[2dogs]

http://www.registerguard.com/news/2003/02/01/1a.SWATshooting.0201.html

Autopsy shows suspect was shot 25 to 31 times
By REBECCA NOLAN
The Register-Guard



CRESWELL - A man who shot at police and said he wanted to die during an eight-hour confrontation at his Creswell trailer was shot at least 25 times when he stepped outside with a gun in his hand and refused to drop it.

Dr. Edward Wilson, assistant Lane County medical examiner, on Friday released results from the autopsy of Guy Einer McClure, 35, shot by nine Metro Area SWAT officers Jan. 18 following the overnight standoff.

Wilson said at least 25 and as many as 31 bullets hit and wounded McClure when the officers fired. The majority of the bullets struck him in the torso, where police said SWAT officers are trained to aim.

Nine bullets hit his right arm, Wilson said. McClure held a .44-caliber handgun in that hand, police said.

"I am disgusted," McClure's mother, Kathy McClure of Eugene, said Friday. "If they had just left him alone, this wouldn't have happened. He wasn't shooting at them until they put the tear gas in."

Police said the autopsy findings proved SWAT officers acted with discretion considering the danger posed to themselves and other residents of the Creswell Court trailer and mobile home park.

McClure called a neighbor Jan. 17 and said his fiancee had shot him in the face with a .44 Magnum. The 37-year-old woman escaped with a bullet wound to her hand.

The neighbor called police at 8:27 p.m. and deputies soon surrounded the trailer. The SWAT team arrived 3 1/2 hours later.

Deputies tried to drive him out with tear gas, and negotiators and dispatchers urged him to come outside unarmed. But McClure, who was drinking whiskey throughout the night, refused to come out. He told dispatchers that he was bleeding to death, that he wanted to die and that he would shoot anyone who tried to make him leave.

When he finally did exit shortly before 4 a.m., he held the .44 in his right hand with his finger on the trigger, police said. Officers repeatedly ordered him to drop the weapon.

They shot him when he walked within 10 feet of officers despite orders to stop, police said. About three seconds passed from the moment McClure stepped out of the trailer to the moment he fell to the ground, Eugene police Sgt. Scott McKee said.

Eight of the nine SWAT officers who shot at McClure were armed with fully automatic weapons designed to fire two or three bullets each time the trigger is pulled, McKee said. In three to five seconds, the weapons can unload their entire 30-round magazine, he said.

"When you put that into perspective, you understand that number of rounds is not unusual when you have that many shooters," said McKee, who served on the SWAT team for 5 1/2 years and now heads the department's violent crimes unit.

"I think it's indicative of shooter discretion, because the weapons are capable of firing so much more," he said. "An untrained officer or untrained individual may just squeeze the trigger and spray bullets until they're out of ammunition."

The Lane County district attorney has called the shooting justifiable. Eugene police and the Lane County sheriff's office are conducting internal investigations into the officers' conduct. Six of the nine shooters are Eugene officers and three are with the sheriff's office.

The sheriff also is conducting a criminal investigation into the shooting and has not revealed the total number of bullets fired by officers or by McClure. Investigators also have not revealed whose bullets pierced several neighboring trailers and a mobile home.

Kathy McClure said she believes her son was blinded by tear gas when he stepped out of the trailer that night and he wasn't wearing his glasses. "I know when he stepped out he couldn't see those officers," she said. "He didn't have his glasses on and he can't see a thing without them."

She said alcoholism, financial problems and the lasting effects of a bitter divorce had driven the man into a deep depression.

A test performed after McClure's death found he had a blood-alcohol level of 0.26 percent, more than three times the legal limit for drunken driving, said Wilson, the assistant medical examiner. Tests for other drugs came back negative.

No police bullets hit McClure in the head, although he had been shot in the face during the earlier domestic dispute, Wilson said. That wound was not life-threatening. Each of his arms and legs was hit, and bullets punctured both lungs, his heart, his liver, his aorta and his intestines.

