Re: Another case of mistaken identity--Ended tragically
I love these threads. Lots of excellent displays of 20-20 hindsight, jumping to conclusions with very little knowledge of the facts or circumstances pertaining to the incident, and hilarious statements about things the poster obviously has no experience with!
SgtMaj said:
I think this says enough: "Police Chief John Welter said the officer ran into Alexander, mistook him for one of the four juvenile suspects and shot him."
Even if he was... an officer, well trained in hand to hand combat, also armed with a tazer... reached for his gun first. Why are we giving cops tazers if they are reaching for their guns first still? Are they only armed with tazers so they can torture confessions out of already subdued suspects?
You obviously don?t understand Deadly Force and the circumstances when you may be forced to use it. You are also obviously unaware of the ?21 foot rule?. Basically, if you both start to react at the same time, any normal adult within 21 feet of you will get to you BEFORE you can draw your weapon and use it to stop him. You better already have it in your hand at a low ready position if you think you may need it. You might want to read this article by Dennis Tueller (from 1983, only been common knowledge 25 years or so
http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Tueller/How.Close.htm)
You need to go out one night carrying a Taser at 2AM looking for 4 burglars and run into some guy carrying a broomstick or shower rod. Now you have to make a split-second decision on what to do. Tasers are ineffective on about 10% of people under IDEAL training circumstances, and in the real world have proven to be effective 67.7% of the time. Means if that big dude carrying the broomstick is one of the burglars, that 1 out of 3 times he?s is going to stick it up your a** after he beats the sh** out of you with it if you?re stupid enough to have a Taser in your hand. And if the Taser DOES work on him, you?re going to feel even stupider when his 3 buddies come around the corner right behind him and you?re standing there with an expended Taser in your hand. You willing to take those odds? Assuming the officer knew there were multiple burglars in the area, I can?t imagine him doing anything BUT having a gun in his hand.
What makes you think the officer was ?well trained in hand to hand combat????. Have you ever been through ANY kind of police or military training??? All the police training I?m familiar with emphasizes hand to hand combat much less than military Basic training. If you consider everyone coming out of Basic to be ?well trained in hand to hand combat?, you really need to meet someone who is actually well trained sometime so you can learn the difference. A couple of hours instruction and practice on basic holds and techniques DOES NOT make you "well trained in hand to hand combat" any more than a few hours of instruction in high school anatomy and dissecting a few rats makes you a "well trained doctor".
Nothing I can find describes the facts of this incident. It is unfortunate that the innocent guy was shot. Possibly he didn?t know the cops were out there. If he did, I would suggest that if people with guns are outside your house looking for other people who also possibly have guns, common sense would suggest that you STAY INSIDE YOUR HOUSE! If someone tries to break in, then beat the whatever out of them with the broomstick. Why were the cops called? Were the burglars supposedly armed? What info did the cops have? Why did he come outside at 2AM? Was he trying to help? Was he 6?6, 250 pounds, coming at a 5?10?, 150 pound cop with a broomstick? Did he hear something? Who knows? As the more reasonable posters have stated, no where near enough facts to make a decision here.
Even the Supreme Court has ruled that decisions on the use of force must be judged from the perspective of the officer on the scene, not a bunch of 20-20 hindsighters like I see on here. Look up Graham vs Conner, 490 US 386 (
http://supreme.justia.com/us/490/386/):
Graham vs Conner said:
The "reasonableness" of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation. Pp. 490 U. S. 396-397.
Skyhawk said:
Though I'm sure he feels awful he should be charged with the maximum penalty the law will allow. In all actuality he should be charged with manslaughter.
Hope you?re not on any Grand Jury making decisions about someone I care about. Nothing like charging someone with manslaughter without having any idea of the applicable laws or facts in the case.
