Police gun down INNOCENT 72 year old man, blame poor lighting for being at wrong home

[DCal430]

Police shot and killed a 72-year-old man while searching the wrong home.
Fort Worth, TX., police have blamed poor lighting after responding May 28 to a burglary alarm, searching the wrong home and shooting dead beloved husband Jerry Waller, according to an affidavit. The city of Fort Worth has had more than one incident involving misidentified homes this year, the second resulted in the wrong house being bulldozed.
Mr. Waller’s home is across the street from the home the police should have been responding to, according to reports.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-responding-burglar-alarm.html#ixzz2aGmtAQ3u
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Fu*king crooked a55 cops. There needs to more outrage over sh*t like this.

Thread title edited from sensationalism to more accurate. -Admin DrPizza (added in "for being at wrong home.) Also it's "police blame" not "police blames", so I corrected the grammar, allowing enough characters to fit the "e" on home.

 

[michal1980]

agree with Dcal on this.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Relax, he was against the NSA snooping. Your guys won.

 

[irishScott]

Uhhh... no they didn't blame the lighting. Did you read the article?

‘The guy came out with a gun and wouldn’t put the gun down,’ Officer Hanlon said. ‘He pointed it at [Officer] Hoeppner, Hoeppner fired [his gun],’ the officer added.

Both officers assert they identified themselves as police and asked Waller to put his gun down. Waller instead pointed his firearm at the officers, causing them to fire in self-defense, killing him in his garage.

If that's true then you can add "idiot" to the list of adjectives describing the guy.

 

[DCal430]

Uhhh... no they didn't blame the lighting. Did you read the article?



If that's true then you can add "idiot" to the list of adjectives describing the guy.

They did blame poor lighting, read the article.

FYI that comment was just an excuse, a story after the fact to cover up their killing of an innocent.

 

[irishScott]

They did blame poor lighting, read the article.

FYI that comment was just an excuse, a story after the fact to cover up their killing of an innocent.

They blamed it for picking the wrong house, not for shooting the guy as your title implies.

As for the truthfulness of their statement, why exactly are you sure it's a lie? Hell I thought you loved police. Last I checked you wanted to eliminate guns by having children turn in their gun owning parents to cops like this.

 

[EagleKeeper]

‘There is no lighting around the home and the officers had only the use of their flashlights, they encountered a subject who was armed with a handgun standing near the corner of the home,’ the affidavit continued

You have no lighting around the house.
Guy comes out with a firearm.
Points it at the officers
Refuses to put it down after officers ID themselves (recorded)
Guy gets shot.


Idiot old man.

DCal again refuses to comprehend what is written

 

[woolfe9998]

They did blame poor lighting, read the article.

FYI that comment was just an excuse, a story after the fact to cover up their killing of an innocent.

I read the article. It looks like they blamed poor lighting for being at the wrong house. The description quoted by IS appears to be their story for why they shot the guy. Where do you get "after the fact to cover up"? It may be so, but how can you tell that from the article?

 

[Moonbeam]

I read the article. It looks like they blamed poor lighting for being at the wrong house. The description quoted by IS appears to be their story for why they shot the guy. Where do you get "after the fact to cover up"? It may be so, but how can you tell that from the article?

Was there a gun on the body? How can identifying yourself as the police excuse being shot in somebody's house when anybody at all can make that claim and you could be dead before you can verify it. What if the homeowner is deaf. Why would I expect the police to break into my house. A person would have to be deranged to expect police on a break in if the home owner isn't doing anything wrong. Shouldn't there be massive penalties for getting the wrong house. Doesn't such sloppiness go with a lack of consequence? Is there any reason to believe the police would admit to shooting just in case they were in danger? Don't police like to keep their jobs and reputations? And don't they also maybe deal with way too much stress and responsibility for what they get paid or the appreciation they get from the public?

 

[irishScott]

Was there a gun on the body? How can identifying yourself as the police excuse being shot in somebody's house when anybody at all can make that claim and you could be dead before you can verify it. What if the homeowner is deaf. Why would I expect the police to break into my house. A person would have to be deranged to expect police on a break in if the home owner isn't doing anything wrong. Shouldn't there be massive penalties for getting the wrong house. Doesn't such sloppiness go with a lack of consequence? Is there any reason to believe the police would admit to shooting just in case they were in danger? Don't police like to keep their jobs and reputations? And don't they also maybe deal with way too much stress and responsibility for what they get paid or the appreciation they get from the public?

20 questions aside, if anyone, police, rapist or otherwise already has a gun on you and instructs you to put your gun down, you put your gun down. Trying to go Clint Eastwood on their ass will very likely get you shot, as this poor geezer apparently found out.

 

[Fern]

Many 72 yr olds don't see or hear well, nor is the mind particularly sharp especially when being awakened in the middle of the night.

This is all on the cops. How damn stupid are you if you can't find an address with a flashlight. If you don't know how to use a flashlight you shouldn't be issued a gun.

Fern

 

[irishScott]

Many 72 yr olds don't see or hear well, nor is the mind particularly sharp especially when being awakened in the middle of the night.

This is all on the cops. How damn stupid are you if you can't find an address with a flashlight. If you don't know how to use a flashlight you shouldn't be issued a gun.

Fern

I'll admit the cops were dumb and certainly not blameless, but the police can't accommodate everything. It's not like they can assign someone fluent in sign language to every patrol car just because they might run into the occasional deaf person.

If the old man raised a gun at them then they were well within their rights to shoot him. Cops are under no obligation to wait for the first shot, although a lot of people seem to have this unicorn/rainbows expectation that they are (probably thanks to Hollywood). It's both parties' faults, and ultimately is just a tragic situation where stupidity collided with senility.