State law allows all sworn officers to use deadly force when their lives or the lives of others are in imminent danger. In this case, nine individual officers evaluated the threat and concluded that the only way to stop McClure was to shoot, McKee said. Because of the unpredictability of barricaded suspects, no one officer or team of officers was designated the shooter, he said.

All of the Eugene officers involved have returned to work, McKee said. Some of them have struggled in the aftermath of the shooting and have sought counseling. "Just because we are police officers does not mean we are hardened to the point that the use of deadly force doesn't impact us," McKee said. "It's an emotional situation. They're all human beings."

Kathy McClure said police have never contacted her to give their condolences for her son's death. She expressed disdain for media depictions of suffering officers. "When they sign up for that job, they know what it is," she said. "They know they can kill someone."

[Art Eatman]

What I have never understood about these myriad events--and in the last 40 years, I've read of enough of them to use the word "myriad"--is the reasoning behind the ultimatum.

That is, the guy is not actively threatening anybody. He is alone and inside the dwelling. Drunk, stupid, messed-up, yeah. But no hostage, no waving guns around and endangering the public. Apparently suicidal.

It strikes me as less than rational on the part of The Establishment to demand a rational action from an irrational person. Why should the sober people bossing the law-enforcement establishment be equally irrational as a drunk? To me, it just does not compute. I fail to see the need for immediacy, the "Do it now!" aspect.

The folks outside know from the galfriend that he's alone and drinking. They know that at some point he's gonna do one or more of several things: Bleed to death. Or, get drunker and pass out and later wake up with a heckuva hangover. In either case, waiting would serve the community just fine.

"Obey us NOW!" gets us too many dead folks. The fact that they might be in the shallow end of the gene pool is irrelevant...

Note: I don't have this attitude for somebody who's obviously a threat. IMO, those are often given too much leeway.

Art

[Joe Demko]

"When they sign up for that job, they know what it is," she said. "They know they can kill someone."

She's right about that.

[Double Naught Spy]

What they aren't telling us is that the fired more than 125 rounds to get their 25-31 hits!!!!

Okay, so I don't have the foggiest idea how many rounds they fired. I'm just working the percentages.

[Coronach]

Art, the problems are this:

1. While waiting for Mr. Drunkenwounded to either pass out or die, you have a colossal amount of manpower tied up guarding his trailer. We did a similar outing with SWAT one day (with no one being shot, I will add), and it literally tied up 3 whole precincts for 6 hours. We were running a 45-minute lag in response time to priority calls. As in, you call in a burglary...someone is in my house!...and we might get there inside half an hour. Thats...bad. And this is a major metropolitan department. I'm not sure where this shooting took place, but unless thay have a uniformed force of thousands, it will impact them even worse that our situation did us. Ths places the public at an utterly unacceptable level of risk.

2. While waiting for Mr. Drunkenwounded to either pass out or die, you are also removing how many other people from their residences? How would you like it if the police cordoned off your street and refused to let you back in to your house, while waiting patiently for this to be resolved? I'm not stating that such considerations should be allowed to precipitate a shooting, but I am stating that its not like this is going on in a vaccuum.

You want him to come out peacefully. Absent that (and they gave him HOURS), you want to force him out under your terms and hopefully force a surrender...and not have him come put under his terms, at his time, with his plan, guns blazing. This is not just for the protection of the officers, but also for the protection of innocents who are always too close at hand.

NOTE: I don't run a SWAT team, and I'm not a negotiatior. I just watch from the outer perimeter.

Mike

[Citadel99]

Eight of the nine SWAT officers who shot at McClure were armed with fully automatic weapons designed to fire two or three bullets each time the trigger is pulled, McKee said. In three to five seconds, the weapons can unload their entire 30-round magazine, he said.

A fully automatic weapon that only fires three to five rounds at a time? Sounds like select fire and not full auto to me. Also sounds like an author who is ignorant of the workings of the weapons upon which he's reporting. Maybe too the guy's got a penchant for sensationalism...

