It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cops go to wrong house then shoot the home owner.

page: 1
15
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Officers respond to wrong house; shoot homeowner in neck.


HENRY COUNTY, GA (CBS46) - An officer-involved shooting which resulted in a resident being shot by Henry County police is being investigated by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation.

The incident occurred in the 600 block of Swan Lake Road near Stockbridge around 1:30 am Wednesday.

Henry County police responded to a 911 call reporting gunshots and an unknown female yelling for help. Three officers were dispatched to the neighborhood. “Based on the directions given to the police officers there, they wound up at the residence of Mr. Powell,” stated Scott Dutton with the GBI.

Upon arrival at 690 Swan Lake Road, officers spotted William Powell, 63, who was armed with a handgun.

According to the GBI, officers told Powell to drop his handgun, but he did not comply. Powell was then shot by one of the officers in the neck.

Youre literally not safe in your own home anymore.

I dont mean from the common criminal, I mean from the police.

I realize that some of you will disagree with me but personally, I would much rather deal with a common criminal.

You are legally allowed to defend yourself from a street thug.

Defending yourself from a cop is illegal.

edit on 9-6-2016 by gladtobehere because: wording




posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 01:36 AM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere
Shot in the neck? Sounds like he missed firearms training that day. It's a shame but if the police report is anything to go by, just comply. Like the grand national winner "comply or die".



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 02:05 AM
link   
Oh, ff#. The second mistaken shooting(possibly more) in just a few days, both have resulting in an unnecessary death.

In this other case "Dog Shot, Killed by Deputies Responding to Wrong House in Hesperia"


Officers responding to a call in Southern California showed up at the wrong house and shot and killed a family dog in what police are calling a tragic accident.

Source
One can try to avert dog shootings happening with a "beware of dog" sign and or other signs according to their local laws.

With people, a whole other story, what's the solution to this madness? Such as having better educated officers in these cases of mistaken localities to advocating for a change from the top up in PDs with these issues.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 02:27 AM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

He was guilty, guilty of the crime of not being the right person, which is punishable by summary execution



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 02:33 AM
link   
This story reminded me of a burglary I suffered a few years ago.

Phoned the cops straightaway, gave all the details.

An hour later, still no cops.

Phoned again, obviously upset and angry at the lack of response.

They'd gone to the address I gave, but in the wrong town.

They'd never make it as cab drivers these guys, would they?



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 02:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ohanka
a reply to: gladtobehere

He was guilty, guilty of the crime of not being the right person, which is punishable by summary execution





He had a gun, it may have been him
, safer to shoot first and go home to your family



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 02:52 AM
link   
a reply to: GemmyMcGemJew

The difference between a police officer and a regular citizen, aside from the uniform and the power of arrest, is that where as a regular citizen has no duty to face death in the service of justice, an officer should be prepared to die rather than suffer harm coming to a citizen. If the officer is harming the citizen, then something is awry.

For this reason, it must never be the case that failure to comply with commands is considered adequate reason to discharge ones service weapon. Getting shot at, would be an adequate reason, not just seeing a gun, or even seeing it in the hand of an individual, but someone at least pointing the gun directly at the officer, would be an adequate reason to discharge a weapon for an officer.

Otherwise than that, they should be prepared to die rather than oppress a single innocent. If they are not, they aren't in the job for the right reason at all.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:01 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit
I'm assuming you are British like me. To say you must wait for a gun to be pointed at you before you discharge your firearm could only come from someone from Britain. It's a rather fanciful concept living in the hope the person with the gun won't fire upon the LEO. The split second reaction time to draw your firearm could result in death.

For me, if an officer tells you to drop a gun and you do not comply to the order, you are a PERCEIVED THREAT, regardless of your intentions. It shows non conformity, a behavioural trait associated with criminal/ someone that could do harm. Plus you never know what substance abuse they do. It is well known in america the most dangerous situation for cops is domestic call outs as there is little information, preperation or coordination based on a fuzzy "goal" (shots fired woman screaming could have so many different permetations).

All I can go according to is US cops testimony and reality shows where they state the worse dangers they can experience. Unfortunately this is one of the most dangerous, which led to the death of a non compliant innocent.

