NFL player shot by off-duty police officer

Status
Not open for further replies.

DouglasW

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
322
Location
Chicago
Anyone else think this sounds weird? Why wouldn't the off-duty officer have called in a report of Mr. Foley's apparent erratic driving and then backed off to maintain visual contact while marked cruisers from that jurisdiction responded? Sounds like he was chasing Mr. Foley for several miles. Ample time for marked units to take the lead in making the stop...:confused:


(CNN) -- The San Diego Chargers' Steve Foley was shot Sunday by an off-duty policeman who had followed him to his home after noticing Foley's car driving erratically, a sheriff's investigator in San Diego, California, said.

The 30-year-old, nine-year NFL veteran was shot twice; his wounds are not believed to be life-threatening, said San Diego Sheriff's Department Lt. Dennis Brugos.

The shooting came less than a week after the 6-foot, 4-inch, 265-pound linebacker was cleared on charges stemming from a scuffle with police in April.

The Coronado police officer, who was driving an unmarked car and was about 20 miles outside his jurisdiction, told investigators he started following Foley's car after he saw it about 10 miles north of San Diego on Interstate 15 northbound "weaving in lanes, traveling at speeds of between 30 and 90 mph and nearly colliding with several other vehicles on the highway."

After Foley left the expressway, the officer pulled next to the ballplayer at a red light and identified himself as a police officer, Brugos said.

When the officer ordered Foley to pull his car over, the linebacker initially drove off before stopping "after a short distance," getting out of his car and walking toward the officer, Brugos said.

At that, the police officer pulled out his handgun and verbally identified himself, warning Foley to stop walking toward him, the investigator said.

"That's a BB gun," Brugos said Foley told him.

Foley then stopped his advance, returned to his car and pulled away, driving at least two more miles before stopping on Travertine Court, the upper-class street where he lives, Brugos said.

The officer said Foley again got out of his car and walked toward him, while his passenger -- Lisa Maree Gaut -- drove alongside him in the car.

"As the suspect approached, the officer again identified himself as a police officer and that his gun was real," the police statement said.

To prove it, the officer said he fired one warning shot into bushes and two shots toward the sky.

"The male suspect reached into his pants with his right hand as he approached the officer," the police statement said. "The officer then fired at the suspect. The suspect acknowledged that he had been shot, but continued toward the officer, who then fired again at him. This time the suspect fell to the ground."

Foley was taken to Sharp Memorial Hospital, where his wounds were not considered life-threatening, Brugos said.

His companion was taken into custody for questioning, police said.

"This investigation is continuing, and it is unknown at this time what charges may be filed in this matter," said Brugos.

In April, police accused Foley of being belligerent after he complained about his illegally parked car being towed in San Diego. Charges were dropped last month.

Seems Mr. Foley or another 'reasonable man' could have envisioned this instead as an attempted robbery-in-the-making, particularly since the "cop" was driving an "unmarked" (do they mean personally owned?) vehicle. Anyone can have a badge and a gun these days.

The cop firing warning shots into the air/bushes seems a bit dangerous, too.

Odd, all the way around.
 
I just saw this story on the news...between the idea of an off duty officer & a pro LB who has had "run ins w/ the law"...the story just didn't sound right to me either. I'll wait to see how this story develops over the next few days.
 
Seems Mr. Foley or another 'reasonable man' could have envisioned this instead as an attempted robbery-in-the-making, particularly since the "cop" was driving an "unmarked" (do they mean personally owned?) vehicle. Anyone can have a badge and a gun these days.

i doubt that. if a person thought he was being robbed (mind you he pulled over and got out of his car twice), i doubt he would have yielded (and exited his vehicle and challenged the alleged 'robber') or driven towards his own home.

Sounds like he was chasing Mr. Foley for several miles. Ample time for marked units to take the lead in making the stop...

the story said he was a Coronado officer making a stop in San Diego County (unincorporated). that usually means they are running on different radio channels, which means there is a delay due to relaying information from one dispatcher to another. also sheriff's patrol areas are usually larger with less patrol deputies, so they response time isn't as good as that of city police. that would attribute to a delay in police response.

but agreed, he shouldn't have taken matters into his own hands.

