that meant I had to shoot a kid to save more lives, I might have to do it. I might feel like crap the rest of my life too and maybe it would screw man or woman up to no end. This is one that is hard to Monday morning quarterback if you ask me and honestly I am surprised by the respect that our usually anti-LEO members are showing. Wow.

This is a raw deal no matter what. Sometimes life is just tough.

[kal]

Sure, it is a terrible thing that baby had to die. But really, it's not THAT big of a deal. Was the baby an engineer? No. Did the baby just finish high school? No. Did the baby recently buy a house with the money he/she earned as a lawyer!?!?!? NO! So now it doesnt really matter anymore that the baby is dead. We are able to get more babies, but we may not be able to get more grown people who have done good things in society.

Some of you call the criminal a "coward" for using the baby as a shield. I call that "good tactics". Whether it's evil or not, it's still a good strategy.

[Joey101]

Sure, it is a terrible thing that baby had to die. But really, it's not THAT big of a deal. Was the baby an engineer? No. Did the baby just finish high school? No. Did the baby recently buy a house with the money he/she earned as a lawyer!?!?!? NO! So now it doesnt really matter anymore that the baby is dead. We are able to get more babies, but we may not be able to get more grown people who have done good things in society.

Are you serious? :fire: Have you no feelings? :mad: Man that's just cold. I don't care whether the kid came from a crack house, it's not the kids fault. What did that kid do to deserve to die? :cuss:





I feel worst for the mother of the child. I'm sure it's hard for the cops to go home to their families knowing they took part in the death of an infant but they will go on with their lives. The cops made a choice based on the situation presented. They did what they had to do to protect themselves and unfortunately the ending was a tragic one. The mother could do nothing but plead and watch, her life will never be the same.

Agreed, I have a 14 month old at home, I couldn't even imagine how that would make me feel. I mean I am saddened by just reading this story.

[Spreadfire Arms]

overall a crap situation.

i once had a similar situation while an officer on duty but no firearm involved.

i had a drunk and aggressive suspect resisting arrest by using his own baby as a human shield.

can't use pepper on an infant you may kill him/her. can't use a taser, can't use a baton, can't use a firearm.

we were lucky. we talked the guy into putting his kid down and arrested him, then he was charged with felony child endangerment.

[RavenVT100]

"It's the SWAT team's job to diffuse these types of situations without killing innocent bystanders, especially children. If you have someone being used as a shield, you need to pick another option. That's my opinion."

Which was precisely the tactic, wait for SWAT, employed at Columbine, to everyone's chagrin.

These are highly fluid, rapidly changing situations in which the "best" option is typically really the "least worst" option. I'm not gonna literally monday-morning quarterback something like this based on a short media account.

Bad things happen no matter how hard they are avoided. All prayers get answered, but sometimes the answer is no.

centac, my comment was in the context of the SWAT team already being there, and it being their jobs to diffuse it.

It wasn't "wait for the SWAT team, that's their job."

[ghostrider07]

"It's the SWAT team's job to diffuse these types of situations without killing innocent bystanders, especially children. If you have someone being used as a shield, you need to pick another option. That's my opinion."

Which was precisely the tactic, wait for SWAT, employed at Columbine, to everyone's chagrin.

These are highly fluid, rapidly changing situations in which the "best" option is typically really the "least worst" option. I'm not gonna literally monday-morning quarterback something like this based on a short media account.
SWAT's mission in life, whole purpose for existence, is for situations just like this. If they can't diffuse the situation with a trained negotiator, they are supposed to contain the situation. Building entry with hostages is supposed to be a last resort, but this was the third time the guy had traded shots with them. If SWAT is on the scene and nobody can make a decision after two exchanges of fire that the next time you get a shot, take him out, these guys are not very good. Indecisiveness can kill more people than napalm, as several parents that lost kids at Columbine could testify. Flak vests and MP5s DON'T, and NEVER WILL make you a SWAT team. You HAVE to be able to shoot, move and communicate.

[Cesiumsponge]

Just curious. I was under the impression that the police usually have a few trained sharpshooters. If they weren't utilized in this situation...when do they ever put those guys to use?

SWAT is one thing, but two elements with MP5's surrounding a guy holding a baby hostage would start making the guy really nervous. I would think that a positioned sharpshooter could be utilized to make a shot that counts at the right time. Maybe they were positioned and there was no possible way to make it happen. I don't know all the details and I'm not an authority figure or expert at this so if I sound stupid, dismiss my comments.

I do, however, recall video footage of a police sharpshooter actually shooting a gun out of the hands of a man holding loosly holding a firearm. He was holding himself hostage (or contemplating suicide) sitting in a lawn chair. The video was ages ago.

[Combat-wombat]

As heartless as it may be, I'm going to agree with Kal. Just because a baby dies and it's highly sensationalized and emotionally charged, it's not that huge in the big scheme of things. Bad things happen. A lot worse things happen than this... Hundreds of babies die from starvation in India, they're just not shown on mass media. Noone is crying for them here.

I'm sorry, but cold rationality just says that this is not a significant event in the world.

[ghostrider07]

If that was your baby, would you feel the same way. It ain't about the baby, it's about professionalism. It's about SOPs, training, fire discipline, not shooting with a hostage unless by sniper. Think guys, would you want this bunch trying to free your kids from Islamic Terrorists that took their elementary school. I wouldn't, I could do better with a half dozen 11Bs or 0311s, a little while to train, and we will kick some IT butt. Hoo ah. Back to my earlier statement about firing 300 rounds, two months ago, these guys fired 120 rounds at a guy who was speeding.

