Cop shoots DUI suspect after crash, DA won't charge cop

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

GarfieldtheCat

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2005
3,708
1
0
It looked to me like an accidental discharge caused by bad trigger discipline. Certainly I'd agree there was not justification for shooting the suspect under the circumstances, but this looked like an accident to me. I don't think this moron should be a cop anymore, and would have no problem with his being charged for criminal negligence. I am particularly troubled that he didn't tell anyone he had fired the shot - it speaks to his terrible judgment all around.

Serious question. Why? He is responsible for his weapon. If you or I "accidentally" shot someone, we would both be in jail for some offense.

This NYPD cop really did accidentally shoot someone, and he is charged with manslaughter since the man died. How is this different?

http://nypost.com/2015/06/23/cop-who-shot-unarmed-man-brooklyn-da-is-biased-against-nypd/

If they can get away with shooting people by "accident", that will become the #1 excuse to kill people. Right now it's the "fear of the officers life" excuse. It gives them a get of jail free card, and they already have a full deck of them, they don't need another.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,330
126
So many of you here are so damn clueless about police work and it's not worth the time or energy to explain how things are. But I will say this, no question in my mind that the officer had an accidental discharge.

I have been taught how to handle firearms safely since I was 8 years old and imho there is no such thing as an "A.D.", especially in a situation like that. If you follow the very simple rules of firearm safety it's quite literally impossible to have an AD in that situation. That makes it negligence not accidental, those two things are quite different.

Then the entire bullshit of him trying to pretend that he didn't get shot or that maybe he got shot back at the Canteen.....
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
First rule of gun safety - never point your gun at anything that you don't intend to destroy
Second rule of gun safety - do not put your finger on the trigger until you are absolutely sure you are ready to fire

too bad cops don't get basic firearm training anymore!
They get basic firearms training. They just don't particularly get any reason to follow it.

I have been taught how to handle firearms safely since I was 8 years old and imho there is no such thing as an "A.D.", especially in a situation like that. If you follow the very simple rules of firearm safety it's quite literally impossible to have an AD in that situation. That makes it negligence not accidental, those two things are quite different.

Then the entire bullshit of him trying to pretend that he didn't get shot or that maybe he got shot back at the Canteen.....
I had a coworker who was accidentally shot at an Army range by one of his closest friends. Everyone agreed that the Colt had malfunctioned; the last round did not fire, did not eject, and failed to fire again when the gun was dry-fired into the sand barrel. (SOP was to fire the magazine, eject the magazine, rack the slide, and dry-fire into the sand barrel just in case. The accidental discharge happened while they were returning the pistols to the range sergeant. Dude still did two years because he failed to treat the gun as loaded and allowed it to point at a fellow soldier. A ricochet might have been explicable; a direct hit was not.

One big mitigating factor here though - the cop pointing it at this dangerous lunatic WAS SOP for the situation and his job, so any accidental discharge will strike this, ahem, fine individual. I think though that the cop still has some culpability for not verifying that the asshole was hit, not rendering aid, and not reporting the fact to the EMTs in a timely fashion. Treatment might differ if one has been shot.
 

MongGrel

Lifer
Dec 3, 2013
38,466
3,067
121
I have been taught how to handle firearms safely since I was 8 years old and imho there is no such thing as an "A.D.", especially in a situation like that. If you follow the very simple rules of firearm safety it's quite literally impossible to have an AD in that situation. That makes it negligence not accidental, those two things are quite different.

Then the entire bullshit of him trying to pretend that he didn't get shot or that maybe he got shot back at the Canteen.....

Just a moldy old goldie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP6UvNgbqIA
 

MrPickins

Diamond Member
May 24, 2003
9,125
792
126
I had a coworker who was accidentally shot at an Army range by one of his closest friends. Everyone agreed that the Colt had malfunctioned; the last round did not fire, did not eject, and failed to fire again when the gun was dry-fired into the sand barrel. (SOP was to fire the magazine, eject the magazine, rack the slide, and dry-fire into the sand barrel just in case. The accidental discharge happened while they were returning the pistols to the range sergeant. Dude still did two years because he failed to treat the gun as loaded and allowed it to point at a fellow soldier. A ricochet might have been explicable; a direct hit was not.

Wow.

This is why you lock the slide open and verify the chamber is empty (in addition to not pointing the barrel at anyone)...
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,330
126
They get basic firearms training. They just don't particularly get any reason to follow it.


I had a coworker who was accidentally shot at an Army range by one of his closest friends. Everyone agreed that the Colt had malfunctioned; the last round did not fire, did not eject, and failed to fire again when the gun was dry-fired into the sand barrel. (SOP was to fire the magazine, eject the magazine, rack the slide, and dry-fire into the sand barrel just in case. The accidental discharge happened while they were returning the pistols to the range sergeant. Dude still did two years because he failed to treat the gun as loaded and allowed it to point at a fellow soldier. A ricochet might have been explicable; a direct hit was not.

Exactly. If you do the very simple things that I've been taught like direct visual of the chamber after you eject the magazine that accident is impossible. Even AFTER that you still treat the gun as loaded and you don't point it at anyone. Every person that touches the gun after should pull the slide back and check the chamber regardless if you just watched someone else do it.


One big mitigating factor here though - the cop pointing it at this dangerous lunatic WAS SOP for the situation and his job, so any accidental discharge will strike this, ahem, fine individual. I think though that the cop still has some culpability for not verifying that the asshole was hit, not rendering aid, and not reporting the fact to the EMTs in a timely fashion. Treatment might differ if one has been shot.

I saw zero reason why the cop should have put his finger on the trigger. The guy couldn't have been less of a threat when as he had his full body weight on both of his arms. The only time your finger should touch the trigger is when you intend to immediately put a hole in something. Where I come from finger on the trigger = you meant to pull it. Granted it's high stress and all that which is why I call it negligence and not anything else. I, as a civilian, am expected to follow those rules and if I don't and accidentally get someone shot I will be, and fully expect to be, charged with a crime. I expect no more or less from the people we give vastly more training and then issue a firearm to.

I'd almost let this go too if it wasn't for the cop pretending he didn't shoot the guy even after the guy said he was shot and not telling the EMT, or anyone, until he absolutely had to. Knowing what's wrong with a patient is vital to saving someones life, the fact that he was getting out of the vehicle shows that he probably wasn't seriously injured from the crash.

Edit: Don't forget that the officer said that he wasn't even pointing the gun at him so it's hard to claim fear for his life is what caused him to put his finger on the trigger. The only explanation is that the officer fucked up. There are supposed to be consequences when you fuck up and seriously injure someone else in the process of fucking up.
 
Last edited:

Subyman

Moderator <br> VC&G Forum
Mar 18, 2005
7,876
32
86
So many of you here are so damn clueless about police work and it's not worth the time or energy to explain how things are. But I will say this, no question in my mind that the officer had an accidental discharge.

Ah yes, we don't have the right idea about covering up a shooting, how a trigger works, or how a cop should get a free pass.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
WTH? The U.S. police now has the license to kill anyone, anytime at will, under any circumstances?

Th DUI driver should be behind bars, but kill him on the spot? Are you Batman?

There is no US police.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
Speaking for our City, it's not the Cameras that cost a ton of money, it's the storage. When you have to record hours upon days of that footage, we're talking hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars. Everyone here clamored for it, but when we presented the quote we got from 3 different companies for storage, not a single person voted for any of them.

lol yup. Data Center and SAN's are expensive.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
First rule of gun safety - never point your gun at anything that you don't intend to destroy
Second rule of gun safety - do not put your finger on the trigger until you are absolutely sure you are ready to fire



too bad cops don't get basic firearm training anymore!

good grief, the dumb!

its amazing how these threads bring out the dummies.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,330
126
Update:

Man that was shot is now DEAD, looks like this is now a murder investigation:

http://www.krcrtv.com/news/local/man-shot-by-paradise-police-officer-dies/37050562

"Ramsey said one of the reasons Feaster could not be charged was because Thomas had not died."

WTFBBQ??? Seriously?? Someone has to fucking die in order for a LEO to be charged when they fuck up and shoot someone? Paralyzing him from the neck down isn't worthy of a charge but hey he's dead now so I guess we gotta look into this shit.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
DVC, would this defense have any chance in court:
"The driver was fleeing from that officer for fear of his life. The officer had on an another occasion when the officer was off duty told my client that he would shoot him on sight if he caught him breaking the law while he was on duty - and that he knew he would get away with it. It is fortunate that my client survived the shooting and can tell his side of the story."

To much fantasy? Or enough to give a jury reasonable doubt?

It's hard for me to respond because your hypothetical is so . . . fanciful. I can't imagine someone raising a defense like that, and I think it'd be hard to get a jury to take the defense seriously since it would be coming from the mouth of a man who had killed his wife while driving drunk. Among other reasons, I can't see how the driver could have known the identity of the cop pulling him over. I suppose if there were evidence to support that this threat had occurred, it could create a legal justification for the reckless driving, but even then this would be considered vehicular homicide because the driver was driving drunk and his wife died.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,330
126
It's hard for me to respond because your hypothetical is so . . . fanciful. I can't imagine someone raising a defense like that, and I think it'd be hard to get a jury to take the defense seriously since it would be coming from the mouth of a man who had killed his wife while driving drunk. Among other reasons, I can't see how the driver could have known the identity of the cop pulling him over. I suppose if there were evidence to support that this threat had occurred, it could create a legal justification for the reckless driving, but even then this would be considered vehicular homicide because the driver was driving drunk and his wife died.

Why can't a cop be charged in a situation like this unless they actually kill someone as the chief said in his statement?
 

Vaux

Senior member
May 24, 2013
593
6
81
Ah yes, we don't have the right idea about covering up a shooting, how a trigger works, or how a cop should get a free pass.

You're right, you don't. And I am kind of tired of teaching here, only to find the same people making the same retarded comments in every daily cop hate thread.

Just about all of you already know what to believe as soon as you read the headline.
 
Last edited:

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Too many people these days believe that a cop who is above the law will protect them from criminals without realizing that a cop who is above the law is a criminal.
 

SphinxnihpS

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2005
8,368
25
91
So many of you here are so damn clueless about police work and it's not worth the time or energy to explain how things are. But I will say this, no question in my mind that the officer had an accidental discharge.

You're going to do very well around here...
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Why can't a cop be charged in a situation like this unless they actually kill someone as the chief said in his statement?

They can be, at least potentially. If the evidence supported the idea that this was an intentional shooting, he could be charged with assault & battery or potentially attempted murder. The evidence doesn't seem (to me) to support that, however. Even so he could be charged with criminal negligence, but that is up to the discretion of the prosecutor. Personally I think he probably should be charged, in light of the fact that he didn't tell anyone he had shot the suspect. That could easily have led to the guy's death.
 

SphinxnihpS

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2005
8,368
25
91
They can be, at least potentially. If the evidence supported the idea that this was an intentional shooting, he could be charged with assault & battery or potentially attempted murder. The evidence doesn't seem (to me) to support that, however. Even so he could be charged with criminal negligence, but that is up to the discretion of the prosecutor. Personally I think he probably should be charged, in light of the fact that he didn't tell anyone he had shot the suspect. That could easily have led to the guy's death.

How do you see this as unintentional?
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,315
1,215
126
They can be, at least potentially. If the evidence supported the idea that this was an intentional shooting, he could be charged with assault & battery or potentially attempted murder. The evidence doesn't seem (to me) to support that, however. Even so he could be charged with criminal negligence, but that is up to the discretion of the prosecutor. Personally I think he probably should be charged, in light of the fact that he didn't tell anyone he had shot the suspect. That could easily have led to the guy's death.

Meh. I would be happy enough if he simply lost his job. I'm not really seeing any convictions coming from this. Why even bother?