Road Rage:Federal Agent Killed at Broward County FL,Post Office

[Drgong]

In all seriousness, even a armed, raving mad federal agent who is holding a gun in one hand, and threatening the virginity of your nephew (to add a mall ninja reference) and saying he going to kill you, with three witnesses, and you shoot him.

You would still have a hard time convincing a jury that the federal agent was wrong. Not fair but that's life.

as for this case, I won't make comment till we know more, but this guy is not in a good place right now.

 

[lysander]

According to ALL accounts of the story, he was UNARMED when shot. According to the police, he was shot in the BACK of the head after a heated argument.

This may be true, however...self defense claims usually turn on reasonableness. If he was shot in the back of the head (entry wound in back, exit wound out front) it is likely, as previously mentioned, that he spun as soon as the gun came into play. In fact, there is a group of experts who testify to this sort of thing, and they do so in the defense of police officers who are accused of bad shoots.

http://www.forcescience.org/articles/shotinback.pdf

It is plausible that the shooter was reasonable in feeling that he was threatened with deadly force. If they make a self defense claim...the jury will figure it out.

Heck, for all we know, the decedent yelled that he was going to get his gun and kill the shooter. We just don't know...

 

[Jeff White]

This presence of mind has him lying in the morgue as we speak.

There is no guarantee that the outcome would have been any different. There mere possession of his weapon is meaningless unless he saw the attack coming in time to use it. The two Navy Colts in his belt didn't save Bill Hickcock in Deadwood SD when he was shot in the back of the head. Hickcock was an accomplished gunfighter.

I'd say he's lying in the morgue as we speak because he went back to discuss the suspects driving habits. Having his weapon in the car or on his person probably didn't make any difference if we can believe the reports.

Jeff

 

[Defensory]

Solo Flyer:
This presence of mind has him lying in the morgue as we speak.

What's done is done. He never should've stopped in the first place, and he underestimated the defendant.

Every choice in life is a judgement call. Even IF he had been carrying his gun in a holster, the defendant STILL might've got the drop on him, and the result would've been the same.

So it's unprovable conjecture that he would still be alive if he had been carrying a gun.

 

[Solo Flyer]

He never should've stopped in the first place,

NOW,on this we both agree as I originally stated.Pettit is dead because of a terribly bad decision.
Once he made that awful decision Wonder was there to execute him.
Not exonerating Wonder.But Pettit was the catalyst who made this tragedy occur.
It's Shakespeare,but that never changes.1608 or 2008,the same result.Death.

 

[Solo Flyer]

I'd say he's lying in the morgue as we speak because he went back to discuss the suspects driving habits. Having his weapon in the car or on his person probably didn't make any difference if we can believe the reports.

OK Jeff ,lets believe the reports.
But with the gun he's got a chance.With the gun in the car he's dead meat.
We'll never know ,but with all that experience,a serious road rage argument just occuring are you,Jeff White, going to exit your vehicle sans combat piece?
I wouldn't and I don't think you would either.
But we weren't there, so its all conjecture.

 

[Defensory]

You can believe what you want, lysander.

I'm confident Mr. Wonder is going DOWN for second degree murder.

He'll have a VERY hard time convincing a jury that deadly force was justified in shooting an UNARMED LEO in front of his daughter. The LEO was FIFTY TWO years old, and NOT a physically large or imposing individual.

It's true the LEO escalated the situation, but if Mr. Wonder was "so frightened", why did he get out of his own car and engage in a heated argument?

Why didn't the allegedly "fearful" Mr. Wonder get back in his car, lock the doors and call the cops on his cellphone?

Virtually ANYTHING is "plausible", so that does NOTHING for your argument.

 

[Defensory]

Since the victim was with his daughter, and the fact that LEO's are held to a higher standard when it comes to firearms usage---I don't think he wanted to jump out of his car brandishing a gun, after a traffic altercation where he was exchanging curses and middle fingers with an elderly civilian.

He was probably thinking about retaining his job and career status, and completely underestimated the defendant.

