LEO grabbed the wrong gun

[Red_SC]

Officer shoots man

A 29-year-old man was shot and wounded about 1 a.m. Monday after one of two police officers trying to subdue him with Tasers discharged a gun instead. He is expected to recover.

In the Monday incident, a clerk at the Circle K store in the 1200 block of East Broadway Road called police because Theodore Wright, 29, refused to leave the premises. The clerk told police that Wright is suspected of several beer thefts from the store in the past. When police arrived, Wright had left but the clerk asked police to locate him and tell him that if he came back to the store he would be trespassing.

Officers Martin Wolfe and Christina Parra found Wright in the 200 block of South Allen Street and tried to talk to him. Wright became upset, shoved and tried to hit Wolfe, Mesa police spokesman Detective Tim Gaffney said. Wright tried to flee. Parra fired a Taser stun gun to subdue Wright but missed. Preliminary information indicates Wolfe also tried to use his Taser but mistakenly drew his gun and fired, striking Wright in the buttocks. Wright, who suffered non-life threatening injuries, was taken to Scottsdale Healthcare Osborn for treatment.

I've never thought about this possibility. Training failure?

 

[armoredman]

Happens a lot - TASER issue with duty sidearm is a mistake, unless tons of extra training is included, not to mention something in the TASER butt that will make it obvious instantly which gun you have - tingler, maybe?

 

[CannibalCrowley]

Yet another "mistake" that could have killed someone. The only "failure" was the lack of judgement on the officer's part. I highly doubt that he had both holsters stacked horizontally and just grabbed the wrong weapon by mistake. His tazer was most likely in a different spot than his gun; but instead of grabbing the tazer, he went for his gun. Whether he meant to grab his tazer or not can only be known to him, but regardless of that he still shot the man.

They should prosecute him and fire him if found guilty. I also hope that the victim sues him.

 

[tommytrauma]

"I then drew my sidearm and fired one shot, striking Mr. Wright in the buttocks and causing him to cease and desist from all criminal activity"


I heard a similar story not too ling ago, female cop doing the same thing. Does appear to be a failure in training.

 

[sendec]

I'm not certain that it is a failure in training - officers have many, many repetitions of drawing their handguns in training, far more than they ever have with the Taser. I am also unaware of other instances where this has happened, and typically the Taser is holstered well away from the pistol just to lesses the chances of this happening.

Mistakes happen. It is unfortunate, but they will continue to happen as long as we insist on using humans for police officers. Fortunately the injury was relatively minor. Let's not forget that it was also avaoidable, if the perp had complied with the officers.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

I am also unaware of other instances where this has happened

I've read of 3 or 4 incidents of this happening. It is still fairly rare.

 

[TimRB]

"They should prosecute him and fire him if found guilty. I also hope that the victim sues him."

String up the cop. Good idea. Of course, the criminal *was* a fleeing felon who, seconds before, had assaulted the shooter. But that doesn't matter. I applaud the cop's good intentions, and I'm sorry he made a mistake, but at the end of the day, I don't care even if he *intentionally* used his firearm. It's a Darwinian thing.

Tim

 

[bradvanhorn]

Without knowing what the officers training is/was, there's no way to know if it is/was a failure. However, on the surface it certainly doesn't sound like a success.

They should prosecute him and fire him if found guilty. I also hope that the victim sues him.

You're kidding right? Some scumbag already suspected of criminal theft then perpetrates two possible/probable felonies on law enforcement officer(s), and you think said scumbag is a victim? As sendec put it, all said scumbag had to do was comply with the officers. I have no sympathy for said scumbag, and as far as I'm concerned, he's lucky they didn't shoot him between the running lights, which probably would have been a better outcome for the rest of society.


Excerpts from AZ Title 13 - Criminal Code:

C. Aggravated assault pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 1 or 2 of this section committed on a peace officer while the officer is engaged in the execution of any official duties is a class 2 felony.

and,

B. Resisting arrest is a class 6 felony.

 

[Dionysusigma]

I call good shoot. Great shot placement ( ), and it was effective at stopping the perp, without killing him.









No real comment.

 

[CannibalCrowley]

bradvanhorn

You're kidding right? Some scumbag already suspected of criminal theft then perpetrates two possible/probable felonies on law enforcement officer(s), and you think said scumbag is a victim?

So if a man strikes or robs someone, that person would be justified in shooting the criminal in the back as he ran away?

Was Theodore Wright in the wrong if he was resisting arrest, yes. Was the officer justified in using lethal force as he ran away, no. Would your reaction be the same if Wright had been the elderly, blind woman from awhile back?

 

[JamisJockey]

String up the cop. Good idea. Of course, the criminal *was* a fleeing felon who, seconds before, had assaulted the shooter.

[soap box on]
Doesn't make the police the final authority on justice in this country, nor the distribution of death. If deadly force is not warranted, then a cop HAS NO RIGHT to use it. I don't care if the scumbag is suspected of killing 40 people and molesting children. If the cop is not authorized to use deadly force, then they shall not use deadly force. Cops are not the law, they enforce the law. Nor are they above the law. This cop made a serious mistake and should be punished. If I accidentally shot you in the buttocks, what would you do? Sue? I would if you ND'd me in the rump.
:banghead:
Cops have a very hard job, and its not one that I would want. Anytime they confront a violent person they have to determine the approprite amount of force necessary. They draw thier weapons hundreds, if not thousands of times without firing them in anger. The misapplication of deadly force is the most serious msitake a cop can make, and they should be held accountable.

[soap box off]

 

[TimRB]

"If I accidentally shot you in the buttocks, what would you do? Sue?"

If I were a thief who, when confronted by police, assaulted one of them and then ran away, I would not be surprised if I got shot.

I'm sure this cop will be held accountable for any mistakes he may have made, but I, for one, am absolutely not going to second-guess him based on the information available here.

Tim

 

[GigaBuist]

CannibalCrowley,

So if a man strikes or robs someone, that person would be justified in shooting the criminal in the back as he ran away?

If I remember correctly from my CCW classes: legally, yes. Only if the person fleeing has committed a felony though. If they didn't commit a felony you're in deep crap though.

It's not something you want to try and do though. One, I find it morally repugnant, and two most people around here would.

Now, if there's some whackjob going down the road, runs over some small children, stops in a playground and starts shouting like a lunatic and just acting generally "not right" -- well, running over them kids was probably a felony -- and he's probably going to do something bad next. It -could- be a good shoot.

Don't take my word for it though -- I'm not a lawyer nor judge.

Sorry, that was a little OT.

 

[sendec]

I'm not sure I understand the vitriol. People error. I was'nt there, but there is'nt any indication that this was malicious or intentional. The agency and officer will be sued, if they have'nt been served already. The insurance company will settle it out of court and then everybody will urinate and moan about this hood who beat the system out of X dollars. It sounds like the officer made a mistake, but a mistake in good faith, as opposed to a mistake of putting a leash on the guy naked. This is a far cry from police brutality.

Technology is neat stuff, but there are downsides. Grabbing the wrong tool is one of them which anyone with a crowded toolbox has done. People have been killed with less-lethal ammunition, or live ammo loaded into a SIMS gun. It is'nt a perfect world.

I can tell you right now, and this will thrill the cop-bashers no end, but this officer will not lose his job. He may get some time off and some remedial training, but this is'nt worth firing the guy over. Indeed, his greatest challenge will be living this down in the squadroom. He will be the "butt" of every joke for the next couple years and will be forever known as the guy who shot the guy in the ass with the worlds loudest Taser.

I can feel it now, self righteous indignation incoming.

 

[bradvanhorn]

Well said sendec!

So if a man strikes or robs someone, that person would be justified in shooting the criminal in the back as he ran away?

I am quite cold hearted on this topic, and yes I think shooting a criminal who has just ROBBED or ASSAULTED ME (or anyone else for that matter) is totally justified - front, back, sideways, I could care less. The law may or may not agree with me (most of the time I'm certain it won't), but that is my opinion, and I'm entitled to any opinion I want, whether you agree or not.

Nevertheless, in this case it was not just striking someone, but a police officer in the execution of his duty. The police officer under assault then has to figure out how to end the violence without losing his own life, at which point the life of the assailant is secondary. And just because the guy turns his back doesn't mean it isn't an attempt to produce or retrieve a weapon, and the officer probably didn't have his crystal ball ready to know what the guy was up to. Was he just going to run away? Probably. Do I really care? NO.

Again, all the guy had to do was cooperate with the officer for a few minutes, and then he probably could have walked away without further incident. Instead he chose to assault the officer, and in MY opinion, whether you like it or not, that scumbag got what he deserved. You assault a police officer and as a result you get shot, well you committed the FELONY ASSAULT, you are not a victim, and now you have to live with the wounds. You'll get no sympathy from me.

 

[gyp_c2]

I've never thought about this possibility. Training failure?

...I couldn't care less about the guy getting shot in the ass...But the thread started with this...

so...Training failure or not?

I say yes...If he meant to shoot the guy then he missed by hitting him in the butt...If he meant to Taser the guy, well...training failure?

LOL...

It's still a Darwin no matter how you slice it...

 

[Roadkill Coyote]

Taser International's latest take on the issue (haven't seen a release from them on the specific incident yet) is that it's the agencies responsibility to set training and policy in order to prevent accidents like this. They used to have a clear statement against strong-side carry in their lesson plan, but changed it a couple of releases ago (believe the 10.0 release has the new wording, not sure about the one before it). It would appear that the change was due to some input from agencies that prefer to make their own decisions on where and how their officers carry the Taser. If the company has been addressing the issue (changes in recommendation aside) for a couple of years, then dealing with a known documented risk would definitely be a training issue.

As for it happening a lot, this is only the the fourth incident that has made the news.

 

[HankB]

I'd like more detail, but taking the story at face value, the officer tried to TASER the suspect. So in the officer's own (presumably) professional judgement, the use of deadly force was NOT indicated, and he (presumably) admitted as much.

Yet he USED deadly force - the only reason the suspect is still alive is because the cop is a bad shot, and hit him in the butt rather than the torso.

Sounds like negligence or carelessness on the part of the officer - "OOPS, I grabbed the wrong thing off my belt, and didn't know it until I heard the bang and saw the blood" just doesn't cut it.

(The other cop - who missed at what sounds like close range with his own TASER - probably isn't a very good shot, either.)

Too bad we don't have video to review and critique.

 

[Jeff White]

Taser International is correct, this is a training and policy issue that every department using the taser will have to deal with. I think that their previous recommendation against strong side carry is right on.

As for it happening a lot, this is only the the fourth incident that has made the news.

You're correct that it's not happening a lot. By now there are probably 10s of thousands of Taser deployments where the suspect wasn't accidently shot with a firearm. But, I have never heard of someone being accidently shot whil an officer was trying to deploy his OC. I carry my OC right behind my firearm on my duty belt. Never reached for my OC and came up with my pistol. I can see that happening carrying a Taser that is shaped like a pistol in close proximity to the pistol. Perhaps Taser could change the design somehow? The best solution is not to carry the Taser in close proximity to the firearm.

Jeff

 

[Roadkill Coyote]

I was certainly disappointed when they changed the lesson plan. Our policy is no strong side carry period. But we're a small agency and I believe the push came from some larger customers.

Strong/Weak side issues aside, it's interesting to note that all four cases involve a relatively late deployment of the Taser (ie; after the situation had already gotten physical). When your behind the curve things are always more likely to go wrong.

Whoops, edited for spelling

 

[Jeff White]

Roadkill Coyote said;

Strong/Weak side issues aside, it's interesting to note that all four cases involve a relatively late deployment of the Taser (ie; after the situation had already gottne physical). When your behind the curve things are always more likely to go wrong.

It's probable time to go to OC an impact weapon or hard empty hand techniques if you're already hand to hand.

I'm with a small agency too and our first tasers are due in any time.

Jeff

 

[Ryder]

I dont have time to read all the other comments right now so forgive me if this has been covered but my opinion is that the Tazer is an alternative to lethal force. It shouldn't be used as a convenient way to subdue someone who is not a threat to the cops. If it is ok'd to use it without serious guidlines it's use will probably end up degenerating to the point that the cops tazer everyone they arrest.

I'd be no more happy about a tazer being used on me than I would a bullet.

 

[Roadkill Coyote]

The new Tasers are, in most agencies contiuums, a low level intermediate weapon. They're placed down there because they have a great safety record at preventing injuries, and because early intervention prevents uncontrolled escalation. Not only that, the majority of agencies are so confident of their safety that all their officers deploying them take a hit themselves. Unfortunately, Taser International no longer requires it, they only recommend it strongly now.

They are most certainly not a substitute for lethal force in a situation that requires it. Thankfully Taser still makes a clear statement concerning that issue. Oviously, a situation may arise in which a Taser can be used where a lethal threat exists, but there's got to be a case by case determination of whether that's either safe or practical. The big issue with a lethal threat is whether theres another officer there to provide cover, and whether using the Taser is going the make injury to either the public or the officers less likely. If the only person whose safety benefits from the deployment of less-lethal is the suspect, then it's only going to be deployed if the situation is just right.

The Taser is a great tool, but it's just that, a tool (an electrical device, like your cell phone). The new Taser is fairly reliable, but you have to put it in context. The Taser's has been around for a few decades, whereas the semi-automatic handgun has been around for a century or so. Maybe we'll have one that can substitute for lethal force when Mr. Cover's amazing invention reaches the century mark. In spite of my enthusiasm, I won't be holding my breath.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Wolfe also tried to use his Taser but mistakenly drew his gun and fired, striking Wright in the buttocks.

Whatever happened to night sticks?

 

[Jeff White]

Standing Wolf asked;

Whatever happened to night sticks?

Two words, Rodney King.....

Jeff