[Joejojoba111]

Not commenting on anything here, except that I studied a site once that made a very clear argument that shooting the gun out of a person's hard is a bad idea. It was a stupid move to do it, and they were lucky it worked. But it's dangerous beyond belief. The bullet ricochets, the gun explodes into a bunch of flying pieces, and gun may even discharge. Furthermore, it's possible to miss, and then you've just started a firefight which will ultimately end in at least 1 person's death, possibly more.

It showed the exact video you mentioned, and iirc a chunk of something took a chunk out of the leg of the lawnchair the guy was sitting on, just to illustrate that stuff does go flying.

[Texian Pistolero]

Five bucks says some sheeple jury will give a bigtime cash award in the lawsuit.

We know who killed this kid, her father did.

After rounds are fired, the time for negotiation is past. Many police agencies won't admit this, but that's the drill.

[Elmer]

Maybe I missed it. Did somebody mention that a police officer was also shot during this situation?

[bigun15]

I do, however, recall video footage of a police sharpshooter actually shooting a gun out of the hands of a man holding loosly holding a firearm. He was holding himself hostage (or contemplating suicide) sitting in a lawn chair. The video was ages ago.

I remember seeing that too. That was pretty awesome to see it happen, but that's a different story. I wonder if there were even any snipers in position around there. I'm almost sure there were, since the holdup lasted over two hours. I wonder why they couldn't/didn't take the shot. It would have been better for one sniper bullet to fly rather than dozens from ground officers IMO.

Yes, Elmer, one police officer was shot in the shoulder.

[Elmer]

I wonder if there were even any snipers in position around there. I'm almost sure there were, since the holdup lasted over two hours. I wonder why they couldn't/didn't take the shot. It would have been better for one sniper bullet to fly rather than dozens from ground officers IMO

LAPD SWAT aren't exactly amateurs at this. I would think if it were possible, that's exactly what would have happened.

[bigun15]

Yeah, so we can make the educated guess that there were snipers there. I want to hear why they weren't shooting when their buddies were.

[Texian Pistolero]

Just guessing from limited info, but it sounds like the snipers were initially

trying to avaoid killing ANYBODY.

Then, the final act was inside the building, out of view of any sniper.

Just a guess, but that sounds like what happenned.

[odysseus]

kal:
Some of you call the criminal a "coward" for using the baby as a shield. I call that "good tactics". Whether it's evil or not, it's still a good strategy.

You might have been making some kind of uber-social commentary until you got to that point. :banghead: At that point you went into the abyss.

Of course he is a coward, and no it was not good "tactics". Are you forgetting he and his hostage died? Perhaps that was his goal? You are actually trying to reason with the unreasonable? It will get you everytime. :fire:

BTW, for the discussion - it is absolutely tragic on all sides. Doesn't seem there was any win in this decision matrix when he shot the officer and continued on his madness. I think more facts will come out as time progresses. One thing I would bet on is a civil suit against the LAPD from the mother of the infant.

[Joejojoba111]

Maybe the mistake was when they moved in to evacuate the neighbor they talk about. that seems like the trigger. They know he's armed and he's already fired at them, and has a toddler hostage. They had all the info but made the call to move in, and it created a direct confrontation.

Maybe learning from this a good lesson would be that if it's your policy to shoot back, regardles of who or what is between you and your target, then you should only move into contact range when you are ready to go shooting.

Plus for me, not juding other people, for me the policy of shooting through toddler children is something i or no-one I know, or no-one I can imagine would consider. I heard about WW2 vets who hesitated to kill Hitler Youth, but those kids were enemy soldiers trying to kill them. Even then there was pause.

Well, like they say one can't judge others, we weren't there, but for me I'd find it impossible, beyond consideration.

Edit:
PS. was the evac move done spur of the moment, or planned? And was it the SWAT or just some ordinary officers?

[Gunsnrovers]

Time to hold the horses on guess work.

Reports currently aired from the LAPD here in LA say the death occured inside the home and that the baby was on a couch on the opposite side of the room from the dad.

Reports are also now saying the guy show 40 rounds and LAPD fired 90.

Serious lack of information to be forming judgements about snipers, SWAT teams, LAPd tactics, etc.

[33-805]

As far as I know from the accounts available now, there is no round count official as of yet. Thanks Hawkmoon, for pointing out that the "300 round" remark was from the mother, not anyone who would have been counting at the time.

For all of those criticizing the officers in this one, take a second to think. The last time you were put into a no-win situation, what was the worst possible outcome? In most civilian cases, it's a business deal or something else that is negative, but not life threatening, unless perhaps you are involved in the medical fields. These guys were put into the ultimate no-win and if anyone is too willing to criticize them without all the facts maybe you should suit up and try a shift or two. Might change you from a monday morning quarterback into one of those guys who just shrug and don't say much because they were there.

[centac]

I am familiar with the incident in Columbus Ohio in which the BG's gun was shot from his hand. That was a VERY highly orchestrated shoot in which the guy was sitting stationary in a chair. I winced when I heard about it as it sets a dangerous precedent - now people will expect that tactic to be employed even when it is inappropriate.

Shooting to disarm just isnt a viable alternative %99.99 of the time.

[El Rojo]

Think guys, would you want this bunch trying to free your kids from Islamic Terrorists that took their elementary school. I wouldn't, I could do better with a half dozen 11Bs or 0311s, a little while to train, and we will kick some IT butt. Hoo ah. Back to my earlier statement about firing 300 rounds, two months ago, these guys fired 120 rounds at a guy who was speeding.Go get 'em Joe Montana! I am sure you would out shoot these guys any day. I bet they hardly ever train for anything. And boy your right, these guys did shoot 120 rounds at a guy who was speeding. Oh wait, no actually it wasn't the LAPD SWAT team. Actually it wasn't the LAPD at all. It was actually the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, which has nothing to do with the Los Angeles City Police Department. If you are going to quarterback this thing like a true keyboard commando, at least try and maintain some credibility by getting your basic facts straight.

