Permit Holder shoots and kills suspect saving Cops life won't be charged

[usmarine0352_2005]

.


For those who say a citizen with a gun wouldn't save any lives.



http://www.wafb.com/Global/story.asp?S=4527526#.UD-u3HWr-0A.facebook

.
Bystander Fired Deadly Shot, Not Officer

8-30-12


There were two big developments Monday in the case of a motorist who was shot and killed along Greenwell Springs Road Friday after a fight with a police officer. Investigators say an autopsy shows the deadly bullet was fired by a bystander, not the officer. Police also announced that no charges would be filed in the case, either against the police officer involved or the bystander who fired the fatal shot into the head of George Temple.

According to Col. Greg Phares, "[Mr. Stevens] orders Mr. Temple to stop and get off the officer. The verbal commands are ignored and Mr. Stevens fires four shots, all of which struck Mr. Temple."
.

 

[critter]

Four for four! Congrats!

 

[Skribs]

Read the article, Critter, 5 for 5. He also issued verbal commands, fired, paused to evaluate long enough to issue more verbal commands, and fired again. Personally, if yelling and firing 4 times didn't do the trick, I don't know that I'd pause to yell again.

I'd also like this to be a lesson to people who think "1 shot per attacker" is enough or that "1 shot from .45 will put him down" is the case - it took 5 shots with a .45 to take this guy down, the fifth shot to the head.

This is clearly a case of where it is helpful for citizens to armed. Although I thought cops usually had partners...

 

[usmarine0352_2005]

.

Cops don't always have partners and many places don't.




Many places may also only have 1 cop on duty in an area of tremendous size.
.

 

[Skribs]

Thought just occured to me - I'm glad comments are disabled on that article, because I'd hate to read pages of "the cop should have called for backup instead of making this person kill for him."

 

[12131]

Four for four! Congrats!

From the article, he fired the 5th shot (that hit the head). That ended the threat.

 

[12131]

Both Phares and Baton Rouge Police Chief Jeff LeDuff stopped short of crediting Stevens with saving the officer's life.

That's interesting. Wonder what their feeling about armed law-abiding citizens.

 

[nofishbob]

How unbelievably similar is the story in the OP to this one from 2005:

http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2006/02/armed-citizen-saves-cop-in_114058863533452150.html

Similarities:

-bad guy on top of LEO

-Citizen shoots 4 times to the body of bad guy

-bad guy ignores verbal commands

-Citizen's final shot is to the head

- Citizen used a .45

-was in Baton Rouge, Louisiana

When I first read this post, I thought it was the earlier incident recycled!

Bob

 

[funklord12]

Didn't this happen six years ago?

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=184021

 

[allaroundhunter]

When I first read this post, I thought it was the earlier incident recycled!

Didn't this happen six years ago?

It is the same incident. The only difference is that one of the reporters does not know the civilian shooter's last name. (Stevens vs. Stephens; Stephens is correct)

It happened on February 17, 2006; and it is entirely possible that this man was under the influence of drugs (possibly steroids, IIRC).

http://www.theshootist.net/2009/01/one-man-got-involved-perry_12.html

This link to the story gives a firsthand account from Stephens about how the incident played out.

The incident began like this:

Stephens was wearing a neck brace, a body brace, and a leg brace, and walking with the aid of a cane. As the driver of the car slugged the cop and drove him backwards with multiple blows to the head and body, Stephens reached into his glove box and pulled out his Sig Sauer P-220 semi-automatic pistol. The gun was loaded with 230 grain Hydra-Shock hollowpoints.

Stephens heard the officer, Brian Harrison, scream for help as George Temple, a six-foot body builder and boxer, pounded Harrison’s face and torso, forcing him backwards and driving him to the ground, dropping on top of him. Stephens heard two gunshots, and Harrison screaming “Somebody help me! Anybody, help me!”

During the struggle, the officer was struggling to keep control of his weapon, and this is what he said after the incident (be warned, there is a statement about a Glock malfunctioning....don't start a war about this):

Harrison, who was taking a tremendous beating, was desperately trying to keep his weapon from falling into the hands of Temple. Temple was slugging him, and grasping his gun hand. He pushed the slide of the gun into the pavement, and fired it twice. He later told Stephens he was trying to empty it, or cause it to jam to keep Temple from getting it from him and killing him with his own gun. He succeeded. The gun malfunctioned, and was later found to have a spent casing still in the chamber.

4 shots to the body did not end the attack, and even the shot to the head was not an instantly incapacitating shot:

As Temple slammed Harrison’s head forward to the pavement and lunged forward with his hand and arm under Harrison, Stephens fired his final shot into Temple’s head behind his ear. The bullet exited the rear of Temple’s head. Stephens said while he did not actually see the gun, other witnesses told him Temple had finally wrested control of the duty Glock from Harrison and was pulling it from under Harrison’s body when Stephens shot him in the side of the head.

At that shot, Temple ceased beating Harrison, and turned, reaching towards Stephens with a look on his face Stephens described as “rage.”

Temple then fell over, off Harrison, and made two attempts to sit back up, looking at Stephens before he collapsed and expired.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

5 shots. Hm. Can you imagine if he would have missed? Or dare I ask, if there was more than 1 bad guy?
Are you really comfortable knowing all you have is 6 or 8 shots? That's only 1 or 3 left after an encounter like this, even when all 5 were hits. This is why I don't carry pistols that can only hold 5,6, 8 shots. Ammo runs out quickly.

 

[Matthew Courtney]

Guys, the event discussed here occurred over 6 years ago.

Here is a 2 year old article about the chief from the 1st article retiring in 2010.

http://www.batonrougetoday.com/2010...chief-jeff-leduff-to-retire-in-december-2010/

 

[MedWheeler]

Are you really comfortable knowing all you have is 6 or 8 shots? That's only 1 or 3 left after an encounter like this, even when all 5 were hits. This is why I don't carry pistols that can only hold 5,6, 8 shots. Ammo runs out quickly.

I agree. However, there are many people here (probably the same ones that do carry lower-capacity weapons) who have sworn off the idea of using their weapons to aid another person. The vast majority of those people probably could extract themselves from a situation calling for deadly-force defense with just a few rounds. They're not obligated to stay and fight. In this case, the officer is duty-bound to remain int he fight, and Stephens made the decision to also stay and defend. He probably already had that mindset when he selected his choice of weapon.
Yes, the incident occurred some time ago. Not sure why it's just now coming to our attention here, but the relevance of it is not affected by when it took place.

 

[allaroundhunter]

Are you really comfortable knowing all you have is 6 or 8 shots? That's only 1 or 3 left after an encounter like this, even when all 5 were hits. This is why I don't carry pistols that can only hold 5,6, 8 shots. Ammo runs out quickly.

I agree. However, there are many people here (probably the same ones that do carry lower-capacity weapons) who have sworn off the idea of using their weapons to aid another person.

I do not think that there is any correlation whatsoever between the capacity of one's self defense firearm and their willingness to help another human being in need. It seems like a rather dumb idea to try to relate the two, IMO...

I also underlined where you said, "many people", because I also believe that that is a false statement. While some will say that they will not dive-in to help someone immediately, I believe that most would end up helping if the situation justifies it, as this one did.

 

[SaxonPig]

"... looking at Stephens before he collapsed and expired."

I'm glad the son of a bitch saw the face of the man who killed him.

 

[MedWheeler]

I also underlined where you said, "many people", because I also believe that that is a false statement.

"Many" is not the same as "most" in any dictionary. It's a relative term, simply meaning "a lot."
If 200,000 people belong to a particular group, and 75,000 wish to leave, people outside the group could still say that "many people" wish to leave the group.
I agree with you that "most" would move to assist.

Again, there are many people here who have announced on this board they have no intent to use their weapons to assist another. To me, "many" could easily be "more than five."
There may or may not be a correlation between weapon choice and desire to assist others. The thread was headed in the direction that more firepower may be needed because one may be obligating oneself to stay in the fight rather than to self-extract. But, yes, bringing up that idea was probably premature. (Maybe that would be a good poll topic..?)
I do also agree with the idea that more is never going to be worse than less when it comes to ammunition on hand. It's rare that I go out with only a five-round weapon. When I do, I usually grab the P32 to ride along with it.