Mark

[Blackhawk]

Kathy McClure said police have never contacted her to give their condolences for her son's death.Suicide by cop while drunk.

Art's right. A lot of situations don't need to be immediately resolved.

[DeltaElite]

Yah, this guy is a huge loss to the gene pool. :rolleyes:

Are you people serious in saying that the police didn't need to resolve a shooting incident?
If they let him bleed to death, then his family would sue for not having taken action to rescue him.
The person who drove this to a lethal force situation was the drunk, not the cops.
BTW, suicide by cop is the ultimate gutless act, have the guts to kill yourself, don't make others do it for you.

I know it's sport to find fault in the actions of Le, but this one was a no win situation.
Especially for the stupid drunk with the gun.

[Mike Irwin]

"They shot him when he walked within 10 feet of officers despite orders to stop, police said. About three seconds
passed from the moment McClure stepped out of the trailer to the moment he fell to the ground, Eugene police
Sgt. Scott McKee said."

Huh?

THREE seconds to get from the trailer door to within 10 feet of the police line, which was probably a pullback perimeter 50 feet or more from the front door?

Anyone else see a timing problem here?

[jmbg29]

That is, the guy is not actively threatening anybody. He is alone and inside the dwelling. Drunk, stupid, messed-up, yeah. But no hostage, no waving guns around and endangering the public. Apparently suicidal.I would agree that if a person is home "Drunk, stupid, messed-up, etc." That it is that person's own business, and they should be left alone.

Unfortunately:McClure called a neighbor Jan. 17 and said his fiancee had shot him in the face with a .44 Magnum. The 37-year-old woman escaped with a bullet wound to her hand.That got the cops involved when the neigbor called them up. In that case, everything that Coronach mentioned kicks in.

If Mr. McClure was the victim, then he need only come outside unarmed, and receive medical treatment. If he is too drunk to do that, well, that's his problem. I have no more sympathy for him at that point then I would have for a drunk driver. He said he had been shot. Fine, come on out and get help. While you're outside Mr. Drunkanstupid, explain how your fiance ended up with a bullet wound in her hand. Happened while struggling to get the gun away from her? Fine. Here's a bandage for your face.

Absent that scenario, we are left with someone that is endangering the public by virtue of the fact that he called someone else and said that he had been shot, and yet the shooter that he alleges, is the one that turns up shot. Come on out (without the damn gun) and explain what happened!

Excessive alcholol can and does cause one to lose control. Everyone, even small children, knows that. Anything that a person does after having lost that control, is on them. Plain and simple.

Remember kids, if you are too :cuss: up to know what "Drop the gun means" then you might not like what happens next.

Drunks cost this country billions of dollars every year. Their contribution to society is a drop in the bucket by comparison. Drunks that keep to themselves, I have no problem with. Drunks that drag the rest of us into their BS because they decided to get wrecked and drag the rest of us into their little soap opera OTOH get what they deserve all too rarely.

[Hkmp5sd]

Why is it everyone always focuses on the number of bullets the killed the BG. Dead is dead, whether 1 or 50.

fully automatic weapons designed to fire two or three bullets each time the trigger is pulled,

Probably a 2 or 3 round burst position. ATF considers anything shooting more than 1 round per trigger pull to be full-auto.

You have 9 cops with a total of about 31 hits. That's right at 3 hits per cop. I see no problem with that, especially considering that 8 of the weapons fired were select fire. You shoot until the threat is removed, so by the time the guy started falling and everyone could cease fire, 31 hits is not unrealistic.

[Coronach]

Anyone else see a timing problem here?Yet another example of why I think it is futile to engage in after-action-review-by-news-report. I know its not very satisfying to constantly say "gee...I dunno." But when you get right down to it, gee...you dunno.

Mike

[DeltaElite]

The autopsy also shows that he was really drunk and his actions showed that he was really stupid.
Now he is really dead.
I hope he didn't procreate. :evil:

[Sir Galahad]

Hold the phone here! The guy SHOOTS at the police and they shouldn't shoot him?! I thought the purpose of police was to protect the community at large. They can't very well protect the community if they just say, "Oh well, he's drunk and waving a gun around and shot at us, but we'll just leave him alone and hope he doesn't hurt anyone." I think the police did an outstanding job and the dead drunk should get a Darwin Award.