[jdberger]

From the New York Times (sorry, don't have the LA Times version)

Man and Young Daughter Die in Shootout With Police

By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: July 12, 2005

LOS ANGELES, July 11 -An armed man and his 17-month-old daughter, whom he had been using as a shield, died on Sunday evening in a shootout with the police here.

The police on Monday defended their actions, saying the man, Jose R. Pena, left them no choice.

The police said Mr. Pena, 35, used his daughter, Susie Marie, as a shield as he shot repeatedly at police officers who, responding to a report of a disturbance, had surrounded his car wash business in the Watts section of the city. After efforts to negotiate the child's release failed and the man opened fire once again, officers shot him and the girl was killed in the exchange, a police spokesman said.

The police said Monday that it was not clear whether the child died from their bullets or Mr. Pena's. An officer, Daniel Sanchez, 39, was shot in the shoulder during the final assault and is expected to recover.

The child's mother, Lorena Lopez, said she had no doubt who fired the fatal shots.

"The police killed my daughter," Ms. Lopez said, tearfully and in Spanish, in the driveway of her green frame house on the corner of Avalon Boulevard and 104th Street. She said she had told the police during the crisis that Mr. Pena, from whom she is separated, was depressed about his failing business. "I told them he needed to be helped," she said.

Ms. Lopez said that no one from the police department had contacted her to explain how her daughter died. "I want the police to pay for this," she said.

The child was only the second hostage to be killed in a case involving the department's special weapons and tactics team in its 38-year history, Chief William J. Bratton said on Monday.

But Chief Bratton blamed Mr. Pena for the child's death, saying he precipitated the crisis by endangering neighbors and his child with a 9-millimeter pistol, which he repeatedly fired wildly. He said that Mr. Pena fired as many as 40 shots, and that the officers were following department policy in returning fire.

"The suspect's actions left the officers no choice," the chief said in a late afternoon news briefing. "It was his behavior that led to the ultimate tragedy."

In the most recent hostage case involving a death, officers shot and killed an armed man holding a pregnant woman hostage outside the Mexican consulate here last November. The woman was rescued unharmed. The man's weapon turned out to be a starter's pistol.

Accusations of excessive force have dogged the Los Angeles police for years and have led to hostile relations between the police and minority residents. The televised beating of Rodney G. King in 1991 led to riots when an all-white jury acquitted the accused officers.

Such incidents have challenged mayors in this city for decades. The shooting Sunday was the first to confront the new mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa, who took office on July 1.

Mr. Villaraigosa spoke carefully to reporters on Monday about Sunday's shooting.

"My heart is out to a grieving mother who's lost her child," he said. "My heart is also out to those officers who put their lives on the line. Not a one of them went into that situation with the intent to hurt anyone."

Eleven officers fired during the three-hour standoff, Chief Bratton said. All have been suspended under department policy and are receiving counseling. He said that all of the officers involved felt bad about the deaths.

"This was extremely traumatic for our officers," Chief Bratton said.

There was little sympathy for the police at Ms. Lopez's small home on 104th Street, just a block from the car wash. Carlos de Paz, 18, a son of Ms. Lopez and a stepbrother of Susie Marie, said the police locked him and the rest of his family in their home during the siege. Mr. de Paz said he heard "hundreds" of shots in three volleys of gunfire before the final assault, which he said began with a very loud explosion and ended with prolonged fire from automatic weapons.

"They didn't let us out of the house," he said. "My uncle tried to talk them into letting us negotiate with our stepdad, but the cops just told us to get back in the house."

Mr. de Paz said that Mr. Pena called Ms. Lopez near the end of the crisis and said the police had killed the child. "They just shot my daughter," he quoted Mr. Pena as saying. "There ain't no reason for me to live anymore."

A senior police spokesman, Lt. Paul Vernon, disputed that account, saying it was inconsistent with testimony from officers in the field. "A lot of people are saying a lot of different things," Lieutenant Vernon said, "especially the family."

[ckyllo]

split second to make call to shoot, weeks, months even years to have it picked apart and being told "well you should of done ...." .

[Pilgrim]

Once again a dysfunctional family unit calls for the police to solve their problems and ends up with an unforseen and undesired result.

Pilgrim

[Mad Man]

Definitely a tragedy, but it's hard to fault the police on this one. It is possible that the father's gunfire, and not the police's, killed the child.

They were being shot at. What were they supposed to do?

The televised beating of Rodney G. King in 1991 led to riots when an all-white jury acquitted the accused officers.

A great example of media bias. What does that have to do with this incident?


DISCLAIMER: I am not nor have I ever been a police officer. I wasn't there, and the only facts I have are from the biased media. Therefore, I don't have the right to judge the actions of LEOs, even favorably. Blah blah blah.

[HI express]

33-805,
The news this morning reported 40+ rounds fired by the perp and 90+ rounds fired by LAPD.

My PO? Movies are showing too much of this "one shot one kill" idea. Public buys into this.

[El Rojo]

Another classic case of the police having to shoot someone and it is the police's fault, not the guy shooting his 9mm all over the neighborhood and holding his child hostage. I would hope I would stand up and apologize in front of the media for my wife going on a shooting rampage. I would hope I would be able to recognize her actions caused this unfortunate accident and that I would even apologize to the officer who was shot and the officers who had to shoot my child. Is that too much to ask for?

[Cosmoline]

Eleven officers fired during the three-hour standoff,

That's horrible. 11 cops were blasting away!? They must have missed repeatedly over the course of the standoff. I find that FAR more disturbing than the possibility that a sniper simply rolled snake eyes. The whole point of SWAT was supposed to be to prevent this kind of shooting gallery. They should have stayed under cover until someone with a PROPER FIREARM who knew how to use it could bring it to bear. Suppressing fire has no place in a hostage situation. :cuss:

If "civilians" from the neighborhood had blasted away in this fashion, they would all be in jail and the LAPD would be screaming bloody murder.

[Cazach]

Local news (KFI) had the following info this morning:

There were at least three seperate gunfire exchanges

1st was between suspect and uniformed officers responding to the initial call. (Suspect was holding toddler during exchange)

2nd was in back of building when suspect (after barricading himself) tried to slip out the back. This was reported to be a shot from a S.W.A.T. officer that may have wounded the suspect. The suspect then turn and ran back in the building while shooting at officers. (not clear if suspect was holding the child at this point). Also officers were able to free another hostage (reported as the suspect's 17 year old daughter)

3rd was during the breach by S.W.A.T (which immediately followed the 2nd exchange above). The officers saw an opportunity and rushed to try to get the toddler out. One officer was shot during his toss of a flashbang, suspect was found behind a desk in a office, the toddler was found on the opposite side of the room.

Also KFI reported that there may be a twist to the motive for this guy's actions. It had been reported that he was depressed because his business was failing. The new spin was that he had been served with a restraining order having to do with child molestation. To further thicken the plot, the poor toddler that died is rumored to have been fathered by him with his own stepdaughter.

Horrible situation for the family and the officers.

[Cesiumsponge]

Also KFI reported that there may be a twist to the motive for this guy's actions. It had been reported that he was depressed because his business was failing. The new spin was that he had been served with a restraining order having to do with child molestation. To further thicken the plot, the poor toddler that died is rumored to have been fathered by him with his own stepdaughter.

Oh boy, the media is going to elucidate on all those over the following weeks and drag this all out.

[Vernal45]

Autopsy to determine if police killed toddler
Infant held by father during gunbattle

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- Police expect autopsy results to determine whether a bullet that killed a 19-month girl was fired by police or her father, who authorities say used the toddler as a shield in a gunbattle that lasted nearly three hours.

Both the girl, Susie Lopez, and her father, Jose Raul Pena, were killed as Pena dueled with police on Sunday. One officer was wounded.

On Monday, Police Chief William Bratton said his officers were having a difficult time coping with the girl's death.

"This has been extraordinarily traumatic for them, wondering if they possibly contributed to the death of a child or maybe caused the death with their own gunfire," Bratton told a news conference.

He said officers followed regulations allowing them to fire "when it reasonably appears necessary" to protect themselves or others from death or serious injury.

The girl's mother, Lorena Lopez, said she pleaded with officers to hold their fire.

"He had problems with depression, his business was not doing well," Lopez told KNBC-TV. "I told them that he needed help, he needs a psychologist, but please don't shoot."

Bratton said the fatal shooting was only the second time a hostage had been killed since the department formed its SWAT team in 1967. In that time, SWAT officers have responded to 3,800 calls involving hostages or people barricaded inside buildings.

It was the second time in nine months that Los Angeles officers have fired on an assailant holding a hostage. In November, police shot a man who held a pregnant woman by the neck outside the Mexican Consulate. Officers pulled the woman away unharmed and the man later died.

Sunday night's killings followed a three-hour standoff in which Pena, 34, exchanged gunfire with officers three separate times.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/12/la.shootout.ap/index.html

[El Rojo]

Here it comes!If "civilians" from the neighborhood had blasted away in this fashion, they would all be in jail and the LAPD would be screaming bloody murder.Yes, thank you Cosmoline. It was only a matter of time before the job of a SWAT team to surround and negotiate with bad guys is compared to a normal group of citizens that just happens to also have this job. Nothing like comparing apples to oranges.

Again, no civilian in the world has the legal right to surround a building and try and force and end to a stand off. That is exactly what we pay police for and legal provide them the authority to do. There would never be a situation where a group of civilians would inheriet this job, so why make the comparison?

[Rich K]

I was not there,so will just say prayers for the officers involved,and for the soul of the baby.And one more,that the man holding that baby as a human shiled will roast in hell for eternity.

[Cosmoline]

Yes, thank you Cosmoline. It was only a matter of time before the job of a SWAT team to surround and negotiate with bad guys is compared to a normal group of citizens that just happens to also have this job. Nothing like comparing apples to oranges.

The SWAT team did not "surround and negotiate" with the bad guy. The LAPD tripped over itself in an ongoing firefight, spraying hundreds of rounds into a house they knew to contain hostages and hitting nothing but blue sky and a baby.

Civilians do have a right to use deadly force do defend the life of another. At least they do up here in the free world. Kalifornia may be another matter. As I said, if "civilians" (read--neighbors) had actually tried to stop this guy and ended up in that kind of a firefight, they would all be in prison with the LAPD screaming for their blood and marrow. But of course when neighbors do intervene, they usually get the job done without shooting anyone or even calling the cops.

Motto of the LAPD:

"ONE LAW FOR THEE
ANOTHER FOR ME"

[campbellcj]

Per one radio report this morning, 11 LAPD officers fired approximately 90 rounds towards the BG...I guess they must've eventually hit him with one or more of those shots, but if this report is accurate it really makes me wonder what is up with the officers' accuracy and/or judgement? No disprespect intended, but why are they shooting in the first place if they do not have a reasonable chance of a clean hit taking their skill, equipment and conditions into consideration?

Seems to me that a "1 shot, 1 kill" sniper operation could have saved the child's life and prevented a messy situation that is causing big community backlash. Don't most/all SWAT units have snipers on staff?

[El Rojo]

The SWAT team did not "surround and negotiate" with the bad guy. The LAPD tripped over itself in an ongoing firefight, spraying hundreds of rounds into a house they knew to contain hostages and hitting nothing but blue sky and a baby.Do you have a source for that? Would you care to outline how long this thing lasted? You imply it was over within minutes. Also it has been stated that the officers fired 90 rounds between 11 officers, you claim hundreds. The suspect is dead, you claim they only hit the baby. It still has not been confirmed who hit the baby. Sensationalism does us no good Cosmoline.

8 rounds each is hardly a spray and pray situation. Its sad that before we even have solid information, we have members on here who are more than willing to display their anti-LEO agenda with a sensationalist spin before the facts are in. Just like the bad guy's family. It is the cops fault that he chose to take a baby hostage, shoot up a community, and endanger lives. Why do I even bother?

[ghostrider07]

Seems to me that a "1 shot, 1 kill" sniper operation could have saved the child's life and prevented a messy situation that is causing big community backlash. Don't most/all SWAT units have snipers on staff?
Since we have the President of the LAPD SWAT Fan Club here, maybe he can explain the rationale in assaulting someone with hostages, drunk, drugged, and highly agitated. If this dude was that wasted, why couldn't they wait a few hours, let him pass out and take him without firing a shot. Why did the SWAT team commander decide to end it that soon, guys need to get home to mow the lawn, drink a beer, city couldn't afford the overtime.

#16 Joe "They Botched It" Montana

[Duh_Bear]

If what I read was accurate, the perp forced the officer's hands when he fired on them.

[JohnBT]

"why couldn't they wait a few hours"

Let's say you're the hostage. Would you want to be left alone with the guy for a few hours until he passed out? How about a few days until the meth wore off?

John

[griz]

If this dude was that wasted, why couldn't they wait a few hours

This from the first article:

According to police, Lemos fired at police several times over the next several hours before he ran out of the house -- first firing indiscriminately, then directly at officers, hitting one in the shoulder.

Waiting just isn't an option if faced with someone charging the police and firing at them. But any of the reports could be in error, it's probably time to wait for the details to come out.

Edited to add:
After re-reading I see that you meant the assult could have waited. You may be right, I have no way of knowing.
But lets remember that the cops are stuck in a situation where the BEST option is still very risky and they have to decide quickly. In other words "lose-lose". We have the luxury of hindsight, spell check, and time to think it over. Plus if we are wrong nobody dies.

[axmurderer]

I wish the police could have taken this guy out with a sniper, but I wasn't there so maybe it wasn't possible. But seems to me the police are in no way to blame for the child's death.

I also hear that the father's family is defending him, and saying that the police should have had more patience. The fact that they say nothing to condemn the father for using his child as a sheild, tells me all I need to know however.

[PaladinVC]

Of course, if I had been there, I'd have seen the man clutching the infant and firing at the officers, smoothly drawn my CCW pistol, stood calmly up from cover into the hail of bullets, taken a deep breath, placed my left hand behind my back, lined up my sights, and fired a single, lethal shot through the subject's cerebellum. Then, I'd drink a vodka martini, play some baccarat, and go back to the hotel with a gorgeous Russian woman.

Without combat experience, I cannot imagine what it must be like to find yourself in such a horrific situation. My basic faith in humanity compels me to believe that none of the officers thought, "Nuts to that little girl, I'm just going to pull this trigger until it stops throwing lead!" I also think that it is unreasonable to expect a 100% success rate from anybody in these situations. Does anyone here believe that the net number of violent tragedies would be reduced if the LAPD said, "You're right, guys. We suck at this. You take care of it from now on."

It's a rotten situation, and a rotten outcome. Nobody in the whole world feels good about this.

[LawDog]

90 shots by eleven officers during three seperate episodes over a several hour period.

Since the critter was holding a child as a shield, I'm going to guess that most -- or all -- of the 90 shots were taken by officers trying to hit the critter, but miss the child.

To simplify: We have a critter juking and jiving in and out of buildings, and around cover.
Said critter is holding a child in front of his COM, so the officers are trying to take head shots.
While the critter is shooting at - and hitting - the officers.
Each and every sight picture each officer obtains includes the screaming child.

Goodness. Moving headshot ain't easy. Moving headshot while receiving fire is that much harder. Now add in the subconscious inclination not to point a gun anywhere near a child, and I'm damned impressed that the officers hit the SOB in 90 shots.

LawDog

[Joejojoba111]

I don't understand, was the kid found dead sitting inside a building, or was the man carrying her when he ran out shooting at the officers???

And I can understand and respect the opinions that disagree, but in the same note I'm still going to respectfully disagree that it should ever, ever ever, be considered to fire when a child is in or near the bullet path.

Well, maybe 100 or 1000 people, that might be a fair trade 'never ever' is a little strong. If shooting would save a thousand people I could see it being justified. And since I find I'm actually flexible here, I'll assume that under duress I'd be flexible down to hundreds or even dozens of people saved. But that's absolute rock-bottom.

And to be fair, no policy maker will ever write down a formula showing how many lives must be saved to justify risking a toddler, so the police were working perhaps without firm guidance.

[Cosmoline]

Lawdog--taking headshots with handguns at a moving suspect holding a child is #$%! INSANE. I'd venture to say only the best pistol shooters would be able to make such a hit. This does not mean the LAPD are great for trying such a stunt. It means they are irresponsible morons. If you don't have a reasonable chance of actually hitting the guy, and he's HOLDING A BABY(!!) YOU DO NOT TAKE THE SHOT!

I don't hate LEO's, but I've never heard anything good about the LAPD. In fact, everyone I know who's had the unfortunate experience of actually living in that hell on Earth has agreed that they are robocops at best and armed nutjobs at worse. They regard themselves as soldiers in a war--and this is just the latest in a long, long string of episodes that show us where that attitude leads.

[LawDog]

Oh, codswallop.

LawDog

[centac]

"They regard themselves as soldiers in a war--"

Spenard's a long way from Central and Rampart :rolleyes:

Getting confronted but a nut using a baby as a human shield'll make ya think that......

[Cosmoline]

LA isn't Spenard, either. This is a wild and crazy place in its own right, with plenty of DV related standoffs. There were several just over the past few months in Anchorage, including one where a man in Turnagain fired at cops. Oddly, our cops have shown a reluctance to spray rounds at men using women and children as human shields. Or even into homes where they simply don't know what's behind the window or wall.

[Hawkmoon]

Goodness. Moving headshot ain't easy. Moving headshot while receiving fire is that much harder. Now add in the subconscious inclination not to point a gun anywhere near a child, and I'm damned impressed that the officers hit the SOB in 90 shots.
Good point.

I suspect it's a lot easier when the bad guy and the hostage are both printed on a sheet of paper hung at 25 yards down range, and not moving around.

[Jim Diver]

Let's also remember that LA LEO also had another spray and pray shoot out about 2 months ago. Over 120 rounds fired, hit the unarmed suspect 4 times and another cop once.

Who ever trains LA LEO should be fired and new trainers brought in... and officers disarmed till then get trained and learn how to put hits on target.

This is totaly unacceptable behavior from LEO.

[Joejojoba111]

I understand, but the more I think about it, self-preservation is a hard instinct to curb.

It should have been curbed,

but maybe there's just no wide-scale policy, and now after this maybe there will be. For instance they could work out a model of the severity that an errant bullet would cause to the child, if they're 10 they might have less liklihood of death than one that's 2. Then they could say "OK it's a small to medium sized kid, so we estimate only a 60% chance of death or horrific injury when shot with a hollow-point 9mm, so if the situation happens you should not return fire, only retreat."

[pokey074]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Family (and others) is now bitching that the officers should have waited it out.

Had the officers waited it out and said dirtbag murdered his child, family (and others) would be bitching that the officers didn't do enough.

I have no doubt that all involved feel horrible. Hopefully I never have to go through anything even close to this.

[ckyllo]

have the police hold fire till the bad guy runs out of ammo. while the bad guy shoots at people left and right. if the dirtbag is willing to use his own child as a shield there is a good chance that he may be saving the last 2 shots, 1 for the kid and 1 for him. how many other people would of been killed if the police hadent engauged the BG? only 1 person is to blame and that is the POS that would put his own kid in that situtation!

[Vernal45]

Coroner: Toddler killed by LAPD bullet
Police say gunman used daughter as shield

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- The 19-month-old toddler who died during a gunfire exchange between police and her father was killed by a single police bullet to the head, the Los Angeles County coroner said Wednesday.

The report said it came from a Los Angeles Police Department officer's rifle.

The girl's father, Jose Raul Pena, died as a result of multiple gunshot wounds, the coroner said.

Pena, 34, was holding his daughter Suzy when he opened fire on police last Sunday, unleashing 40 shots in three separate exchanges. He and his daughter died in a hail of gunfire after he confronted police in an alley behind his apartment.

A total of 11 officers fired nearly 90 shots at Pena.

Chief William Bratton said Monday that Pena "left the officers no choice."

The LAPD's internal investigative unit was looking into the shooting, and its findings will be reviewed by the district attorney's office and the civilian Police Commission.

In a timeline offered by Bratton, the incident began at 2 p.m. when Pena's estranged wife made a domestic terrorist report, accusing him of threatening her, his 17-year-old stepdaughter and the toddler.

At that time, officers could not find him, Bratton said.

About two hours later, the stepdaughter called 911 from Pena's auto dealership to report that he had threatened her, Bratton said.

Before police arrived, a dispatcher called back, and the stepdaughter answered, but the call abruptly ended, Bratton said.

After 4 p.m., shortly after officers arrived, Pena began shooting, using the toddler as a shield, Bratton said.

The 17-year-old stepdaughter escaped, later telling police that Pena was under the influence of cocaine and alcohol and had threatened to kill her, the toddler, his wife and himself, Bratton said.

Though crisis negotiators were able to talk by telephone with Pena at 5 p.m., he ended the call about 5:35 p.m., Bratton said.

At about 6:30 p.m., in the last of the shootings, Pena and the baby were killed.

Sunday's incident was only the second time in the 38-year history of the SWAT team that a hostage died during a standoff involving the unit, Bratton said. In the last incident, in the 1970s, the victim was killed by the hostage-taker, he said.

CNN's Stan Wilson contributed to this story.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/13/to...ting/index.html

[griz]

I'm sorry to hear that. :( I was hoping for the officers sake that they found the BG was the one.

[buzz_knox]

According to the diagram present on TFL (TFL link (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1624535#post1624535), the fatal shots were fired when the perp saw some officers in an alley, fired on them, and then fled into an interior office and officers chased him inside. This may have been a blown takedown operation. Who knows at this point?

Lose/lose situation for all involved. You can't save a hostage without either some rationality on the hostagetaker's part or decisive action by the police. In the absence of the former, the latter is twice as dangerous for all involved.

[HI express]

I would like to hear your opinions. The LAPD was involved in a shooting incident where the father held his baby daughter as a shield and shot at the LAPD, wounding one officer. The police returned fire, killing the man and the baby girl.

Reports showed that he shot over 40 rounds. The same reports showed that the police officers fired over 90 rounds.

That is not the parts that I really wanted your opinions on. These were just the facts.