All I would ask is if you were a cop and you demanded someone to drop their gun and they didn't comply, would you hope they didn't fire upon you or follow "procedure to ensure you are the one to see your family again. It's a very difficult situation that I feel neither of us can related to in terms of domestic violence callouts.

Oh and I totally disagree with the statement they should be prepared to die. Police officers have no intention of dying and minimise the risk by not putting themselves in bad positions. I won't go on more.

Thankyou.

edit on 9-6-2016 by GemmyMcGemJew because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-6-2016 by GemmyMcGemJew because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: GemmyMcGemJew

If you don't love justice and freedom enough to die for it, then you should not be employed in a role which might require you to kill for it.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: GemmyMcGemJew
a reply to: TrueBrit

For me, if an officer tells you to drop a gun and you do not comply to the order,
what you don't get though is cops don't give you a chance to comply, from the moment they shout "drop it" to the moment they shoot you is about 1 second, they never intend to give you a chance to drop it. They only shout "drop it" to give themselves justification. "I told him to drop it, he did not comply" besides that if some criminal breaks into your home and shouts "drop it" would you? This man had no reason to believe it was a cop not a criminal, cops don't announce themselves reliably like they used to, we need body cam footage to know if he did,



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: GemmyMcGemJew
a reply to: gladtobehere
Shot in the neck? Sounds like he missed firearms training that day. It's a shame but if the police report is anything to go by, just comply. Like the grand national winner "comply or die".


You know if someone kicks my damned door down for no reason and without identifying themselves, they are getting shot at.

Not my fault they got the wrong house. They can get their # together and figure out where they're supposed to be. If they can't they can deal with the consequences.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:56 AM
link   
Has it occurred to anyone besides CJCrawley that our outrage is misplaced?

All the funding since 9/11, all the training and tech toys and STILL !!!
Crappy 911 systems for dispatch and locating the origin of the call?

The military can shoot the butt out of a fly at a couple of hundred miles but we can't find the correct JQPublic?

I do know locating cell phone callers for local LEO's isn't as easy (if at all) by systems currently used.
Yet the NSA knows what web sites I read?

Anyone else seeing a problem with this?

In a sense funding for Police depts is also to blame. Our town went with a bunch of part-timers to save $$$. This means one officer works usually part time for 3-4 localities and really doesn't get a good chance to make good ties to the communities. It's like working a bunch of part time burger flipper jobs. They are tired ( I assume) and just do their best.

Most localities around me can't afford police coverage at all and are dependent on the State police. Hope it wasn't an emergency because they have such large geographical area's it may take several hours or more for a response. If it's not a life or death emergency, it may take a couple of days.

The weirder the weather is the busier they are keeping intersections safe etc, till the local fire depts can show up, or the appropriate utilities.

Not saying all Officers are white-knights, there are some real "tools" out there in uniform who should NEVER have passed the psych part of their application testing. Heck in some jurisdictions they aren't even tested. Maybe if people changed that things might improve.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 05:47 AM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

He was shot because he had a handgun.

Non compliance to the order to put the gun down could have been a misunderstanding or merely confusion as to who was giving the order.

The possession of a firearm does not protect you.

It makes you a priority target regardless of if it is Law enforcement that has weapons drawn, or if it is an armed intruder, or other armed criminal.

In a scenario where everyone is armed, things like this are bound to occur.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 06:52 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Taking a bullet to save an innocent is a rather different act than taking a bullet to make sure the bad guy isn't pointing a gun at you for poops and giggles.

Most of us are more than willing to put ourselves between a bad guy and bystanders. What we're not willing to do is take a bullet so the internet can tell our widows and children the guy that killed us was in fact a bad man.

Noble sentiment you posted, but oversimplified.

Disclaimer: not to be construed as a seal of approval for the incident in the OP. I sincerely hope the resident gets recompense.
edit on 9-6-2016 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 07:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Noble sentiment you posted, but oversimplified.

Disclaimer: not to be construed as a seal of approval for the incident in the OP. I sincerely hope the resident gets recompense.



Want to bet no video survives of this manly bold shooting?

Because what I bet is that the guy went out to find who was screaming and the cops were lurking about, spotlit him in the face, screamed dropitdropit and opened fire, without identifying themselves.