[Citadel99]

Maybe everyone here didn't read the article through. This joker shot his girlfriend. Now tell me again why the cops should not have been involved in this scene. The mom says "if they would have left him alone none of this would have happened." WRONG--if he hadn't shot his girlfriend, he'd most likely still be alive.

Mark

[Double Naught Spy]

Hkmp5sd, NO DOUBT! Far too many times I have seen the family members or friends of some dead dope fiend on TV talking about how the cops acted wrong in shooting the fiend X number of times and how it was "over kill" as if there is actually such a thing as "over kill." You have kill or no kill, but as you noted, dead is dead and so killed is killed. At worst, it would be descecretion of a corpse that would be the point reached after "killed" or "dead."

Gosh you have to agree with the mother on this, don't you. The guy is reported to have shot his girlfiend in the hand, she calls the police, and his mother blames the police for shooting in tear gas to cause her son to extract himself from the trailer. He didn't need to bring the gun with him, did he? Nope. He did, threatened the cops, and was shot while advancing on them and not following their commands. From the article, I don't have a problem with the cops actions.

As for as the comment that they know they can kill someone when they sign up for the job, the mother has no room to be talking as her so apparently tried killing his girlfriend and threatened cops. Oh sure, they are blood thirsty (sarcasm).

[Joe Gunns]

Problem is that drinking makes otherwise honest, upstanding gun owners irrational and unable to respond to reason so they end up endangering themselves and others and causing trauma to kind and gentle police officers who are forced to shoot them to protect society and themselves . Obviously, we need to reinstate Prohibition! ;)

[Ryder]

She shot him in the face. Her wound may have been self inflicted or as a result of him removing the gun from her grasp? It does not say how or why she was wounded.

The police initiated the aggression by firing tear gas. He may have fired into the floor to back them off? I'd be interested to hear what his target was during this "shooting at police".

I think you are going to know when somebody wants to kill you or not. I doubt they would have given 3 seconds if they thought he had that intention. Looks like he was killed for not obeying orders.

Guess all of their tasers were on the charger that day? :rolleyes:

[DeltaElite]

Yah, a Taser against a 44 Magnum. :rolleyes:

Maybe you should volunteer to fill that role for your local SWAT team. :neener:

I just love the 20/20 hindsight from the peanut gallery. :neener:

[Citadel99]

I doubt they would have given 3 seconds if they thought he had that intention. Looks like he was killed for not obeying orders.

When you have an entire SWAT team with a bead on you--you do what they say to the letter. Get a lawyer and protest later. Common sense dictates that you don't do anything stupid with a platoon of weapons trained on you (especially if you've shot in their direction earlier).

Mark

[Art Eatman]

Once the guy comes out waving his pistol, all bets are off, so far as I'm concerned. Once that happens, I'm totally on the officers' side. But that's not at all what concerns me.

Again, to me it's the idea of the immediacy of compliance. I'm not sure why so many regular-patrol police are needed. (Although it might well be to protect the public from itself. On Charley Whitman day, people came from far away to watch. Several of them got shot.)

I can see calling the SWAT team in, and setting up the perimeter. I just have difficulty with the time-pressure and then the tear gas. I know that sitting around, just waiting, for another few hours is a PITA, but somehow it seems better than forcing action "right now".

Were I a neighbor and were told the reason I was being discommoded was to try to get the guy out alive, I think I'd be cooperative. Or should I get POed because I'd miss The Simpsons?

Art

[DeltaElite]

Art,
All kidding aside, I do understand your concerns.
They were there 7.5 hours before he came out and he came out armed.
They waited him out for along time, it seems obvious that he wasn't coming out except by coercion or force.
His BAC was .26, this my friends was no social drinker, he was a full blown alcoholic.

I saw an officer on my dept pull the same crap as this guy did, but he did it in a 30 minute time frame and took two rounds center mass from a MP5. No, I didn't pull the trigger, but I would have if I had needed to.
He lived only to be convicted for shooting at his fellow officers with his dept issue weapon.
I have no sympathy for him, or for this dolt.
Alcoholism is a disease, but so is stupidity, this guy and my former colleague were guilty of both.

[Drizzt]

"When they sign up for that job, they know what it is," she said. "They know they can kill someone."

Same could be said for the military, but does she think that's a dishonorable job as well?

Could things have been done differently? Probably, but I gotta think that my opinion is that the LE were the good guys in this one...

[Joe Demko]

All of the Eugene officers involved have returned to work, McKee said. Some of them have struggled in the aftermath of the shooting and have sought counseling. "Just because we are police officers does not mean we are hardened to the point that the use of deadly force doesn't impact us," McKee said. "It's an emotional situation. They're all human beings."

I believe this is what the mother was referring to, rather than police work being a dishonorable job. She was still right. I don't feel bad for the cops. Theydid know the possibility existed they might kill someone when they signed up, especially after going the extra lengths to join a SWAT outfit.

[Coronach]

Again, to me it's the idea of the immediacy of compliance. I'm not sure why so many regular-patrol police are needed. (Although it might well be to protect the public from itself. On Charley Whitman day, people came from far away to watch. Several of them got shot.)Bingo. While SWAT is watching the trailer, there will be a 3-4 times as many uniforms watching the perimeter, mostly to make sure that people don't cross the tape line and get nailed. Possibly more, depending on the layout and how cooperative the crowd is.I can see calling the SWAT team in, and setting up the perimeter. I just have difficulty with the time-pressure and then the tear gas. I know that sitting around, just waiting, for another few hours is a PITA, but somehow it seems better than forcing action "right now".At some point, for a number of reasons (and not being a SWAT team commander or a negotiator, I have no idea what that point is) you simply have to pull the plug and do something. This is because...

1. You have a massive number of your assests tied up here, rather than out taking dispatched runs and calls for service. Yes, I know that Matt G's Theft-from-motor-vehicle report can wait. But Oleg Volk's burglary in progress can't. Especially because Oleg is sure as heck gonna bushwack that poor burglar.

2. The people in the neighborhood have to be able to go home.Were I a neighbor and were told the reason I was being discommoded was to try to get the guy out alive, I think I'd be cooperative. Or should I get POed because I'd miss The Simpsons?Art, would that every person at a scene like this was you. They aren't. And you know what? They have a point, too. They have lives to get on with, and while they might not express it in the most helpful manner, or get frustrated a little sonner than I or SWAT might like, they should be not denied access to their property any longer than necessary.

Ideally, with unlimited resources and a remote location, you wait it out...in the real world, you have to end it eventually.

Mike

PS note that there is an entire field of expertise in resolving these situations. I'm not one of them thar experts.

[Lord Grey Boots]

Thing to remember, when there is a lot of cops pointing guns a suspect, and the suspect forces them to shoot, a lot of cops are ALL going to shoot until the suspect is no longer a threat.

I.e lots of duplication of effort.

The Vancouver City police had a similar situation about 15 years ago, while they still had revolvers.

The suspect came out with a gun up well before the ERT team arrived, the 8 or 10 uniformed officers all emptied their revolvers into the idiot.

Yup, was shot a lot.

[Art Eatman]

Well, 7-1/2 hours is probably long enough, I guess, so tear gas then could seem appropriate.

And, like I say, anybody waving a gun around and not obeying a command to behave is pretty much begging for Bad Things. That part of the deal doesn't bother me at all.

As far as the length of time that folks could be discommoded from daily life: Had it not been for three brave men and fire from the ground, Charles Whitman could have controlled the environs around the UT tower for as long as his water held out. And he had five gallons. Tens of thousands of people, for close to a week?