Coulda, shoulda, woulda. Like Jeff and myself both stated previously, even if Pettit had gotten out with his gun, there's no guarantee he'd be alive.

He's dead and there's no changing that. The only question now is what will happen to the defendant, and as Drgong correctly stated earlier, Mr. Wonder is "not in a good place right now."

 

[Solo Flyer]

I don't think he wanted to jump out of his car brandishing a gun,

This is exhausting.We are not talking brandishing.We are talking putting the gun in your holster(which I'm sure Mr. Pettit had,on the belt,shoulder, or pocket)and exiting his vehicle.
Of course the odds are, even doing this ,he'd still be dead.Wonder had the element of surprise.He obviously was in the frame of mind to ambush.
Mr.Pettit was not.
But maybe,maybe, with the gun ,Pettit might have had a small,tiny chance.Comprende amigo?
The old canard the,.22 in the hand is worth more than the .45 back in the drawer.
With the gun in the car there was NO CHANCE.
That is all that I am saying to you and Jeff White.
I agree,he's in the morgue because he turned around and confronted an unstable,out of control citizen.
He's keeps driving ,he's alive and well at this moment.
10-7.

 

[Richbaker]

Been reading this too long....I thought I'd seen that he was 35....sorry 'bout that...he was still stupid to go back and confront the older guy.

 

[Defensory]

This is "exhausting" for you, Solo, because you wish to keep arguing about irrelevancies that prove nothing. Coulda, shoulda, woulda.

If he had kept driving he MIGHT still be alive. If he had carried his gun he MIGHT still be alive. If he hadn't left his house to drive down that street with his daughter, he MIGHT still be alive.

It's irrelevant to conjecture that he MIGHT still be alive. Whether there's a "small, tiny chance" that his firearm MIGHT have made a difference, is irrelevant. He's dead, gone, finis.

I managed to "comprende" all that long ago in this thread.

Just how are you "sure" Mr. Pettit was wearing a holster that day? It hasn't been established that he was on duty. After all, he's a POLYGRAPHER, and they don't usually administer lie detector tests to suspects while driving down the road with their daughters in the car. I also would be willing to bet that most polygraphers don't take their daughters to work with them.

Also, many LEO's and civilians own clip-on IWB holsters that allow them to remove the gun AND holster while in the car, for comfort purposes. So it's entirely possible that Mr. Pettit had both gun and holster locked away in his glove compartment, especially since he was with his young daughter, who he certainly wouldn't want accessing his firearm.

Being fifty two years old and apparently having a bit of a temper himself, there's a good chance this wasn't the first time he'd ever engaged in an exchange of vulgarities and middle fingers with people in traffic.

So he has an exchange with Mr. Wonder, who appears to be a harmless old man driving a fairly nice car, coincidentally it was the same make and model as Mr. Pettit's car.

So he's PROBABLY thinking something along the lines of "Old guy in a nice car driving like an idiot, he's not any kind of threat---I think I'll stop and give him a piece of my mind, especially since he flipped me off with my kid in the car."

Alas, Mr. Wonder turned out to be an emotionally unstable individual with a gun. End of story, at least for Mr. Pettit.

I'd be willing to bet that A LOT of other individuals, both LEO and civilian, would've made the same mistake as Pettit, in underestimating an "old guy in a nice car".

 

[FCFC]

Pettit....Simple.He was just a normal, average human being prone to all the vagaries,disatisfactions,aggravations and grumpiness that beset all of us at any given time.
This time he let it all boil over,didn't control it, and it cost him his life.
It could happen at any given time to any one of us.
We discussed this recently.Controlling ourselves in mind bending traffic situations with complete strangers is one of the hardest things to do.
Most of us are not living in Mayberry,RFD.
Tremendous self control and the fact the our lives might be at stake is the way to handle these combustible situations.
As several members have said on this thread ,disengage at all costs,including "losing" our dignity.

I'm onboard with this line of thinking.

Pettit's job experience doesn't look to be a significant factor in the driving/argument/shooting incident. He was just acting as a regular ole citizen. Like you. Like me.