What I wanted was your opinion on the aftermath where the folks.. whoever they are, are starting protests, the wife blames LAPD for shooting her daughter and husband and she claims she wants justice.

MHO? These protesters watch too many movies where a person with a handgun can shoot and wound at will, much like the old westerns where they shot the handgun out of a BG's hand. I know, combined with the rising heat and not having a real life, a lot of these protesters are getting worked up over a sad result of a man who used his baby as a shield and felt that while he shot at the police officers they would not shoot back.

[El Tejon]

The mother should be prosecuted for Neglect of a Dependent. Protestors should be given lectures on firearms, criminal law, and a talking to about what happens when you behave as the decedent gunman allegedly did.

[Biker]

A horrible situation. Barring a sniper taking a shot, and apparantly one wasn't available, I don't see what else the cops could've done. I suspect that the mother will see a healthy settlement form the city though.
And El, I think that "The Decadent Gunman" would make a great screen name.
Mind if I steal it? :)
Biker

[SIGarmed]

Many of these protesters are plain idiots. They are same ones who think it's ok for a 13 year old to try and run a police officer with no repercussions.

I can gaurantee that these are the same people who leach off of society.

[El Tejon]

*bows with great fanfare* By all means, sir. :D

Of course, it's the "decEdent gunman" (dead dude with gun). :scrutiny: "DecAdent gunman" has a whole other meaning (guy having too much fun with a gun). :D

[simon]

This woman showed NO emotion whatsoever after this happened, besides the obligatory 5 minute wailing ( we all would) then the next day, shes out there with the protestors and talking a civil suit against the LAPD.
SHES A MONEY WHORE!
The child wasn't even cold yet when some greedy shark was whispering $$$ in her ear.
I really don't want to sound callus, I'm not..(she deserves it,the money that is) but she could have waited till after the funeral for this BS!

[Gunsnrovers]

why does she deserve money?

[Biker]

Aw hell, El, now, apparantly, my insomnia has a new friend-dyslexia. That would explain much: Lately, I've been laying in my bed, wide awake for hours, wondering if there really is a Dog.
Biker :)

[CentralTexas]

Kids die every day, sad? Sure.... What are the chances this kid would be a scientist that cured cancer anyway? More than likely he/she would be a "cancer."
Stupid people ask why the cops can't wound someone and stupid police dept politicos kiss ass instead of speking the truth and explaining why it's not usually possible. hat should be followed by some state official saying your life choices prove you are scum and an unfit mother. Followed by the state Bar saying they will sanction any member caught contacting the "victim mommy."
We have decent Americans dying for reasons they don't really know in Iraq -at their own choice. I don't have time to handwring over a dead welfare baby.
Trust me, she will make 10 more....
Man am I cranky or what?
CT

[El Tejon]

Biker, take faith in that there are many with your problem. Dyslexics of THR untie! :D

[migoi]

of the situation is correct the idiot was gunned down while trying to escape a police set perimeter, while firing indiscriminately and using his own child as a shield.

While tragic, the death of the child lies firmly under the responsibility of the idiot. My hope is the policemen that were in a position to possibly be the one firing the shot that killed the child are given the help, counseling, and support needed to understand the idiot killed his own child.

From my understanding of the situation it devolves to a simple math problem much like that faced by military pilots on a September day 4 years ago. If the police had held their fire and let him escape the possibility of many innocents being killed was very high (it was reported that he was shooting indiscriminately at various times and aimed fire at others). It was one of those tough decisions that no individual should be forced to make but seem to be having to be made at an alarming rate.

I would hope that the first judge that runs across this lawsuit rules the mother is perfectly free to sue the estate of her late husband for any damages she perceives she is owed due to the death of her child (whatever there is left after the police officers get a share for the mental pain and anguish the idiot's actions caused them).

migoi

[armedcitizen]

Questioning the police actions and response in this situation is not out of line. A child is dead, through no fault of her own. Where were the vaunted snipers of the LA Swat team? Valid question in my book.

[Ian]

If I'm ever in a gunfight with cops (note: situation not anticipated), I'll have to remember not to use someone I like as a human shield... :uhoh:

[OF]

Are we sure about these 'facts'? Was he actually holding the child while he was assaulting the police perimeter? Did he assault the perimeter? Coroner says the child was killed by a single LAPD rifle shot to the head. Some reports say things like "you're not going to stand there while someone is shooting at you", but the clip below says the SWAT team went into the building after him...

KCAL9 (http://kcal9.com/localnews/localnewsla_story_192110930.html) Sunday night's killing followed a three-hour standoff in which Jose Raul Pena, 34, exchanged gunfire with police three separate times. Police initially identified Pena by the last name Lemos.

Police responded shortly before 4 p.m. and saw Pena outside an auto repair store and car wash business in South Los Angeles holding his little daughter, Susie Lopez, in his arms. He fired at officers with a 9 mm handgun and ran inside the building, Bratton said. Police returned gunfire.

Bratton said police were able to call Pena inside the building and tried to get him to release his child. Officers also managed to rescue Pena's 17-year-old stepdaughter who was pinned down by Pena's gunfire. Pena again stepped out of the building and shot at officers, who fired back, police said. Pena ran back inside the building. Police were uncertain if the stepdaughter was targeted by Pena.

Around 6:30 p.m., Pena exited the rear of the building where a SWAT unit was setting up. Police said Pena reached for his weapon, officers opened fire and the man ran back inside while shooting at them.

SWAT officers followed him into the building and it was believed that the exchange of gunfire killed Pena while he held his daughter. Officer Daniel Sanchez, a 15-year veteran, was shot in the shoulder. He was treated and released from a hospital Monday.
Where did the rifle shot come from? Newer reports say it was from an LAPD sharpshooter...who I assume was not in the building with the SWAT team...if they ever went in at all.

