Tennessee cops shoot 59 rounds to kill one man

The medical examiner found 43 bullet wounds in his chest, face, arms, hands, legs, buttocks and groin. Police contend Heyward was a danger to others and threatened the six officers.

Link to Source

Police accounts and a patrol car video indicate the shots were fired in three volleys, all within 30 seconds. Each officer used a .45-caliber pistol. Some officers emptied their magazines, reloaded and fired again, while others didn't fire all their bullets, Weary said.

and the piece that makes it all ok.

"We are saying that our people did what we trained them to do," the chief said.

Look, I'm glad the cops got to go home that night, but come on...43 bullet wounds found in this guy. Some of the cops RELOADED while they were filling this guy with .45 slugs. Witnesses claimed the suspect was already lying down when the cops opened fire.

Amanda Counts, Heyward's girlfriend, and neighbor Darrell Turner said they witnessed the shooting. They said Heyward was lying on the porch on top of the rifle when officers opened fire.

"Before the first shot was fired he was down," Counts said. "Not one time did he threaten anyone."

'Why are you shooting me?'

Citing the ongoing investigation, police declined to answer questions about Heyward's position when officers started shooting. Counts and Turner both said that during the first brief interruption in the barrage of police gunshots, they heard Heyward ask, "Why are you shooting me?"

That cannot be heard in the recording provided by police.

This seems like an older story. I really don't know how I haven't seen it. If it's already being discussed, please disregard and respond to the previous thread.

Keep your heads down out there.

reply to post by KSPigpen


Simply shocking and absurd. There is NO excuse for the officers firing 59 shots with 45 caliber pistols into the guy who was only threating HIS OWN life. Looks like the police committed the suicide for him.



They need to go to prison...

There is a phenomenon called "suicide by police." It amounts to someone waving a weapon, pointing a weapon, or even firing a weapon at police unitl they commence fire. Once they commence fire, they will not quit until they are sure the threat is neutralized. That means he has to be dead or verifibly disabled. It happens to be one of the reasons that concealed carry classes ask the question, "Have you ever threatened suicide?" or "have you ever been committed to a mental institution?" I have yet to figure out if that last one means voluntary or involuntary, since my state doesn't make it clear on the application.

16 warning shots and 43 meat tenderizers. This is ridiculous! Talk about overkill. So, I wonder, did it take 43 hits to put this guy on the ground? How many were follow ups after he was choking on his own blood in the fetal position.

Just my 2-cents

www.timesfreepress.com...

Got that alonzo mixed up with another alonzo that got shot and killed.

[edit on 28-8-2009 by celticdragon23]

reply to post by celticdragon23


So that gives these cops the right to unload 59 rounds into the guy? I think 1,2,4,8,15,25,30, etc would have been more than enough. He was not a big guy. I do not care if he was a gang banger or not, 59 shots into one person is just WAY OVERBOARD. Also apparently there was never any statement from the victim proclaiming he was going to kill the police.

reply to post by celticdragon23


Please post a link.

It may stave off the barage of anti police posts.

www.timesfreepress.com...

reply to post by celticdragon23


Funny how that article leaves out the shot 59 times part.


The main issue for me is the excess force used, I do not want to get into if the guy did or did not make a threatening gesture to the police. The point is to shoot ONE man 59 times is beyond excessive. There is no excuse for that, the guy was not likely not a threat after the first clip was unloaded into him, let lone after it was up to 30 shots fired into his body. No excuses IMHO, all those officers need to be fired and sent to prison in my opinion.

[edit on 8/28/2009 by jkrog08]

[edit on 8/28/2009 by jkrog08]

www.timesfreepress.com...

www.timesfreepress.com...

reply to post by jkrog08



Threaten a cop with a weapon and you become swiss cheese.

Dead is dead. It doesn't matter if they died from 1 shot or 59.

The energy's are rising these cops got a rush out of shooting this man so they kept on shooting.

reply to post by colloredbrothers


I wouldn't call it a rush.

In a fire fight your adreniline does kick in and the first one gets it racing making you feel as if you are going to have a heart attack.

I imagine once the shooting started they got spooked. I would like to know how many clips got dropped while trying to get loaded.

Where's the video?

It'd be interesting and at the same time horrifying to see, but I must.

Why weren't any of the officers questioned?

www.wdef.com...

reply to post by Aggie Man


Unless he was a body builder hopped up drugs, only one shot should be needed to have him on the ground. Not necessarily to kill him however.. but the .45 is a powerful slug. It's penetration power isn't very good, but even armored targets will be knocked to the ground by the kind of force these generate.

It's beyond excessive.

Why do police shoot so many bullets? I know they are trained to kill, but 3 bullets should be more than enough, especially from a .45.

Cops are there to protect and serve, as long as they are doing their job who am i to question how they do it? It's not like i am the one with the gun. If I was the one with the gun then I deserve to be shot for being a complete and total moron, I totally agree with Jtd threaten the cops with a gun and you get what you deserve one bullet or 50.....So long as the INNOCENT are not harmed.

Originally posted by Miraj
reply to post by Aggie Man

 

Unless he was a body builder hopped up drugs, only one shot should be needed to have him on the ground. Not necessarily to kill him however.. but the .45 is a powerful slug. It's penetration power isn't very good, but even armored targets will be knocked to the ground by the kind of force these generate.

It's beyond excessive.

Why do police shoot so many bullets? I know they are trained to kill, but 3 bullets should be more than enough, especially from a .45.

They tried to subdue him with a taser and it was inefective so it makes you wonder if he was on drugs or something.

Yeah, I can't help but think that these guys were sort of 'caught up in the moment' for lack of a better term....and I have no doubt that adrenaline played a factor...the witnesses claimed he was already down on the ground when the shots were fired...I just don't get it...I really thought that cops usually did like a three round volley, or so....even with six of them, 19 to 20 shots max...I think that would still have been enough to neutralize the threat.
One of the things that bothers me, aside from the absolute carnage (there couldn't have been much of this guy LEFT when they got done) but the 16 ERRANT shots. We have a STATIONARY target, or at least one not moving very much...he wasn't 'running away' or anything like that...so, out of the 59 shots fired, only 43 caused a wound on the guy.
The article states that bullets had entered the apartment behind the guy. I guess the public is lucky that there wasn't anyone in that apartment. But I suppose it would have all been justified then as well.
'it was an unfortunate incident, but the officers reacted in the manner in which they had been trained.'
Once you've emptied a clip into a guy, using a .45, the guy should be thoroughly incapacitated to say the least. Multiply that by six and once the equivalent of one clip per officer had been used, I would think a reassessment would be warranted.
This really strikes me as a case where there was some sickness involved on the part of at least some of the cops, if not just very poor training.
I am certainly NOT defending the guy with the rifle. He was obviously an idiot and may have even had a death wish.
What I would like to know from someone IN law enforcement is if you feel the firing of 59 shots into a stationary 'target' (a human being, of course) is justified and what can an LEO do to prevent this from happening again?
Should we even be concerned with this? I know 43 shots didn't kill him any 'worse' than 1 or 2 might have, but why the need to empty clips and reload?

In a situation like this several cops should be designated as the shooters. I would suggest the ones with the best range scores. The rest should hold off unless the designated shooters yell for help. There is certainly no need for every officer on the scene to empty multiple magazines in a case like this. I can understand that they all want a piece of the action so they can be big heroes though.