Cop shoots and kills 73 year old grandmother during police shoot/dont shoot demonstration

a reply to: odzeandennz

Ummm...blanks are not "live rounds."

I noted the difference between the two, and sadly, there is plenty of precedent to show that these types of accidents in trainings and demonstrations--accidentally loading live rounds when blanks should be there--do happen. It's a tragic thing.

Sorry about the late response.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: SlapMonkey

That being said how do you feel about the dog attack ?

The dog attack video is a completely different issue, but it's pretty terrible, nonetheless.

Again, though--completely different issue.

Sorry about the late response.

originally posted by: mtnshredder
a reply to: SlapMonkey

BS, this is gross negligence a thousand fold. This idiot did so many things wrong it's incomprehensible. Did he mean to kill her? No, but with all the mistakes he made, it was a murder waiting to happen. His actions were inexcusable and to top it off he shot her more than once? Good gawd, you really can't fix stupid can ya.

Well, for one, you're letting your ignorance show, as anything that is accidental that results in a death is not "murder."

Secondly, officers are trained to fire more than once at a threat, so that was an extension of his training--if you think that the fact that he fired more than once is indicative of anything else, you're wrong (at least, in general).

Also, to be fair, I noted that this is negligence, and even said that I can understand if he is charged with negligent homicide.

How about you list what he did wrong for me, and we'll see if our lists match up, because I can only think of one thing that he did wrong, which is not checking his own magazine and firearm prior to the demonstration to ensure that the proper rounds were in place...and since he apparently did not do that, that is why I would support a charge of negligent homicide.

A LEO should know better than that. Hell, my 12-year-old son would know better than that.

Sorry about the late response.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

How about you list what he did wrong for me, and we'll see if our lists match up, because I can only think of one thing that he did wrong, which is not checking his own magazine and firearm prior to the demonstration to ensure that the proper rounds were in place...and since he apparently did not do that, that is why I would support a charge of negligent homicide.

He also pointed the firearm directly at her after not checking the mag/chamber, which is blatantly idiotic. An accident is something you can continue to call it, sure, but really it's not considered an accident when you are trained to take certain steps to ensure safety and you ignore them and kill someone, and you verify that when you say that he should be charged with negligence. Negligence is not an accident.

I agree that people painting this as something malicious or intentional are out of their minds, but this guy is extremely bad at his job; being careless with a firearm is no accident. If you check the mag, the chamber, and don't aim at the actor, there is pretty much 0% chance of killing them; it's painfully simple, really. I guarantee you he was instructed to do all these things and did not.

originally posted by: Bone75

This was a setup, not an accident (at least not on the part of the officer in question).

Please explain to me how someone can set you up to not check your magazine.

"Here's your mag you're going to unload on the 73 yr-old librarian.

It's all blanks, I promise; please don't check."

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: imsoconfused
Sorry, but doesn't the premise of using real firearms in this 'exercise' seem to be a whole lot of STUPID?

This cop needs to be behind bars just on the fact he sicced his mutt on the bike rider and nearly killed him.
When I was in the military, loaded or not, you never point your dam weapon at anyone.

Not keeping your weapon pointed downrange or down was enough to get an ass chewing much less pointing it at someone.

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: windword


The only way to impose a nationwide, consistent standard for use of force is for the federal government to step in and regulate law enforcement across the board...and that is not what anyone wants. But if we cannot get it together and find a peaceable solution to the conflict, that is exactly what will happen.

We do not have a federalized police in name, but in every other way we already do.
Look at all the military gear being awarded to departments across the nation as well as the federal tax payer money handed to them?

If the tax payers are on the hook, then they are entitled to control over them

If the officer was using a revolver modified for simunitions, there is a set of steel rings that goes in the cylinder up to where a regular bullet case mouth goes, which is supposed to keep live rounds from being chambered, and only simunition ammo from being used, live ammo would not let the revolver cylinder close and function. If the revolver was tampered with, and someone loaded it with live rounds, the steel rings in the cylinder would have to be removed, they don't just fall out, you have to push them out with some force. this officer was probably handed this modified weapon. probably never opened the cylinder, assumed it was safe,already knowing live rounds couldn't be loaded. This is looking most suspicious, more and more like some kind of setup.

originally posted by: DeadFoot

I agree that people painting this as something malicious or intentional are out of their minds, but this guy is extremely bad at his job; being careless with a firearm is no accident. If you check the mag, the chamber, and don't aim at the actor, there is pretty much 0% chance of killing them; it's painfully simple, really. I guarantee you he was instructed to do all these things and did not.

But he feels really really bad about it, and thus has had enough punishment. After all, he only wanted to go home at the end of his shift, and if he's not on the street protecting us, are you going to call a crack dealer instead? He RISKS HIS LIFE FOR US EVERY DAY. We should give him every benefit of the doubt and not Monday morning quarterback him.

originally posted by: DeadFoot

originally posted by: Bone75

This was a setup, not an accident (at least not on the part of the officer in question).

Please explain to me how someone can set you up to not check your magazine.

By putting the blanks on top... DUHHH

This isn't rocket science.

Do you know how many shots he fired?

Do share any info you have please.

originally posted by: DeadFoot

originally posted by: Bone75

This was a setup, not an accident (at least not on the part of the officer in question).

"Here's your mag you're going to unload on the 73 yr-old librarian.

It's all blanks, I promise; please don't check."

How many of these shows have they done?

The first thing I would do is take a long hard look at everyone that's been putting on these demonstrations with him for the last two years.