Bottom line for me so far is that nothing seems to add up into one coherent understanding of where anyone was when or when the child was killed. Media reports seem to make it sound like the guy was shielding himself with her, at least part of the time, but not everything jibes with that.

[AK-74me]

You know I hate to do this because I know a child is dead but, LAPD has responded to 4200 of these type of baracade situations in 40 yrs. and this is only the second hostage that has died. Those are pretty good stats if you ask me. I did hear today on the radio that they determine it was a rifle round that killed her, so it does appear someone was trying to take just him out.

[Standing Wolf]

They should protest the government's indifference to illegal aliens instead.

If you don't want your babies killed, don't leave them in control of criminals.

[jcoiii]

Did SWAT go in, or did he come out? I've read both reports. The rifle could have been used in either case, but just wondering.

This woman is in a win-win situation. If LAPD sits and waits and the SOB kills the baby and himself, she still sues and gets millions. Sue the "insertyourexpletivehere" that is responsible, not the people trying to saver the baby! Of course, I'm sure he has lots of money :cuss:

[Hawkmoon]

I really don't want to sound callus, I'm not..(she deserves it,the money that is) but she could have waited till after the funeral for this BS!
Please explain to me how and why this woman deserves a penny.

The fault/responsibility for the entire episode lies with her idiot husband. If she has any claim against anyone, it's against his estate. And, yes, I understand completely that she IS his estate.

Case closed.

[HI express]

GRD,
These were the "facts" as reported 6:30 a.m. this morning on Channel 5 and Channel 4 News. (On my earlier post).

So, you probably heard a more detailed report. (After 6:30 a.m., right?)
I am waiting to hear the "facts" as laid out in detail showing the sequence of events with the corresponding time frames..it would be great if they showed the positions of the officers who fired their weapons. Then we all can make better conclusions from the facts at hand.

So, as I laid it out, those are the "facts" in its simplest form. Doesn't mean it makes sense, but a lot of the news doesn't, does it?

[Joejojoba111]

Just saw an associated press article (without an author?) that said it was a single rifle bullet in the head that killed the kid.

There's no guarantee it's correct, it is the news media after all.

[OF]

I hear ya. I'd love to see something official that lays out the whole scene...until then I guess we should keep "facts" in quotes. ;)

[Hkmp5sd]

The "protesters" don't care about a dead baby any more than they care about about the Pope not liking Harry Potter. It is an excuse for them to act like a bunch of animals and go wild with little or no expectation of being arrested.

[Hardtarget]

I don't know about you,but...if I lived in L.A. I'd be looking for signs of a week similar to the Rodney King situation. Maybe condition "Bright Orange" would be about right.
Mark.

[peacefuljeffrey]

why does she deserve money?

Yeah, Simon, why does she deserve the money?

Why should a third party be compensated by the cops when the actions of the first party precipitated and necessitated the life-ending actions of the second party?

She isn't entitled to SQUAT. People die all the time -- sometimes adults, sometimes children. Whether someone should be compensated for the death of a loved one depends entirely on whether those who ended that loved one's life were WRONG, and in this case, they WERE NOT WRONG. The poor little girl was just caught up in a very horrible situation and the police were not able to neutralize the threat her father posed while still safeguarding her life. It's tragic, but that's life.

Other than that, do you really think that every life should now be assigned a dollar value, and when the life is prematurely ended, that value should be bequeathed upon the survivors by the State, or the Police Department?
Every time? JUST because it was a non-natural death?


-Jeffrey

[peacefuljeffrey]

Questioning the police actions and response in this situation is not out of line. A child is dead, through no fault of her own. Where were the vaunted snipers of the LA Swat team? Valid question in my book.

Are you positioning yourself to be saying that a sniper should have and would have been expected to make a surgical strike at a vital part of a man holding a child as he runs around out of doors? Is it valid to expect this would be easily accomplished? Isn't that the trap that was mentioned before, that of expecting the good guys to shoot the guns out of the hands of the bad guys?

It really is a shame, that in real life, people are trying to hold the police or ANYONE accountable for movie-level unreality in their actions and abilities.

-Jeffrey

[Elmer]

Let's also remember that LA LEO also had another spray and pray shoot out about 2 months ago. Over 120 rounds fired, hit the unarmed suspect 4 times and another cop once.

Completely different agency, (LA Sheriff's), but nice try.



Sunday's incident was only the second time in the 38-year history of the SWAT team that a hostage died during a standoff involving the unit, Bratton said. In the last incident, in the 1970s, the victim was killed by the hostage-taker, he said.



This, in a city with daily SWAT callouts. Thousands and thousands of lives saved. But some make it sound like they're the keystone cops.

Those who run towards the gunfire, always seem to be judged harshly by those who would most likely run away from it.

[Preacherman]

I have a thought about this. As we all know, on an AR15-style rifle, the usual line of sight (i.e. sight picture) is two to three inches above the line of bore. Is it perhaps possible that an officer at close range, using a sight picture just above the head of the child, forgot that his line of bore would mean that the bullet would hit her instead of his intended target, the felon?

Just a thought... but a sad one. :(

[33-805]

The mother is definitely entitled. She is entitled to be charged with the California statute pertaining to recklessly endangering her child's life. Then she is entitled to an appropriate cell for a suitable length of time. Do I think there's a chance in h@%% she'll get what she really reserves? No. She'll get the big wad of cash she was whining for before her child was even cold.

[Biker]

Ya know, in all fairness, if the cops fired 40 plus rounds at the BG, hitting the child only once considering the proximity of the intended target seems to be fair shooting.
Biker