What's most important is how the driving/argument/shooting incident escalated to the use of deadly force. It looks to me, from the details revealed so far, that both men involved in the incident were very foolish, even stoopid.

Two lives were destroyed for a minute or two of self-righteous rage. Plus a ton of emotional and law enforcement wreckage left behind.

Haste. Road rage. Bad judgment(s). (Un)Lucky shot.

Structurally, not very much different from the Yalanda Parrish case...

One of our members here has posted in another thead the following thesis:

"ANGER/BOUNDARY ISSUES + LACK OF RESPONSIBILITY + CARRIED WEAPON = RISK TO SOCIETY."

I think he's got a good model.

 

[divemedic]

Why does one have to be right and the other wrong? There is plenty of blame to go around.

As a LEO, he should have known how things can escalate. Why would you get in an argument with another driver, and then turn around to follow him into a parking lot so you could get out and yell at him? What kind of example does that set for your child? Wouldn't you think there was a chance things would escalate? Or were you counting on the fact that you were a LEO, and maybe you had a little ego?

The shooter was equally guilty. Why give another driver the high sign? Why shoot him in the back? Why shoot him at all?

We will never know, but as far as I am concerned, they are no different than any other road rage shooters. A pair of hotheads, one should not be a cop and the other should not be a CCW.

Two lives ruined, a little girl had to see her father act like an idiot, and then had to watch him die. the only victim here is the little girl.

 

[FCFC]

as far as I am concerned, they are no different than any other road rage shooters. A pair of hotheads, one should not be a cop and the other should not be a CCW.

Take the gun out of the equation and this thing is a minor skirmish.A few fingers and some F-bombs. Maybe a push and shove. That's all.

With the gun, it ends up with some sickly old dude putting a hole in another man's head and this sickly old dude running off as in instant and incompetent felon with 400+ LEOs and multiple helicopters chasing him down in the biggest manhunt in Florida history.

And that sickly old dude just hurt the gun and carry rights of all law abiding citizens....thanks a bunch, Wonder dude.

 

[Downrange]

Come on, how many questionable LEO shootings are investigated every year? We've had, what, two or three headline cases where CCWs were involved - and in at least two, the aggravating catalyst was an off-duty LEO!
Pride of badge has got to be entering into these cases, imo. But the anti-gun press will blow these extremely few cases into as big an issue as possible to try to take away our hard won rights to carry!
Both were wrong, clearly. These things are going to continue to happen as long as males (nearly always) feel their manhood is threatened by their rolling ego extensions (autos) being "dissed."
Every CCW should have to read "In the Gravest Extreme" by Ayoob, as a minimum requirement.

 

[SSN Vet]

Wonder remains jailed on a charge of first degree murder.

I have no idea how they are getting a first degree (pre-meditated) murder charge out of this.

 

[leadcounsel]

With all due respect for the deceased federal agent, who has YEARS of high level security and defense experience.... what in the heck is he doing in that situation!!?? :banghead: No matter how you spin it, given what I've read, he is at least a significant contributing factor for his own death!

* He was involved in irresponsible road rage and gestures with a child in the car!
* Evidence he was abusing his position as a public official running errands in a public vehicle while on duty, to include CONTINUING THIS ALTERCATION!
* After the shooter removed himself from the original incident by going to the post office, the deceased FOLLOWED HIM AND EXITED HIS CAR TO CONTINUE THE ALTERCATION!

Here's the defendant's side:
* He was involved in a road rage incident
* He was lawfully carrying a handgun for self defense
* He is a disabled man 10-15 years older than the federal agent
* He removed himself from the road rage and was going to the post office (or that's what it sounds like he was doing) when the agent turned around and followed him there, got out of the car, and continued the argument.
* He shot another person (possibly in the back): time will reveal whether this was a lawful shoot or not.
* He fled the scene - HUGE mistake.
* He is also significantly responsible.
* He talked to the police without a lawyer - HUGE mistake.