To prove it, the officer said he fired one warning shot into bushes and two shots toward the sky.
wow. im wondering if he violated department policy for doing that. that is pretty extreme to say the least.

Odd, all the way around.

agreed. :what:
 
Problems with the details of this incident...

1 Why would the off duty LEO fire "warning shots"? In my state and in my area(a major US city) you can not fire "warning shots" for any reason. If you have a CCW license or armed/G security license policy rules clearly state you can not fire a weapon for any reason other than defense of yourself or others from a violent attack. I'm not sure what this LEO's department policy is but this is not something he could do where I live, :scrutiny: .

2 Why did this off duty LEO pull a traffic stop on the vehicle to start with? If the cop was in his POV(privately owned vehicle) why didn't just relay the information to the on duty officers or CHP and wait for uniformed back up. Citizens have a valid dispute to not pull over for cars that are unmarked or when people flash badges at them. To drive to an area with bright lights/people and wait for uniformed LEOs/cars to show up is understandable.

3 An LEO should act like a mature adult when in plainclothes. It sounds like this LEO had what I call: "Superman Syndrome". Sometimes LEOs/armed security think everyone knows exactly who they are or that they know exactly what they are doing even when the LEO is wearing non uniform clothes. Last year at this time a local sworn LEO in plainclothes was shot and killed by a uniformed bike officer(and 25 year veteran) in a tragic accident.

If anything the off duty LEO's department should review the policy and standards for off duty arrests/contact with citizens. More media coverage will show what took place and I hope it can improve the conditions for all involved.

Rusty
:cool:
 
1 Why would the off duty LEO fire "warning shots"? In my state and in my area(a major US city) you can not fire "warning shots" for any reason. If you have a CCW license or armed/G security license policy rules clearly state you can not fire a weapon for any reason other than defense of yourself or others from a violent attack. I'm not sure what this LEO's department policy is but this is not something he could do where I live.
I'm not sure of his departmental policy, but CA State Law does not prohibit the use of a warning shot. The rules of engagement by a civilian lawfully carrying as a CCW holder or an armed security guard do not affect what a peace officer can do.


2 Why did this off duty LEO pull a traffic stop on the vehicle to start with? If the cop was in his POV(privately owned vehicle) why didn't just relay the information to the on duty officers or CHP and wait for uniformed back up. Citizens have a valid dispute to not pull over for cars that are unmarked or when people flash badges at them. To drive to an area with bright lights/people and wait for uniformed LEOs/cars to show up is understandable.
per the article quoted:
"he started following Foley's car after he saw it about 10 miles north of San Diego on Interstate 15 northbound "weaving in lanes, traveling at speeds of between 30 and 90 mph and nearly colliding with several other vehicles on the highway."

It appears the officer believed the driver was either guilty of 23152 CVC (Driving while Intoxicated) or 23103 CVC (Reckless Driving).

It does not state the officer was in a POV. It states he was in an unmarked car. For all we know it was an department owned vehicle, although doubtful since the officer pulled alongside him and flashed his badge vs. using police lights (solid red light in CA). That is the assumption of the original poster. He may have decided to act because he believed the driver was driving so recklessly that if an officer did not immediately act then other innocent persons may have been injured or killed. It is not feasable to tell someone to pull over and then have that person just sit in the car, so they can drive off. It makes sense that the officer would have to get the driver out of the vehicle, even if it was just for a few minutes standing on the sidewalk awaiting on-duty law enforcement to arrive.

It does not state that the driver went to an area with bright lights and people awaiting for uniformed LE. It says the driver went towards his residence. If someone believed they were being followed by a police impersonator, the last thing they should do is show the impersonator where they live.

Also, it does not say that the driver even challenged that the officer was or was not a law enforcement officer. He only challenged if the gun was real or not.

I still agree that if I was that off-duty cop, I would rather have waited for the uniformed officers to do the police work. However with that prior 148 or 69 PC arrest (Resisting) I'm not sure if this situation would have unfolded any differently with uniformed law enforcement. I suspect however that if a uniformed officer shot the driver then it wouldn't look so questionable.
 
Also, it does not say that the driver even challenged that the officer was or was not a law enforcement officer. He only challenged if the gun was real or not.

Well, it kinda goes without saying...everyone knows that cops don't carry BB guns. Questioning the gun is in turn showing obvious doubt that the man with the gun is a police officer.

It doesn't sound like the linebacker believed this person to be a police officer to me. Not that it makes him right or the cop wrong, that's just my take on it.
 
department policy; "warning shots"

I can't see how or why a LE agency would permit any sworn LEOs to fire "warning shots" by department policy other than rural areas where LEOs may need to signal others with firearms(firing 3 shots in the air, etc). Guns are not toys or props, they should not be used in a reckless way by anyone; armed citizens, armed secutity officers/guards or by sworn LEOs.

Rusty

:cool:
 
I live in the area and I think I might have acted similarly to how Mr. Foley did in the same situation. Theres too many scams out here where criminals pretend to be cops to extort money or steal your car, etc... You can't just believe anyone in an unmarked car when the flash a badge at you is a cop. Plus the badge was from another city than the one he was in. Theres no way I'd go for that.
 
The article in the morning paper said Mr. Foley was walking and approaching the officer. Mr. Foley's friend was driving the car next to him and steered it at the officer. The officer shot twice at the car and then shot Mr. Foley when he reached at or in his waistband.

John
 
Has anyone had a chance to get statement from Foley or just from the officer?

This story sounds bad and it is all from the police. I think that officer is in trouble even if Foley was drunk.
 
I find it hard to image that a cop in San Diego does not have a cell phone, dial 911, goes straight to CHP, follow the guy and wait for marked cars. This seems to be the case of an over zealous officer. In addition, it sounds like the driver made it to his house or at least the street he lives on. If all the officer thought he did wrong was the erratic driving, call 911 and watch where the guy goes and let uniforms handle it.

There has to be more to this.

Add: I am also bothered the officer fired two shots in the air, anyone else would be prosecuted for this.
 
Last edited:
Fella's;

"To prove it, the officer said he fired one warning shot into bushes and two shots toward the sky." The, "two shots toward the sky" sounds like reckless endangerment to me. Those bullets do come down, and he knew not where they'd land. Regardless of any other considerations, the person who fired those shots toward the sky should face charges. Whether he's an L.E.O. or not is of no consequence IMHO. If the guys who enforce the rules can't be bothered to obey the rules, there is a major problem.

900F
 
What it looks like at first glance is that the football player was hunted down like a dog for having escaped charges on the previous scuffle with LEOs.

Now I'm not saying that's what happened. But that's for damnsure what it looks like.

I would be most interested to know if this off-duty cop called the situation in. Because after this much distance travelled, he would have had real black&white backup if he had. If he had no cellphone or radio or other communication method, he had no business trying to make a solo felony stop. Cops are taught NOT to try and cuff somebody solo, but if he had no comms whatsoever then that's what would have inevitably happened.

That or a shooting.

I'm really wondering here which was planned from the get-go.

As an aside: Foley is black. And the police chiefs and sheriff in San Diego County uniformly handle CCW permits in racially discriminatory and illegal patterns. If the top guys act that way, one has to ask how far down the ranks it extends.

And yes, as a citizen I have the right to ask that question regarding anybody who wears a badge in a department that is openly discriminatory at the highest level.
 
bizzare

To prove it, the officer said he fired one warning shot into bushes and two shots toward the sky.

I guess this cop likes to hunt rabbits and birds while apprehending stupid crotch grabbing football players.

Tweedle dee & tweedle dumb.

It doesn't (the article) say personal car, it says "unmarked"
you know , probably a big Crown Vic with spotlight and and lights...

I wish some one would explain to young droopy pants wearing idiots that reaching for your waist to pull up your pants can get you shot if you do it during a police stop when they have guns pointing at you.

If you dress & act like a gangbanger, you might get treated like one.
 
I read this article three times and I can't find where it says anything about the clothes Foley was wearing, whether it be that he had on "droopy pants" or had on something else in any way indicative of being a gangbanger. Or that he was pulling up his pants.

In any case something smells rotten about how this guy was pursued in this manner.
 
Quoting Gunsmith:

It doesn't (the article) say personal car, it says "unmarked"
you know , probably a big Crown Vic with spotlight and and lights...

Yeah, but if that's the case it makes the cop look much more guilty of stalking and hunting, to me.

See, if it's an official car, he's GOT comms. So he's going to call in backup, which would have been there by the time of the shoot.

If not, then he didn't call for backup. And just about the only reason I can think of for not calling it in is if he's out hunting prey rather than being a peace officer.

If on the other hand this was his personal car and he had no radio and no cellphone, then he's a blithering idiot but not necessarily a criminal.

He'd be an idiot for dealing with two people solo. And it damned well leaves open the possibility he's a criminal because while it wouldn't be safe to arrest a person solo under these circumstances, it would be perfectly safe to execute one.

I have a baaaaad feeling that was the plan.
 
I see your point

but I think the cop was just a garden variety idiot,... warning shots??...
an assassin would fire one or twice, not give warning shots that would attract undue attention....

To me it looks like idiots all around, cop-spoiled football "playa" and his bimbo
driving alongside while he walks into the barrel of a gun.

Yup, the LEO certainly should have called for back up...but they really are a racist PD if they only issue ccw to (rich) white guys-and If Jim says they do I will certainly take his word they do.
 
VA 1168 welcome to thr

"The male suspect reached into his pants with his right hand as he approached the officer,"

Having lived in Cali and having had to deal with CA idiots I can assure you he was either grabbing his crotch or pulling up his droopy draws.
I know the article doesn't mention what the steroid junkie was wearing but it's a stupid newspaper article...journalist are clueless idiots who think a Kel-tec
sub 2000 is a sub machine gun and revolvers accecpt "hi cap clips"
 
"...it makes him look much more guilty of stalking and hunting..."

"...if he's out hunting prey..."

And those are comments on a pro-gun web site from pro-gun people, about a law enforcement officer. CCW holders better well think about them because they are exactly the kind of remarks a prosecutor can and will make about a person who claims to have killed in self defense. Those who think a CCW allows them a "get out of jail free" card if they kill someone should reconsider.

Jim
 
my bro is a cop

and he told me last night
"just like any other profession, there are some idiots"
in this case,shooting into the air and bushes seems pretty dumb.
I think this cop is to dumb to be an assassin(sp)
 
The cop in question is either a criminal or an idiot. That's what the facts say. While I'm not certain which he is, my personal view leans more towards the criminal side. There are criminals with badges, they exist, I've encountered them and I will not apologize for saying so.
 
The statement that the suspect reached into his pants (stupid thing to do IMHO) does not justify warning shots, but it might have justified the officer shooting him. I don't know what really happened or what the officer was thinking, but he made some mistakes that might end up being trouble for him.
 
Really, every thing at this point is conjecture, and untill all the facts or "facts" come out, we will not know what the deal is.

So far, we could be reading about an idiot drunk NFL'er, or a possible idiot "bannger" or an idiot cop or an idiot cop assassin.

The only "fact" I have seen in all of this is that everyone involved exercised poor judgement on some level, and everyone involved seems to be at least guilty of basic idiotsy.
 
I'm Going to Wait and See

Society would be well-served if this case were to make its way through a criminal court. Someone here, not yet certain whom, was criminal. Let's see what shakes out. If there is one thing I believe in, it is that our justice system, while slow, does work.

Doc2005
 
I usually don't give professional athletes the benefit of the doubt these days, because most of them are pretty arrogant. For a bunch of rich guys, they sure get into a lot of trouble. However, in this case, the whole scenario sounds pretty fishy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top