Art

[P12]

But Oleg Volk's burglary in progress can't. Oh, it could wait. It would be over before they called the cops.:cool:

Self-reliant people are so cool!

[jmbg29]

She shot him in the face.Actually, he told the neighbor that she shot him in the face. That doesn't make it so, nor does it make it not so.

If he wasn't an :cuss:hole drunk, he could have told the police what happened instead of just the neighbor.

As it stands, he's dead. His fault, nobody else's.:fire: :fire: :fire:

[Robby from Long Island]

Regardless of the circumstances beforehand, anybody that comes out of the their home with a weapon in their hand while the police are present, refuses their order to drop the weapon is just begging to be shot. It's that simple.

[Ryder]

Yah, a Taser against a 44 Magnum.

The taser comment was sarcasm. Takes a certain amount of imagination to understand that. Try re-reading my post.

I imagine there are other non-lethal options available which would be more appropriate for the situation.

[DeltaElite]

Ryder,
I read your post, after saying that "the police initiated the aggression by firing tear gas" and "looks like they killed him for not obeying orders", I have a hard time finding sarcasm in your post.
I only see the comments of someone who is totally ignorant to what we do and why we do it and is taking a chance to trash the actions of the people involved.
If I am wrong, then I apologize, but your quotes certainly don't show me that you meant anything other than malice with your comments.

He was shot for being a lethal force threat to the officers and community, not for not obeying orders. :rolleyes:

As for non-lethal means, nope.
I bring a gun to a gun fight, not a taser, bean bag gun, etc.

BTW, I "imagine" you will try to justify your other comments too.
How's that for imagination. ;)

[jmbg29]

I imagine there are other non-lethal options available which would be more appropriate for the situation.Emphasis added for obvious sarcastic reasons.:rolleyes: :scrutiny:

[Coronach]

Gentlemen, play nice. ;) Lets all ease up on the sarcasm.

That said,

Ryder, you are incorrect. Once the situation is officers v. suspect with gun in a confrontation, it is lethal force time. There are very few such situations in which deploying less-lethal weapons would be prudent.

Now, questioning whether it is appropriate to force the issue to a head, as they did, is less cut and dried. Still, it sounds like they handled it properly, IMO.

Mike

[Ryder]

SWAT is Special Weapons And Tactics. "Tactics" implies intelligent solutions. I just don't see anything "special" about tear gas and bullets. Guess I know otherwise now. Thanks for the clarifications.

It wasn't that big of a deal to me. This guy stated he wanted to die, he got his wish, no problem.

:D

[mrat]

I imagine there are other non-lethal options available which would be more appropriate for the situation.

Actually no. Non lethal options are not considered in a gunfight.

SWAT is Special Weapons And Tactics. "Tactics" implies intelligent solutions.

In this situation the intelligent solution was shooting the guy with the gun.

No one, police or citizen, should ever attempt to use non lethal options or intelligent solutions when faced with a subject with a firearm whose actions show intent on doing harm to another human being.

[igor]

There are always resources to be had if there is will to organize. Balancing the tied up resources and annoyance to the neighborhood to a human (well, relatively) life is a rather revealing exercise in societal values, IMHO.

[cordex]

A word from the Master on this:
Stupidity cannot be cured with money, or through education, or by legislation. Stupidity is not a sin, the victim can't help being stupid. But stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence is death, there is no appeal and execution is carried out automatically and without pity.
*shrug*
If the drunk wanted left alone and to bleed to death, he shouldn't have called the coppers. Was properly equipped to bring the situation to whichever resolution he wanted, either through putting another round into himself or walking out unarmed.

I don't condone trigger-happy cops shooting at imaginary threats, but I don't think this qualifies.

[Delmar]

"When they sign up for that job, they know what it is," she said. "They know they can kill someone."

Dear Self Righteous Old Bag mother of idiot,
Where were you for 7.5 hours when your drunken, wounded son was alive and needing help? :rolleyes:

There must be a shortage of C-clamps at the local hardware store, because that fool sure needs one for a hat.