We have no idea what was said in that altercation in the parking lot. It was likely something that fueled the fire (I doubt that the agent went there to apologize, resulting in the shoot). The agent probably went there to arrest or harass the citizen and when he said he was going to get his gun or arrest him, the defendant pulled and shot.

Was it in self-defense? Time and facts will tell. But this is no slam dunk case. In all honestly, based on these facts, if the defendant hadn't fled the scene I could make a solid case for self defense here.

So, if someone followed you after a road rage incident where you exchanged gestures, and after you parked at the post office they approached you with verbal threats and said he was returning to get his gun from his car to kill you, would you shoot? Is that enough to justify imminent fear of serious bodily harm, or do you have to wait until he actually gets the gun?

These are all very good questions that a good lawyer will dissect.

However, he also made the mistake of talking to the police without a lawyer - something everyone here needs to understand.

 

[ilbob]

The police chief claims that the decedent was shot in the BACK of the head, which flies in the face of a self-defense shooting, if true. But the police chief has a strong interest in painting the accused in a bad light, so that's not particularly believable until an autopsy report is forthcoming.

A fair number of times cops shoot people in the back and claim self defense. Sometimes it is legit, too. A guy that turns quickly while you are firing at him, can easily get hit in the back rather than the front. I would not read anything into where the shot hit the dead guy.

 

[Solo Flyer]

I'd be willing to bet that A LOT of other individuals, both LEO and civilian, would've made the same mistake as Pettit, in underestimating an "old guy in a nice car".

You stayed up late,Defensory winking and blinking ,with plenty of assumptions of your own.
But we seem to agree on one item.Pettit made a mistake.

 

[Destructo6]

This may be true, however...self defense claims usually turn on reasonableness. If he was shot in the back of the head (entry wound in back, exit wound out front) it is likely, as previously mentioned, that he spun as soon as the gun came into play.

Which would make it "not self defense." You can't shoot someone who is not currently presenting a threat and call it self defense.

However, if the shooter reasonably believed that the agent was turning to retrieve his pistol from the car, I would buy self defense. And, that only works if the agent had not identified himself as such.

 

[MakAttak]

Which would make it "not self defense." You can't shoot someone who is not currently presenting a threat and call it self defense.

However, if the shooter reasonably believed that the agent was turning to retrieve his pistol from the car, I would buy self defense. And, that only works if the agent had not identified himself as such.

A person can turn 180 degrees in something like .3 seconds.

The act of pulling a trigger and firing can take .6 seconds.

You can be firing a gun at someone's front side and shoot them in the back because they moved.

This is the point ilbob was making that where you a person is shot is usually (edit: can be) immaterial to a self-defense claim.

 

[ilbob]

And, that only works if the agent had not identified himself as such.

What difference does that make?

 

[FCFC]

This is the point ilbob was making that where you a person is shot is usually immaterial to a self-defense claim.

I think that ilbob made a good point but you're taking it to a new level by concluding that "where ... a person is shot is "usually immaterial"in a shooting, including a SD one.

That's going too far.

 

[MakAttak]

I think that ilbob made a good point but you're taking it to a new level by concluding that "where ... a person is shot is "usually immaterial"in a shooting, including a SD one.

That's going too far.

You are right. I should have said "can be immaterial."

Thank you for the correction.

 

[roo_ster]

It truly did take two to tango, in this case.

JW nailed it: mutual combat.

Either could have avoided this altercation at several stages before the final shot. Neither turned away and one gets killed.

-------------------

If the dead man was not a LEO, I would predict some sort of less-than-murder homicide, given the circumstances. Since the man who got killed is a LEO, I expect the feds to go all-out and will likely get a murder charge less than premeditated, as there is no way this was premeditated (what with the LEO's turning around and following his killer into the parking lot).


------------


Application to self:
In the 15+ years I have toted CCWs, I may have made a rude gesture at another driver at most a handful of times (less than five) and a grand total of once since I had kids.

Guess what? That is too many.

Forget the firearm. You have folks with 2-ton weapons at speed. Keeping a cordial outer mask is not cowardice or soft-headed, it is a survival method.