Police Officer Fatally Shot by another Officer...Many Lessons to be Learned Here

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jeff White

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
37,889
Location
Alma Illinois
We often discuss how an armed person deals with having to use his firearm in a public venue. There are some lessons to be learned from this tragedy. Everyone who carries a firearm needs to read this and think about the training and operational issues involved. The first officers to respond aren't likely to pat you on the back and high five you for removing a dangerous felon from society in the aftermath of a defensive use of a firearm.


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/POLICE_SHOOTING?SITE=MOSTP&SECTION=US
Sep 25, 3:05 AM EDT
Fla. college police officer fatally shot


ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) -- A university police officer working with the state to curb underage drinking was shot to death by an Orlando police officer outside the Citrus Bowl Saturday as fans were arriving for a football game, authorities said.

Mario Jenkins, a canine officer working with Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco agents, was killed, said University of Central Florida Police Sgt. Troy Williamson.

Williamson said Jenkins was wearing street clothes. He would not talk about the circumstances of the shooting.

"You've got about 50 police officers and beverage agents who are in complete shock at this point," Williamson said.

Witnesses told the Orlando Sentinel that the incident started when an undercover officer tried to break up a tailgate party. When he encountered resistance, they said, he fired three shots into the air. An Orlando Police officer saw the man with the gun and shot him several times, the newspaper said.

Authorities believed a third person was involved, said Barbara Jones, spokeswoman for the Orlando Police Department. Jones refused to say whether the person was injured.

The shooting occurred before a game between University of Central Florida and Marshall University, which UCF won.

"It's pretty freaky. You don't think you would see this at a UCF game," junior Nicole Jorgensen, 22, of Melbourne.
 
Not good

My first thought upon finishing the article was that uniformed officers may have served as more useful in the situation. It would seem to me that the best strategy for keeping rowdy college students and fans on their best behavior would be visible LE presence, not undercover.
The second problem, to which there may be no solution, is the two agencies (campus and local) didn't have a rapport with the folks from the other agency they would be working with. These two men likely met for the first time when the shooting occurred. Curing this problem may not be do-able because of the size of local PD and duty rotation.
The next problem, the glaring tactical blunder, was firing into the air. If force wasn't needed, the handgun should have stayed holstered. If it was needed, the sky is not likely to be an accomplice.
The final problem I see is the apparent lack of common communication. If the situation was that out of hand, did he radio for B/U? Was local PD on the same freq. since they had a presence at the game? I'm not a police officer, but having dealt with confusing situations and weapons at the same time, this is what I take away from it. Several things could have been done before hand to prevent this and an error was made by a man that cost him his life.
 
When he encountered resistance, they said, he fired three shots into the air.

Ditto 1911 Guy.

Has anybody ever received any training that endorses this tactic?
 
Let's look past the interagency cooperation issues, the communications issues, the plainclothes vs uniform presence issues and look at it as a situation where an armed citizen used his firearm in a defensive situation and what happened when the uniformed officers arrived, what they saw, or thought they saw and why they reacted the way they did, and what the armed citizen could have done to prevent his being shot by the responding forces.

What if the situation was that our armed citizen was steering his significant other through the crowds of partying tailgaters, they were accosted by a badguy armed with a knife, and the armed citizen shot at the assailant 3 times, and the uniformed police who were in the vicinity heard the shots or maybe even observed the shooting....how do you avoid becoming a victim of friendly fire?

In that situation, it may not be possible as we don't know what the officer or even another armed citizen might have observed, and then we have someone without all the facts shooting to stop an incident that he/she believes is something other then what it was.

Just some things to think about....

Jeff
 
I dont even know where to start. What sort of police academy teaches officers to fire their guns into the air as a debating tactic? This isnt an iraqi wedding.

How could you possibly see someone well enough to shoot them with a pistol but not be close enough to yell at them to put down the gun, let alone see that they are wearing the same uniform as you?

I can understand accidentally shooting a friendly in the middle of a poorly coordinated firefight or when you are ambushed by an LEO thinking he is ambushing a criminal but who doesnt bother to identify himself, but this situation doesnt appear to come close to either of these situations.
 
My first thought upon finishing the article was that uniformed officers may have served as more useful in the situation. It would seem to me that the best strategy for keeping rowdy college students and fans on their best behavior would be visible LE presence, not undercover.
It depends on whether you want to prevent behavior or punish behavior. A strong uniformed presence will prevent the behavior, but then you won't be able to justify the expense to the trustees. Good law enforcement is best judged by what doesn't happen. Unfortunatly bean counters don't understand that.
 
