Reservist depressed. Family calls police for help.

What happend to the time when if your family member had a problem you went and helped them out no matter what it took, not call the police to check on them?

A suicidal person struggling with a moral conflict about taking their own life will have a perfect out when the cops show up and he's backed into a corner.

If he really wanted to kill himself, he would have done it as soon as the cops showed up.

Cops did their job.

The only people that failed was his family.

RIP.

14 hours then they gas the house. They gave the branch davidians more time than that.

sounds like suicide by cop/s plain and simple, especialy with the birdshot angle.

it sounds like he was genuinely depressed and they pushed all his buttons, turning him into a caged animal. the police got bored after half a day and decided to "gas him out" that they expected him to come out peacefully with his hands on his head is naive.

It sounds like he served his country once, lost good friends with his own life spared and goes home shell shocked, I'd be curious to hear if he has had any mental help since returning home. he surely needed it, instead they treated him like john rambo.

yeah this guy wasn't acting the way he should have, but they knew that to begin with.

the article also didnt say alot of other things....

but i think almost everyone can reasonably figure out that SWAT was not the first responding unit to this call.

well....most everyone...that is....

14 hours then they gas the house. They gave the branch davidians more time than that.

Click to expand...

Please, I would hope that you are smarter than to compare the two situations.

the article also didnt say alot of other things....

Click to expand...

Like what the original call really was for.

but i think almost everyone can reasonably figure out that SWAT was not the first responding unit to this call.

Click to expand...

If the call had been that someone was barricaded in their home I could see SWAT being the first responder, well I would assume after a patrol verifies it. It doesn't say at what point he actually fires at anyone. Again there just wasn't enough information and I was just pointing that out.

well....most everyone...that is....

Click to expand...

And most everyone would answer a question instead of attacking someone for requesting more information.

im not attacking you. i am merely stating that it is nearly painfully obvious that SWAT was not the first responders to this incident. you are the only one that seems to think that it is possible that SWAT did respond first.

here is a quote you may want to revisit from the article:

Dean, 29, was shot once after a confrontation with officers that began when a member of Dean's family asked police to check on him about 10 p.m. Monday, police said.

Click to expand...

Dean's family asked police to check on him. that is called a "welfare check". that does not warrant SWAT to respond to check on him. nowhere does it state that SWAT was sent to do a welfare check. just because it doesn't state that SWAT wasn't the initial responding police unit you say it is reasonable that SWAT was indeed the initial responding unit.

what i am saying is that it is very obvious, due to typical police response, which this one very apparently is (meaning, the police did not have a knee-jerk reaction), that SWAT was not the initial responders to this incident.

It doesn't say at what point he actually fires at anyone.

Click to expand...

you're right. but it is safe to assume he didn't fire at the police before the police arrived. thus, some police had to respond initially to have been fired upon. it implies that SWAT did not initially arrive and surround the house and get fired upon. it does imply that patrol arrived, was fired upon by a barricaded subject, and called SWAT.

merk:

If good old Patton was here it would just take a few smacks and hed be more than willing to go.

Click to expand...

Go here to see how Patton treated unarmed WW1 vets in DC:

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/snprelief4.htm

Suddenly Patton's troopers turned and charged. "Shame, Shame" the spectators cried. Soldiers with fixed bayonets followed, hurling tear gas into the crowd.

Click to expand...

Seems like a guy would have the right to be left alone to sort out his own problems. He might have killed himself and it would have been a loss for the family. But he might have found other solutions. After 14 hours I don't think he really intended to kill himself.

My thought, with the info at hand, is that no laws were broken untill he used force to keep the police from interfering in a matter that was personal.

The police shouldn't be the nosey neighbor that can't keep to their own business. If no laws have been broken and I tell a policeman to go away it shouldn't turn into a SWAT situation.

Interesting that some of you seem to think that the family failed this soldier. I'm curious...do you all who think this live right nearby every one of your relatives? Myself, I live about 700 miles from my dad. If I didn't hear from him and didn't get ahold of him, I'm supposed to hop in the car and drive 700 miles to go check on him? Or, oh, ask his local police to check on him?????

It's not a dereliction of familial duty to ask the police to do a welfare check.

Springmom

A despondent vet threatens suicide, police are called, shots are fired at the police at some point, gas is used after a 14-hour standoff, and the vet is shot when he leaves the house and points a weapon at the police.

I don't see how this isn't a good shoot.

he fired at initial responding officers, prior to SWAT even arriving or at least prior to SWAT doing anything about it.

patrol officers responded, got shot at, the bad guy barricaded himself, and then SWAT showed up.

Normal officers responded, were shot at, created a perimeter and called in those better suited for entry.

Click to expand...

So what's the point in embellishing the story when it's good enough as is?

that is unless you are one of the anti-cop paranoid THR members.

Click to expand...

This attitude might just be what creates anti-cop paranoia. Either choke down the obviously embellished story and assumed sequence of events or you're anti-cop. I see a lot of well-founded indignation when people embellish stories and assume events to bash the police. It cuts both ways.

A tragedy, but not one that the officers (either the initial responders or the SWAT) are responsible for.

Interesting that some of you seem to think that the family failed this soldier.

Click to expand...

You shouldn't be suprised. We live in an era in which everything is sombody else's fault. Personal responsibility is dead.

This looks like a basic no win situation. The police show up, he overreacts to the presence of police. SWAT shows up, does what they train to do. Tragic outcome.

The police don't show up, this guy goes ballistic someone else gets hurt or killed and the police take a barbecuing for failing to stop this guy. Like I said....a no win situation.

If soldiers like Dean really really refuse to go back when they get orders thats
fine. He should man up, go to his CO and say "I'm not going back". He might
get some time in the stockade. He would probably get a dishonorable discharge, maybe some other negative consequences but he would be alive, a cop would not have had to shoot him and this wouldn't be a news item.

People who join the military need to honor their oath and go when ordered but for those who have served and been traumatized a means to address this concern should be looked for. Soldiers who refuse to deploy should face significant consequences for failure to obey a lawful order but it's sad that the only recourse seems to be violence.

suicide by cop

sad all the way round

wonder how far away family lived
and whether they were afraid of him

wonder how far away family lived

Click to expand...

"Despondent about his orders, Dean barricaded himself inside his father's home with several weapons on Christmas, threatening to kill himself."

This attitude might just be what creates anti-cop paranoia. Either choke down the obviously embellished story and assumed sequence of events or you're anti-cop. I see a lot of well-founded indignation when people embellish stories and assume events to bash the police. It cuts both ways.

Click to expand...

there's nothing embellished about it. i don't see how the sequence of events were any different than how it was described. the officers had to respond before being fired upon. otherwise it is physically impossible to shoot at the cops when the cops haven't arrived yet. then they call in SWAT. there is nothing to suggest that SWAT was the intial responding police unit. it wouldn't make any sense to send in a SWAT team on a welfare check.

there is no doubt that alot of outspoken people on THR are clearly anti-police, or at least, anti-SWAT. id be glad to see some news stories that show that something different happened, and not some crazy concoction consipracy theory by Mr. Balko who is not recognized by anybody as an objective news source.

are you saying that something different happened? if so let's hear a reasonable account of what may have happened instead. nobody except one poster actually thinks that SWAT was the initial responding law enforcement entity (okay, maybe you too, so that's two). that would be a highly abnormal police response for a routine welfare check. the call did not come out as a barricaded subject. it came out as a welfare check, plain and simple.

i think some of the people on here who have it all figured out how the police should respond ought to be teaching in America's police academies. i mean heck, with some people's ability to post on THR as an all-knowing guru on police tactics and use of force certainly qualifies them to instruct in their local respective police academies and in addition testify in their local courts as experts in use of force when it comes to the use of force and/or a SWAT team by their local law enforcement agencies.

simply put, some people on THR have been known to have a very strong opinion about use of force, tactics, etc. without having any foundation to say in an objective manner what is correct and what is incorrect. alot of people have strong opinions on what the police ought to do, yet have little to no formal training or experience in such matters. yet some of these people are the most outspoken people on here and have absolutely no credentials to add to their credibility.

he had no friends the family could call?

Heck, hire a stripper to stop by, it might boost his morale.
Call a local Chaplain? A military Chaplain?
Send him a pizza?

Quote:
wonder how far away family lived

"Despondent about his orders, Dean barricaded himself inside his father's home with several weapons on Christmas, threatening to kill himself."

Click to expand...

That doesn't actually answer the question since we know nothing about the father - for all we know, the father may be comatose in a long-term care facility.

That doesn't actually answer the question since we know nothing about the father - for all we know, the father may be comatose in a long-term care facility.

Click to expand...

"Dean's father, Joseph L. Dean Jr., was not home during the standoff, authorities said"

local news:
Police could not confirm Tuesday evening if any family members were with Dean when he began threatening suicide. Officers did speak with his wife and with family during the incident, and the relatives were further down the barricaded street at a safe distance from the house today.

Click to expand...

Does a locked door and a wish to be alone equal barricade?

The press calls it an arsenal we call it a couple of old guns.
The press call it a compound we call it a hunting cabin.
The press calls it prepared for war we call it emergency preparedness.

I barricade myself every night, I put the chain on before I go to sleep.

as was stated, he's a good country boy, as such there were always guns in the house.

It all depends on how you write the report.

when

you shoot at em and go in the house it becomes a barricade situation.

Yes gunsmith, oh so correct. It's all in the semantics. The words we see in media usage and the different connotations they provoke are as much a factor in todays social decay as any other. To the ivory tower elitists in DC you and I are borderline sociopaths stockpiling weapons of mass destruction
in our arsenals. To a rational person we are independent personalities not needing to depend on the government taking advantage of economics of scale by making bulk purchases to enhance our private collection of memorabilia. Its all in which words you use and how you use them.

there's nothing embellished about it. i don't see how the sequence of events were any different than how it was described. the officers had to respond before being fired upon. otherwise it is physically impossible to shoot at the cops when the cops haven't arrived yet. then they call in SWAT. there is nothing to suggest that SWAT was the intial responding police unit. it wouldn't make any sense to send in a SWAT team on a welfare check.

Click to expand...

That's your version. How about this: officers respond, vet says he's armed and refuses to come out, SWAT is brought in sometime in the next 14 hours, vet then fires on assembled police, etc. There - my version is as plausible as yours. And both of them are just based on assumptions because neither of us know the exact sequence of events.

As I said before, there is no need for conjecture when the facts that are known support the action taken.

That's your version. How about this: officers respond, vet says he's armed and refuses to come out, SWAT is brought in sometime in the next 14 hours, vet then fires on assembled police, etc. There - my version is as plausible as yours. And both of them are just based on assumptions because neither of us know the exact sequence of events.

Click to expand...

sounds good. so you're saying that the responding police should have just left him alone and cleared the scene? unfortunately they can't because the law doesn't allow them to just walk away if someone wants to kill themselves.

really it doesn't matter if he fired at the police before or after SWAT responded, does it? the bottom line is that he made death threats, as evidenced here:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003525401

LEONARDTOWN, Md. An Army Reservist despondent about being sent to Iraq was killed by police during a 14-hour standoff that began Christmas night when family members told authorities he was armed and threatening to kill himself. The Washington Post first explored the Iraq connection on Tuesday.

James Emerick Dean, 28, will likely not be included on the rapidly growing list of Iraq war dead, but that conflict killed him just the same.

He had barricaded himself inside his father's house with several weapons Monday night, family members told police. He later told officers he would shoot anyone who entered the house. His father was not home at the time.

Around noon Tuesday, while police were preparing to use tear gas to force Dean out of the home, Dean came to the front door and pointed his weapon at an officer, St. Mary's County Sheriff Tim Cameron said. Another deputy shot Dean once, killing him.

Dean had already served 18 months in Afghanistan and was despondent after learning recently that he would be deployed to Iraq, family members told police.

During the standoff, Dean fired several shots at police, including one that struck a car where a deputy sat. The officer was not injured.

Cameron did not know what reserve unit Dean served in.

Wanda Matthews, who lives next door to Dean's father, told the Washington Post's Megan Greenwell she knew the young man was depressed about heading to Iraq.

"His dad told me that he didn't want to go to war," Matthews said. "He had already been out there and didn't want to go again."

Click to expand...

that makes him not only a hazard to himself, which the police unfortunately don't have the option to just leave him, but also a hazard to others. if he is going to shoot at anyone who enters the house then he may shoot at his relatives. after all, it isn't even his home. other people live there. the police can't just leave him and hope he really doesn't kill his family members.

so he barricades himself inside his house and refuses to come out. what are the officers to do? of course they call their supervisor, and most likely, it went up the chain of command to someone who figured it was best to call out SWAT and the negotiators.

im not seeing the point you're trying to argue. what significance is it if SWAT arrived before or after the shooting at the police occurred?

im not seeing the point you're trying to argue. what significance is it if SWAT arrived before or after the shooting at the police occurred?

Click to expand...

You made statements that added "extra" details about the incident that are not supported by any news reporting. Those "extra" details are just your assumptions (very possibly correct, but still assumptions) about exactly what happened. You also promote the anti-cop paranoia you complain about when you brand people as anti-cop just because they do not automatically accept your "extra" details.

My point is that you do not need to add unsupported "extra" details to the story when the facts that are known support the action taken.