That's a long time to get to know someone's routine.

originally posted by: DeadFoot
He also pointed the firearm directly at her after not checking the mag/chamber, which is blatantly idiotic. An accident is something you can continue to call it, sure, but really it's not considered an accident when you are trained to take certain steps to ensure safety and you ignore them and kill someone, and you verify that when you say that he should be charged with negligence. Negligence is not an accident.

I agree that people painting this as something malicious or intentional are out of their minds, but this guy is extremely bad at his job; being careless with a firearm is no accident. If you check the mag, the chamber, and don't aim at the actor, there is pretty much 0% chance of killing them; it's painfully simple, really. I guarantee you he was instructed to do all these things and did not.

Yeah, I'll agree with all of these points, although I'll argue that if blanks are known to be in the weapon, pointing the weapon at the "enemy" while firing is a non-issue, assuming it's more than about 5-10 feet away.

But regardless, I think that we're on the same page, although I would still argue that negligence is still considered an accident, albeit a preventable one that shouldn't have happened.

Either way, I feel terrible for the woman's family and friends.

originally posted by: intrptr

Stupid mistake apparently. He loaded a magazine of live rounds instead of the one filled with blanks.

Another look

So isn’t this a violation of the first rule about guns? Always assume they are loaded!

I think this incident demonstrates one of the biggest problems in regard to the police use of force issue gripping our nation.

Complacency!

Why would anyone have on their person a live clip and a blank clip at the same time? Why would anyone point a real gun at another person during a role play exercises no matter what it was loaded with (or not loaded with). You just don’t do that with a firearm if you are a responsible user.

But complacency has taken hold in our society; when I’m complacent I get a mal ware on my wo rking tools … no big deal right? But it’s the same complacency these officers have fallen into; except their work tools can kill people.

“It’s no big deal I’m choking this person, I’m just doing my job. Of course he’s going to say he can’t breathe, he’s a perp, ant nobody got time for that”

“I don’t need to strap him into the truck; it’s no big deal to just leave him lying hand cuffed on the floor. I’m tired and over worked so F it”

“I’m not going to stick my neck out and report what I see as abuse … it’s above my pay grade to deal with this #; let my boss whos making twice as much as I am deal with it”

We all say and think and do stuff like this all the time. We’ve all become lazy and immune to the needs of others and our role in society. It just so happens that these people deal with stuff that can get people killed on a daily bases.

a reply to: DanDanDat

Obviously he was showing off, demonstrating his prowess as real as possible.

His demonstration firing blanks from a service weapon would have rang everyones ears. No better demonstration of police authority than that.

To imbue police authority. He still had on his uniform, instead of a criminal disguise...

Edit: Everyone who owns firearms has made a mistake at one time or another. Its how respect is learned. Hopefully the 'lesson' doesn't cost lives.

In this idiots case, despite the poor ladies demise, he will never wear a cops uniform again. Good riddance.

originally posted by: intrptr
In this idiots case, despite the poor ladies demise, he will never wear a cops uniform again. Good riddance.

I'd bet no real action is taken. Maybe, MAYBE he will get a first degree misdemeanor culpable negligence charge with sentence waived. But more likely they'll play it off as just an accident, he's so SAD, hasn't he suffered ENOUGH, the family already forgave him, let's move on and let the guy go home at the end of his shift and that'll be that.

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: intrptr
In this idiots case, despite the poor ladies demise, he will never wear a cops uniform again. Good riddance.

I'd bet no real action is taken. Maybe, MAYBE he will get a first degree misdemeanor culpable negligence charge with sentence waived. But more likely they'll play it off as just an accident, he's so SAD, hasn't he suffered ENOUGH, the family already forgave him, let's move on and let the guy go home at the end of his shift and that'll be that.

You should run for police chief.

Just kidding, you're probably right.

a reply to: DanDanDat

I just wanted to let you know I reread your reply to me.

“It’s no big deal I’m choking this person, I’m just doing my job. Of course he’s going to say he can’t breathe, he’s a perp, ant nobody got time for that”

“I don’t need to strap him into the truck; it’s no big deal to just leave him lying hand cuffed on the floor. I’m tired and over worked so F it”

“I’m not going to stick my neck out and report what I see as abuse … it’s above my pay grade to deal with this #; let my boss who's making twice as much as I am deal with it”

Well said.

United States of Complacency, is right. Their names were Eric Garner, Freddie Gray, and Rodney King. They are from everywhere in complacent ville.

originally posted by: chopperswolf
If the officer was using a revolver modified for simunitions, there is a set of steel rings that goes in the cylinder up to where a regular bullet case mouth goes, which is supposed to keep live rounds from being chambered, and only simunition ammo from being used, live ammo would not let the revolver cylinder close and function. If the revolver was tampered with, and someone loaded it with live rounds, the steel rings in the cylinder would have to be removed, they don't just fall out, you have to push them out with some force. this officer was probably handed this modified weapon. probably never opened the cylinder, assumed it was safe,already knowing live rounds couldn't be loaded. This is looking most suspicious, more and more like some kind of setup.

This was something I didnt get all training weapons s shouldn't allow live rounds. I asked a friend who's with local police and he told me the same thing live rounds won't fit in training pistol unless you remove the stops. So either someone removed the plugs or don't use training pistols.

originally posted by: DanDanDat

Another look

Read that article again. It says she was struck by A live round, but the officer shot several times.

My guess is someone stuck a live round into the box of blanks he used to load his clip.

originally posted by: Bone75

Do share any info you have please.

The info we have on this case in no way immediately points to this being a setup, so you making the claim that it is a setup begs for information from you to argue the plausibility of your standpoint.

What everyone else is talking about here is supported by information covered in the original article. Your idea is the only one requiring more information, considering you're the one hypothesizing a specific scenario without specific information to support the claim.