 

[Zodiark1593]

You have no lighting around the house.
Guy comes out with a firearm.
Points it at the officers
Refuses to put it down after officers ID themselves (recorded)
Guy gets shot.


Idiot old man.

DCal again refuses to comprehend what is written

Going after the wrong house isn't exactly a minor issue by any extent of the imagination.

While I think the police should have some blame for identifying the wrong house, the rest of the event is purely a fatal misunderstanding.

The guy in question is old, likely resulting in diminished senses, in addition, being awoken in the middle of the night, isn't likely in good mental condition to accurately identify whether or not the intruder is a threat or a cop. For all he knew, the intruder could have been robbers passing themselves off as police.

Now the cops, not knowing they were at the wrong house are staring down the suspect who is armed and appears ready to open fire. Not sure about the folks here, but (after attempted communication fails) I'd think that a cop would rather end the threat ASAP rather than prolonging the situation in an (risky) attempt for a peaceful resolve.

Nothing more than a tragic accident due to unfortunate human error. It's not like we don't already get plenty of these. :|

 

[Venix]

Waller was allegedly shot inside his garage near the door to the kitchen, yet the police affidavit uses the ambiguous phrases "near the corner of the home" and "near the garage-driveway area." If he was killed inside the garage, that's extremely deceptive.

I see no reason to blindly trust anyone's account of the events. The situation needs to be investigated by an unbiased third party.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Was there a gun on the body? How can identifying yourself as the police excuse being shot in somebody's house when anybody at all can make that claim and you could be dead before you can verify it. What if the homeowner is deaf. Why would I expect the police to break into my house. A person would have to be deranged to expect police on a break in if the home owner isn't doing anything wrong. Shouldn't there be massive penalties for getting the wrong house. Doesn't such sloppiness go with a lack of consequence? Is there any reason to believe the police would admit to shooting just in case they were in danger? Don't police like to keep their jobs and reputations? And don't they also maybe deal with way too much stress and responsibility for what they get paid or the appreciation they get from the public?

Are you looking for answers or just a general off the wall in all directional rant.

 

[ericlp]

Not only can they not use a flashlight to find the correct address but couldn't they have shot the guy in the knee or something? Ah well. Stupid on all parts.

 

[Moonbeam]

Are you looking for answers or just a general off the wall in all directional rant.

Before I look for answers I look for the questions the limited information I have suggest would need to be explored before I could arrive at any meaningful conclusions. I call that listing rather than ranting especially since the list was only partial. I find that without approaching a situation filled with my own portfolio of predigested assumptions the vacuum created thereby leaves room for a lot of questions. Folk that read links and have all the answers to spout I find to be rather amusing, doubtless the result of poor lighting. We don't want to rush to the conclusion this condition is the result of dim bulbs, now do we.

 

[Oyeve]

Texas, runner up for Fuck tard state after Florida.

 

[waggy]

fucked up situation.

A old man just woken up thinking someone is breaking in. And fucking stupid cops that can't use a flashlight.

bad situation sadly resulting in the old mans death.

 

[Zodiark1593]

Not only can they not use a flashlight to find the correct address but couldn't they have shot the guy in the knee or something? Ah well. Stupid on all parts.

Police are trained to shoot to kill. Basically, if you survive an officer shooting you, that's more down to dumb luck than intentional incapacitation.

 

[marvdmartian]

Uhhh... no they didn't blame the lighting. Did you read the article?



If that's true then you can add "idiot" to the list of adjectives describing the guy.

You DO realize that seventy-something year old people tend to be hard of hearing, and oftentimes confused if overwhelmed with sensory input, right??

Having two rookie cops involved will NOT help their case.

 

[bshole]

You have no lighting around the house.
Guy comes out with a firearm.
Points it at the officers
Refuses to put it down after officers ID themselves (recorded)
Guy gets shot.

Of course that is what happened. The police never lie and the only one could possibly contradict this story is dead. Don't worry the police will investigate the incident for us and I am sure they will clear the officers of any wrong doing.

You literally have to film the cops breaking the law for their behavior to be challenged. Given the sheer volume of police getting caught in lies (and exposed on youtube), the SELF SERVING statements of officers must be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[bshole]

Police are trained to shoot to kill. Basically, if you survive an officer shooting you, that's more down to dumb luck than intentional incapacitation.

Tell that to the two latina women who were shot by 9 officers in their crazy manhunt for Doehner in LA. Police shot 70 odd times with only a few non-fatal shots hitting the two innocent women. The cops were cleared of all charges of course and settled for millions with the two ladies.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Not only can they not use a flashlight to find the correct address but couldn't they have shot the guy in the knee or something? Ah well. Stupid on all parts.

A weapon pointed at you requires a shot to stop a potential threat.
Aiming for a limb is not guaranteed to hit and may not stop the shot.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Of course that is what happened. The police never lie and the only one could possibly contradict this story is dead. Don't worry the police will investigate the incident for us and I am sure they will clear the officers of any wrong doing.

You literally have to film the cops breaking the law for their behavior to be challenged. Given the sheer volume of police getting caught in lies (and exposed on youtube), the SELF SERVING statements of officers must be taken with a grain of salt.

Pictures do not show lighting around the house.
The report does not show lighting around the house.
You would suspect that the paper would have challenged the statement that there was no lighting if there is lighting.

There is audio indicating the police order the weapon to be put down.

A coverup will be difficult to justify; but I am sure (right or wrong) that as long as the officers are hung out to dry; JUSTICE was served. :thumbsdown: