Officer shoots, kills suspect first night on duty

[thorn726]

"He could have accidentally just rolled around from the pain that he was suffering from the one shot and went near the gun with no intentions of going near the gun," Seaton says.

anyone else want to scream???

who cares ??? once dude pulls a gun, officer is supposed to ..... man ARGH!!

 

[thatguy]

What do you expect a parent to say?

As for me, if the cop had any ammo left in his gun then he didn't shoot the SOB as many times as I would have.

 

[NineseveN]

Roger that, "thatguy".

 

[XLMiguel]

Baptism by Fire

Tough way to break in a new job, but it seems the rookie's training and reflexes were good. Hope the trend is up for im in the long run.

Sorry for the family's loss, but mother's idiot comment probably reflects values and upbringing leading to why Matthew was in trouble to begin with. JMO.

 

[iiibdsiil]

I nominate him for Rookie of the Year Award.

 

[GT]

I think I would know if my son was a scumbag.

And when he, inevitably, got wasted I think I would say "yeah, he was trash and got what was coming".

The thing is, I think part of the reason he was a scumbag is encapsulated in the mother's comment. She was always there for him telling him being a scumbag was OK and she still loved him.

Shoulda shot the Mother too.

G

 

[myrockfight]

Shoulda shot the Mother too

Can someone help me on this? I'm thinking that comment was a quite a bit out of line, not to mention immature and ignorant.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

No doubt you might know your son was a scumbag, but that does not mean that you would openly admit such a thing to the press. Right or wrong, Parents, loved ones, and friends of dead criminals will often only discuss the virtues of the dead criminal, or the potential good of the dead criminal as if the potential was the same thing as who the criminal is at the time he is killed.

After all, there is no way that the family will be able to win a wrongful death lawsuit against the police if the family talks about what a danger the criminal was to society.

Heck, even when such incidents are caught on tape where they show the officers operated within the law, within department protocols, etc., family members will still claim that the officers were in error, used excessive force, etc.

There was a case in Garland Texas a few years back about a teenager with a knife and causing mischief. His sister called the police because he had threatened her. The boy was shot and killed by the officer who arrived on scene. The whole incident after the officer's arrival was caught on audio and part was caught on the video. The boy approached the officer with a knife (maybe it was knives) and the officer drew his gun. The boy continued to approach and the officer repeated was yelling at the kid to drop the knife as the kid advanced on him. After several commands, the officer could be seen backing across the field of view of his dash cam, still giving orders. As I recall, the boy had backed the officer some 50 feet or more. As the officer is about to pass out of the field of view, the boy with the knives enters the frame. It is clear that he isn't more than six feet away from the officer who kept backing and giving commands to drop the knife. Finally, the officer shot the kid, killing him. With the exception of the sister who called 911, the entire family went on TV to tell of the great injustice to the boy and that the officer could have used other means to stop the boy. Based on the video, I thought the officer showed amazing restraint, if not almost to such an extent to have not been prudent to wait that long.

 

[ZeroX]

that was the most poorly written article I've ever read..

Really. I had almost no idea what I was reading.

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

"He could have accidentally just rolled around from the pain that he was suffering from the one shot and went near the gun with no intentions of going near the gun," Seaton says.

but I don't think the police officers should be forced into the gamble that this is what was happening, the stakes were a bit too high for the police officers.

migoi

Well, for one thing, what would be her argument if the cop's FIRST shot had done the killing? She's arguing over a red herring, here. The issue is whether the cop was justified in killing the attacker at all in the first place; since any shooting is deemed by courts everywhere to an attempt to kill.

If he was justified in killing with the first shot, he was justified in killing with the second, since it seemed possible or likely that the suspect was still trying to get and aim his gun at the officer (presumably to shoot and kill the officer).


Ruger270man: Yep, poorly written article is too mild a term. That's "journalism" these days. The entire first four paragraphs of most "hard news" stories these days are maudlin, melodramatic "teasers." A far cry from the traditional news story of old, which was designed to be sleek and efficient: Who What When Where Why How, in that order, with the most important stuff at the fore.

It's the age of touchy-feelyism run amok. These days they would rather their stories be jazzy than informative. Everyone's angling for some b.s. creative writing award.

-Jeffrey

 

[Randy in Arizona]

The Tucson Daily Fishwrappers are abysmal in their lack of literacy and their disregard of the rights of good citizens - - as opposed to the rights of scum and illegal aliens.

Only Gun shops may advertise guns for sale per the edict from the editorial staff (staph?)

As you might guess I have little use for the local tree assassins.
:banghead: :banghead:

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

Heck, even when such incidents are caught on tape where they show the officers operated within the law, within department protocols, etc., family members will still claim that the officers were in error, used excessive force, etc.

Such family members have no problem believing that LEOs should put themselves further into harm's way and do all manner of exorbitant things just to avoid having to shoot/kill their loved one -- even when their loved one has fully justified the use of deadly force against them.

They certainly don't care that drastic steps to keep from having to shoot Matthew would have resulted in further danger of being killed to the officer. They believe that cops exist for the express purpose of shunting danger away from civilians and onto cops. They believe this even when said civilian is the cause of danger.

-Jeffrey

 

[jkswiss]

that was the most poorly written article I've ever read..

No kidding. I had to read it about three times to comprehend what I had just read.

 

[Nick_90]

I also had to read it twice to understand it. I thought it was my English! Anyway, thank God the police officers didn't get hurt... And the BG got what he deserved!

 

[PX15]

Suspect?

My heart goes out to the Mother, but I have no sympathy for the dead "suspect"..

If I were a cop and the "suspect" pointed a firearm at me the "suspect" immediately becomes a criminal and all bets are off.

I would much rather have a grieving Mother of some street punk than the grieving Mother of a leo just doing his job.

Anytime a Mother loses a Son, even a dirt-bag such as this, it's a shame. But it's a shame that the dead criminal put himself/herself in harms way by doing bad things. Pulling a firearm on a cop is a BAD THING.

Good for the cop, sorry for the Mom's grief, but there is one and only one person to blame - the dead criminal..

JMO

 

[PaladinVC]

Boy, that's a rough first day for the police officer. I hope it's the roughest one he sees.

 

[GRB]

Someone said this:

Shoulda shot the Mother too

Then someone replied:

Can someone help me on this? I'm thinking that comment was a quite a bit out of line, not to mention immature and ignorant.

I think maybe that was a bit of sarcasm as opposed to being ignorant or immature. I sort of agree with the sentiment but allow me to phrase it differently: Hypothetically speaking, if it was a different world, I would I think: the mother should be held responsible for any lousy upbringing her son may have had and, I would believe the officers and the city should file a lawsuit against the mother for allowing her son to turn out to be such a bad element. I would also believe the mother should be sued by the officers for bad mouthing them if they in fact were justified in how many shots they fired. Then I think the mother should be forced to do community service to make up for her spawn's crimes against society and to help defray the cost of the psychological counseling the officers and their families should be receiving for going through the trauma of having to kill someone (or in the case of the officers' families for their having to cope with the psychological changes that the officers will inevitably go through due to mental trauma). Of course this will all cost a bundle for the tax payer to pursue and, in the end even if the officers and the city won the law suits, what would they get from mama? Probably a hard luck story about how she has nothing to give and how she is too ill to do community service and how she should not be held responsible for the actions of her son is all that would be gotten! Of course a bullet would have been cheaper in the long run. Of course I live in the real world wherein I do believe in doing it legally, so shooting her would be out of the question.

All the best,
Glenn B

 

[Phil Ca]

With 10 years in the military and over 30 as an officer with a federal agency and concurrant duty as a reserve officer I feel very fortunate that I was never called upon to shoot anybody. There were times that weapons were drawn, pointed and ready to fire but the perp either gave up or changed his aggressive stance.

In training we were taught to shoot until the threat is no longer a threat and to handcuff wounded or dead suspects. Works for me.

Sorry for the mom that lost her errant soon but those things happen. Maybe a little discipline at home might have changed him early on and prevented this type of ending.

 

[myrockfight]

I think maybe that was a bit of sarcasm as opposed to being ignorant or immature. I sort of agree with the sentiment but allow me to phrase it differently: Hypothetically speaking, if it was a different world, I would I think: the mother should be held responsible for any lousy upbringing her son may have had and, I would believe the officers and the city should file a lawsuit against the mother for allowing her son to turn out to be such a bad element. I would also believe the mother should be sued by the officers for bad mouthing them if they in fact were justified in how many shots they fired. Then I think the mother should be forced to do community service to make up for her spawn's crimes against society and to help defray the cost of the psychological counseling the officers and their families should be receiving for going through the trauma of having to kill someone (or in the case of the officers' families for their having to cope with the psychological changes that the officers will inevitably go through due to mental trauma). Of course this will all cost a bundle for the tax payer to pursue and, in the end even if the officers and the city won the law suits, what would they get from mama? Probably a hard luck story about how she has nothing to give and how she is too ill to do community service and how she should not be held responsible for the actions of her son is all that would be gotten! Of course a bullet would have been cheaper in the long run. Of course I live in the real world wherein I do believe in doing it legally, so shooting her would be out of the question.

Point well taken. I obviously should have taken it as tongue in cheek, which it obviously is.

It is hard to get sarcasm across when just reading words and not seeing or listening to someone saying them. I've been on both sides of the miscommunication - it just struck me wrong In that regard, I give my apologies to GT for not giving the benefit of the doubt and looking at it realistically.

With that said, this being the High Road, I try to measure my words carefully and put them in context so morons like me don't have to decipher what I really meant Also I hate giving an anti such an easily transferrable piece of fodder. I'd rather them twist the facts or pitch them, so we can point out all the vagaries, lies, and inconsistancies in their statements.

 

[thatguy]

Often parents DON"T KNOW what their teenaged kids are doing, and that's a big part of the problem. Out of sight, out of mind. I'm sure many are genuinely shocked when the kid gets arrested or killed. They had no idea he was hanging with gangs and doing crime.

Also, with a child's body still warm, many parents may be in a state of denial, unwilling to accept or admit the truth. They don't want to believe it.

Sometimes the kids do manage to conceal their activities from busy parents who try but fail to the kids under control. The parents maybe aren't negligent, but not as attentive as they should be.

 

[BlackCat]

In the car, investigators later found a backpack containing ammunition, marijuana, drug paraphernalia and scales, police said.

...and this is relevant to the story how, exactly? Oh wait, he musta been all "hopped up" on pot!!

 

[GRB]

...and this is relevant to the story how, exactly? Oh wait, he musta been all "hopped up" on pot!!

Isn't one "hopped up" when one has imbibed copious quantities of a beverage containing hops - or am I just old fashinoned?