You can sure arrange for someone to freeze in panic or confusion, a light to the face and a lot of screaming conflicting orders is a really good way. And they're trained to do just that, are they not? At least, that's how it ends up going.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

When a cop shows up, and coincidentally the place you are told to go to has an armed man standing there...... Come on. It is tragic yes, but there was no ill intent. They DID warn the man to drop the weapon. Mistakes do happen.


iTruthSeeker



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 07:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: iTruthSeeker
Come on. It is tragic yes, but there was no ill intent. They DID warn the man to drop the weapon. Mistakes do happen.

iTruthSeeker


If you come up behind someone in their own yard, fail to identify, spotlight them and scream 'drop it' and 'freeze' and 'down' at the same time then start shooting, it may not require ill intent, but the incompetence rises to the level of criminality.

It's easy to get people to misreact. Shamrock will probably agree. Surprise and dazzling them will do that. And it's how you're trained to deal with coming up on armed people.

Recall, this man was not the criminal. He was a homeowner in his own yard. He had every right to be there. Armed. He was not the problem. If you are the cop, you would hopefully be a bit more wise than to assume the first person you come up on is the criminal, even if you think you might be at something like the right address. If the dispatcher wasn't quite sure, I would imagine she/he told them that the address wasn't confirmed.

This is why we need cameras that are always on and can't be turned off or erased. If the guy turned and pointed the weapon at them, then ok. If he got a three cell maglite to the face dropitdropitdropit bang bang bang, then you've failed to identify AND induced the man not to drop the weapon, and it ought to rise to manslaughter.

But of course, no evidence like that would see the light of day.

eta: I can get you to help me meet LOAC by coming up behind you and yelling HEY too. I guarantee you'll turn around. And then I can say "he swiveled his weapon around toward me so I fired" and it will be absolutely true.

edit on 9-6-2016 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

Yea there needs to be more known about the case to really draw conclusions. Seems like a big accident though. Who knows.


iTruthSeeker



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 07:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: iTruthSeeker
a reply to: Bedlam

Yea there needs to be more known about the case to really draw conclusions. Seems like a big accident though. Who knows.


iTruthSeeker


If the poor guy had anything WHATEVER to do with the crime, it would be different.

It's not like the guy was some hardened criminal they'd just caught in some high crime neighborhood. It was some guy in the neighborhood checking out the screaming. So it's not like he's going to stand there and scream "You'll never take me alive, copper!" and start swapping slugs with them.

Things being accidental shouldn't excuse from incompetence. I think shooting the wrong guy at the wrong address is a bit more than 'whoopsie, do over'. Yes, you have to decide in a split second. But really BAD decisions should sort of, you know, disqualify you from ever having to make that sort of decision again.

eta: and if "what?" or "who the hell are you?" preceded the bam bam bam, then the cops ought to get the treatment. And given the guy wasn't a crook, I'm betting that he either didn't know who the cops were (remember, someone's been screaming, how does the GUY know the cops aren't the criminals, if they're shining a light in his face and screaming things and don't identify?) or the cops didn't give him time to grasp what was going on.
edit on 9-6-2016 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

An officer who is more interested in maintaining his or her safety, than they are in making absolutely sure they never take an innocent life, is not ideologically suited to the role of law enforcement agent. People accepted for the role of law enforcement, should be ideologically driven, in so far as they should all operate with the express understanding that the moment they join that service, their lives are MEANT to be LITERALLY spent in the service of justice and the protection of the citizenry. They should not be the sort of person who desires or possesses family, or property, or places more importance on coming home to those things, than they do on doing as near to a perfect job as is humanly possible as a representative of justice, as its right hand, as its will made manifest in flesh.

They should only value their mortal lives, in so far as that they are more useful to justice and to the citizens protected by it while alive, than they are dead. They should be fundamentally opposed to considering their own fears, needs, or desires, before the needs of justice or the citizen. They should SERVE, not go to work. There should not be a single officer armed by a nation or state or city, in defence of any one of those differing borders, who is not fundamentally incapable of putting their fear of death before the rights of the citizens.

No one, other than such a person as I outline above, should be wearing a badge and enforcing the law. They might be rare, but I am willing to bet that if the only officers out there were of that calibre, your forces would be respected and no one would be able to question their loyalty to the people, or the justice which protects them all. As it is, saving their own skin rather than risking their life does not fill folk with confidence, and it is not as if this is the only situation which bears similarity to it.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join