In Air Force Security, we were authorized to fire warning shots in some locations overseas, but this was due to the language barrier and was specifically authorized and briefed at each guardmount. Otherwise, warning shots were completely verboten. Perhaps they were foreign college students? :what:
 
Does curbing underage drinking really qualify such a large-scale operation? This was a college football game, not a crack house, and there was very little chance for serious violence, so I don;t see the need for officers to pull their sidearms for any reason.

Also, just because the officer who was shot shot 3 times into the air, does that justify the other officer to shoot him? What did he percieve as a threat to his life or others lifes (well, actually besides shooting into the air is really stupid and potentially dangerous) to the point that he felt it was OK for him to use deadly force against a citizen.

This seems like a lot of stupid moves by undertrained people.

Also, does anyone else think it was strange to find that the reporter decided to let us know who won the football game?
 
More applications

I easily see what Jeff White is talking about. So I'm attending this football game with my wife, we're going through the parking lot and get into a tangle with someone with a weapon. I shoot him, now the cops are converging on the sound of gunshots and I'm standing in the middle of a crowd with a .45. Yep, this could get interesting. My first reaction, I'm sure, would be screaming like a girl, possibly incoherently. I'm being serious. It's been a long time since I've had to deal with honest to goodness life and death decisions. So now am I a victim of an attempted robbery/mugging/assault/etc. or am I a crazy guy with a gun? I'm not sure I would re-holster for two reasons. A) am I going to be too wigged out to think straight or B) am I scanning for his buddies who want immediate payback? So I'm still a crazy guy with a gun in a crowd.

Wow, I'm not sure I have any answers, but maybe these comments can stir the minds of others so I can come back and learn something.
 
Should be manslaughter at least.....

I'm gonna go out on a limb here, but I don't think the responding officer should have shot the UC officer. Murder, at least manslaughter. Lets take a look at what we know from the various eyewitness accounts and from offiicial police statements. We're pretty sure that at some point the UC fires 2-3 shots "in the air" as warning shots. Now to get past the ignorance of that little gem, I ask you, what if he actually shoots someone instead of firing warning shots? Would the response from the uniformed officer have been different? I don't see how. The bottom line is this, the responding officer shot "a man with a gun" and not "a threat to human life".

This is a state in which many citizens conceal. The police should be expected to assess the situation before they fire a shot. The same reason you shouldn't intervene as a third party to a situation is the same reason the officer should not have fired until he had positively identified the person a bonafide threat, rather than a potential one. P!@# poor police work all around.

My heart genuinely goes out to the family of the slain officer. They pay a hefty price in this situation, as do those of the shooter. I have no sympathy, however, for the uniformed officer who killed the other. He is a murderer, as would I be if I had done the same thing. It could just as easily been you or me getting killed after a rock solid self defense shoot. Shame on him and those who protect him.


I.C.
 
Let's Keep Politics Out of This Discussion

This is the Strategies and Tactics Forum. If you want to talk about what the police should or shouldn't do, hit the thread in General Discussion. Here, we'll talk about ways to keep this from happening.

Jeff
 
I'm sorry Jeff, but that's the whole point of my post. There is nothing the UC officer could have done to prevent his murder IMO. His shooting into the air, and the responding officer shooting him are two seperate things. Shooting into the air is clearly bad tactics, but aside from placing himself in the prone position after tossing his sidearm BEFORE the other officer arrived how would he have prevented being shot? The appropriate tactic to prevent this tragedy from repeating itself is to convict the murderer AND train the police better.

If you have some realistic tactical action the UC could have taken at the scene to prevent being shot in the back I've got open ears. No disrespect intended.

(additional thought)..as far as police are concerned, around here UC and off duty officers are supposed to wear "the color of the day" when armed. A good policy I think. This still does not address what the average Joe CCW can do to prevent being murdered by the responding officer in this case. Still falls upon LEO training I think.

I.C.
 
Personally, in the place of the plainsclothes officer, immediately after firing my weapon, I would have been holding a badge aloft where uniformed officers could see it. As a private citizen, I would have reholstered my weapon after firing. I would have fired no warning shots at anyone.

After reading the article, it doesn't sound as if anyone, including the police, yet know exactly what happened. As it stands, it sounds as if the training of both the victim officer and the reserve officer was lacking.

Friendly fire isn't. If fired upon in error, assuming my survival of the opening rounds, I will make one attempt to tell the shooter he is in error. After that, if I'm alive and capable, I will return fire aiming for the center of mass. Why? I'm in fear of my life.
 
The police officer that responded to the shots fired was in the immediate area on a bicycle. The initial info I received indicated he was approached by witnesses stating a crazy man was shooting people. This is not a good situation by any means. I would not say the OPD officer was a murderer. This is a very volitile situation and the responding officer could have done every thing right and still the UC in the fog of battle/stress of the situation made a dumb move with his gun that the OPD officer perceived as a threat. We already know that he fired off three rounds against policy.

Bad stuff to be sure but not at this point can it be considered anything but an accident. When more info comes out I hope to re evaluate the case.
 
Well we obviously can't have everyone with a CCW wear the color of the day. I have no idea why the UC fired into the air. There isn't enough information to say that his actions were or weren't justified.

Blue on blue incidents are always going to happen. I'm concerned that as more and more people carry concealed that they may become more prevalent. In this case it was two police officers who were involved. I can think of all kinds of scenarios where the same thing could happen to two CCW holders. All you have to do is read some of the "what if" or "should I shoot" threads here to find out that there are all kinds of people who say they would jump into a situation with guns blazing because it was the right thing to do. It would be very easy for someone to jump in and shoot down another CCW holder in a crowd like that, not knowing what was really going down and shoot down an innocent person. It would also be reasonable for that person to believe in his heart of hearts that he was stopping the next massacre by a crazed gunman...until the facts were in.

Everyone agrees that there were training and procedural errors that caused this tragedy. What training and procedures do you, as a lawfully armed citizen have to fall back on to make sure this doesn't happen to you?

Think about it......

Jeff
 
Jeff,

I need more training, no doubt about it. Coming up next year at Shootrite with Tiger McKee.

I do have some procedure: 1) I will not draw a gun in public unless I mean to immediately shoot someone. After I shoot someone, then I will immediately reholster the gun. Rationale: A plainsclothes officer cannot mistake my intentions with a handgun if I have no handgun in my hand. I believe that even if a police officer had just withnessed me shooting someone that he would not, under agency policy and law, be able to shoot me if I had reholstered the handgun and obeyed any commands he gave me.

2) I've intervened in situations. Before intervention, I make sure there is a situation. John Shirley and I saw what appeared to be two men pulling a resisiting woman into a car. We were across the street from them and most of a Denny's parking lot. John called 911 on his cellphone and I popped the trunk to allow possible access to long guns. John took up a positon by the trunk and I went moseying across the road to see what was up first hand and to get a license plate number. I didn't walk directly at them but at an angle that would carry me close enough to see the situation and the license plate. I didn't look at them as I was approaching. When I got directly behind their car, I looked at the license plate and then looked into the interior at the 'abduction.' They were drunk. The woman had a big grin on her face and the 'fighting' was drunken play on all parties' parts. Turned around, walked back across the street, closed the trunk, and went into Denny's to eat. We sat where we could observe the intersection. A police car never showed up the entire time that we were at Denny's, at least forty-five minutes from the time of the call. This was in downtown Atlanta. The purpose of this is not to complain about police response time. It is likely that all the available unitis in metro Atlanta were on calls that were at least as dire as the possibility we called about. I mentioned it mainly to show that you can't see something happening, call 911, and go in to get your meal.

If you are going to intervene then you had best know exactly what you are intervening in.

In a situation where a shooting has just occurred, I would seek cover and concealment that allowed me to view the perpetrator. As long as he didn't continue shooting people, I would consider it to be a problem best handled by police. If he reholstered his weapon and left the immediate area of his victim, then I would attempt to render aid to the victim.
 
If an officer approaches an armed suspect, is he supposed to confront or challenge the suspect before opening fire?

I guess we don't have a lot of details just yet to make too many judgments.
 
I hope this thread stays on topic. There is another thread in General for discussion of police communication issues.

There is no easy answer to the question. Shooting in a public crowded place is always going to be the most dicey situation possible. Shooting should always be a last resort, but *especially* in a crowded place. Reholstering immediately is probably about the best thing that can be done.
 
This is an interesting situation from several points of view.

1. How many times have we discussed the need to keep the weapon in hand after firing shots, in case the Bad Guy has a buddy in the wings? Now, imagine responding officer, who hears shots fired and comes up to see you, gun in hand, scanning for targets, a body at your feet.

2. You're a uniformed officer. You hear shots fired, respond to teh area, and find a guy with a gun in his hand. Do you really want to draw his attention to you by yelling, so that he opens fire on you? Yes, your first shot might be dead-on perfect, but it might not stop him from returning fire at you.

These are difficult situations, but something we must really consider, as they are all too real. We train to stay alert and ready in case of a second or third BG, so we face the real possibility of being in the first situation.

And, as for the second situation, we can hardly fault the responding officer for firing on a man with a gun. And, before many of you cast fault, think back to other threads where we've all talked about dropping the hammer to eliminate the perceived threat without hesitation. Think of the threads about finding an intruder in your home, and dropping the hammer on him because of the possible threat to you and yours. How can we fault an officer who is in the area, hears shots fired, and sees a man with a gun?

This is a situation where, as an LEO, the Hidden Agenda jackets are invaluable. He tugs down a couple of patches, and ID's himself for the world to see. As an armed civilian, could we get away with something like that? Instead of saying POLICE, could we change it to say CALL THE POLICE, with POLICE being in huge letters? I doubt that it would get you in trouble, but might just keep you out of trouble. Just a thought.
 
Think of the threads about finding an intruder in your home, and dropping the hammer on him because of the possible threat to you and yours.

There's a big difference in shooting an intruder in my home (if he does not live in my house and has forcibly entered, then I am explicity allowed by Georgia statute to use deadly forcer if I believe it to be necessary to prevent the commission of further felonies) and shooting someone in public after they have shot someone else when I don't know the circumstances. I don't know the policy and procedure of the agency that employs the reserve officer. He might have followed that policy and procedure religiously dotting every i and crossing every t. If he has done so, then I believe that a seriously long look needs to be taken of the agency's policy and procedure. Before a cop kills a cop there again. Or an innocent private citizen.

Everyone carrying needs to do a risk/benefit analysis on the issue of reholstering the handgun after firing. The risk of reholstering is that the person you just shot might have accomplices bent on revenge. The benefit of reholstering is that it gives an officer, who has you in view, a good reason not to shoot.

Personally, I'd rather chance the accomplices' potential revenge seeking. It takes a fair amount of courage to face down someone who has just killed your partner in crime. I worked collections and repossessions in very bad neighborhoods for fifteen years. I can tell you from personal experience that there aren't that many people with the courage to go for a gun when they know that you are armed, watching, and waiting for their move. There are plenty of bushwhackers, backshooters, and people who are ready and willing to shoot unarmed people. But, I guarantee you, when you've just killed their buddy, and are looking at them with your gun reholstered, there's darn few people who have that good a friend. Based on my personal experience, I would say that the number of people who will go for their gun when you are watching them and they know that you are armed is less than five percent. I've had several people tell me, as I stood in their living room, that they were going to get their gun. I told them that was the thing for them to do. It's peculiar, but not a single one of those people was able to find the gun that they went to their bedroom to get. I never had one step back out in the living room.

So, I have known people from personal experience who might have been a threat if my back was turned but who didn't have the courage to face return fire. I haven't heard of that many cops who failed to open fire from intimidation. In fifteen years, I had exactly one person try to draw on me, face to face during a confrontation. And he thought that I was drawing on him. He was the passenger in a car stopped opposite me on a street. The driver looked at him, looked at me, realized that he was about to be in the middle of a gunfight, and floored the gas pedal.

Between the two, I'd rather take a chance on the dead guy's buddies than to take a chance on the cop identifying me as an upstanding member of the community with a dead guy on the ground and a handgun in my hand. YMMV.

One circumstance that could change my actions: I live in a small town and work the ED in another small town. Usually all of the officers know me fairly well. If I shot someone where I live or work then I would be much less concered about police misidentification. Even then, I would probably reholster. With my luck, the officer would have just moved to town and be on his first shift.
 
We all train to keep our weapon at the ready and search for additional threats. I think that in situations such as this, a sporting event with a lot of police presence, it might make sense to holster as soon as the the fight has ended. The police officers at the scene are going to be running toward the sounds of the gunfire and their radios are most likely going to be screaming fragmented reports of what happened as everyone in the vicinity with a cell phone calls 911 and gives their version of events.

Jeff
 
One other factor to consider is that (at least in SC) it is not legal for permit holders to carry on campus, or at school sporting events that don't involve firearms. If this is the case in FL, the uniformed officer might have also assumed that there is no way that a plainclothes individual with a gun was legally carrying in the first place. Judging from a thread in the General section, there are plenty of people who ignore carry laws, so that is probably something else for those people especially to think about.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top