Unarmed Man Charged With Wounding Bystanders (who were) Shot by Police

Unarmed Man Is Charged With Wounding Bystanders Shot by Police Near Times Square

An unarmed, emotionally disturbed man shot at by the police as he was lurching around traffic near Times Square in September has been charged with assault, on the theory that he was responsible for bullet wounds suffered by two bystanders, according to an indictment unsealed in State Supreme Court in Manhattan on Wednesday.

Now, we've heard and read about accomplices who were also charged with murder after their partner was the triggerperson in the commission of a felony, but this is the first I have EVER heard of a man (who was unarmed) being charged with assault for the harm caused by the POLICE.

A curious crowd grew. Police officers arrived and tried to corral Mr. Broadnax, a 250-pound man. When he reached into his pants pocket, two officers, who, the police said, thought he was pulling a gun, opened fire, missing Mr. Broadnax, but hitting two nearby women. Finally, a police sergeant knocked Mr. Broadnax down with a Taser.

Why didn't they try the taser FIRST? It seemed to have worked, and two people wouldn't have been SHOT.

This man was UNARMED. While he might have been "lurching around traffic," the people who were shot were only put in danger by the RECKLESS DISCHARGE of a firearm BY the cops. Sure, his lurching around in traffic might have put some pedestrians or motorists in jeopardy, but no one was harmed by THAT action, they were harmed BY the cops' actions who MISTAKENLY thought he had a gun, and FIRED THEIR WEAPONS WITHOUT BEING CERTAIN HE WAS ARMED.

The man was mentally ill apparently, and this is once again cops not being trained or having the discretion or judgement to determine and deal with a situation before shooting at the hip.

BUT, apparently the DA decided it was appropriate to brings charges or send this to the grand jury??? Anything to NOT hold public "servants" responsible for their actions, eh?

Basically, what this says is that if you are suspected in ANY type of crime, real or imagined, and anyone gets hurt because of the actions of the police (regardless if you're committing a crime because the police acted in due faith of their duties), you are responsible for damages to person and property caused by the police. Sound precedent. I look forward to the outcome.

What say you, denizens of ATS?

If they tell you don't put your hand in your pockets while having guns aimed at you, you don't put your hands in your pockets. Unless you wanna be shot!

reply to post by 3u40r15m


You did see that this man was apparently mentally ill/emotionally unstable?

Therefore, rational commands and actions (and his competence) negate your response.

reply to post by 3u40r15m


True but they are trained to use the least amount of force necessary to restrain the person and shooting a gun twice into a crowded area is just reckless endangerment and extremely poor judgment. That, and then trying to charge him with THEIR crime seems to me to be a pre-emptive lawsuit and a deflection of who's actually at fault for the injury done.

Another case of cops shooting first. That's what cops do these days. Cops have no regard for human life, at least here in America. Land of the free. Free that is until a cop decides to kill us without justification. Scary, yes?

So now people will shout injustice about him being charged for a crime he didn't commit instead of shouting at cops for opening fire in a crowded street.

Deflection.

So if someone was killed would he have been charged with murder? This is definitely a license and actually permission to kill for cops isn't it? No blame whatsoever...just blame someone else at the scene and that's it.

Peace

Personal responsibility.

The police are responsible for their actions and any harm done as a consequence.

Likewise for the criminal.

To be clear, had the criminal fired a gun and harmed an innocent
he should be held accountable for that action.

Had the police returned fire and harmed an innocent, they should be
held accountable for that action.

Considering that the police were acting in good faith, and the criminal
acting with malicious intent, the subsequent charges should reflect
the intent.

Personal responsibility for all.

Personal responsibility.

The police are responsible for their actions and any harm done as a consequence.

Likewise for the criminal.

To be clear, had the criminal fired a gun and harmed an innocent
he should be held accountable for that action.

Had the police returned fire and harmed an innocent, they should be
held accountable for that action.

Considering that the police were acting in good faith, and the criminal
acting with malicious intent, the subsequent charges should reflect
the intent.

Personal responsibility for all.

More and more, I'm of the opinion that the majority of police should not be allowed to have firearms, and that only special units like SWAT, or something that needs be specifically called in should have firearms.

If they didn't have firearms, then, they would facilitate the other tools at their disposal, like the taser gun, pepper spray, and/or simple physical tackling of a subject then restraint.

amazing
Another case of cops shooting first. That's what cops do these days. Cops have no regard for human life, at least here in America. Land of the free. Free that is until a cop decides to kill us without justification. Scary, yes?

Another wildly inaccurate statement by another member of the conspiracy crowd! Cops lives are ever more in danger with the ease to which a criminal can obtain a gun. Therefore, even with training a police officer must at all time protect themselves.

The police opened fire believing the man could pull a gun. I am not sure if the police were fully aware that this man was mentally ill....reports are hazy at best. A crazy person ( or mentally ill for the PC crowd) can act very much like a person on any number of street narcotics.

My only concern here with the police is not their actions (which I believe were justified) but there poor marksmanship. Surely if a man with a tazer can hit the target an officer with a gun at roughly the same distance should also be able to hit the target.

However, stressful situations bring about differing endings.

All in all the cops did the right thing and its just a shame too women got injured in the incident. However, I have noticed that people are the dumbest creatures on the planet, when they see a potentially dangerous situation happening they form a crowd...Not so smart....ask the two women.

reply to post by rival


And therein lies the problem: the suspect was not mentally competent. In a court of law a different standard is used on the mentally incompetent. It's obvious the cops were aware that he wasn't right in the head so it's less a matter of intent and more a matter of competence.

reply to post by 3u40r15m

... He was mentally ill and he was also "lurching" around in an area where anyone who doesn't work there tend to lurch around. i know from working on 44th and times sq for over a year...Plus I doubt he had the mental capacity to realize what was being shouted in an over crowded area filled with bustling tourist and loud traffic.




That being said, I feel that was an underhanded way to shill the blame unto a man who was in no way to blame for the outcome.
They are most likely looking for a plea of mental incompetence so that the officers involved can shirk all responsibility for there actions. This man does not deserve to have that charge on his record.

in the incredibly insightful words of N.W.A. F*CK THE POLICE.

reply to post by Liquesence


Cops love to play with their toys. "Tasers are no fun!"
They should be charged accordingly

What? Are you serious?

Everyday I see a new story about cops causing mischief it seems. But blaming other people for something THEY did?

What is this? 3rd grade all over again?

What the hell is going on in this country?

more evidence the police are just one big gang whom seemingly enjoy harming citizens and then shifting the blame onto whomever they feel justified to do so.......makes me wonder if part of the morning meeting(or pep talk if u like) involve watching judge dredd,then they high five each other and walk out chanting " lets go kill some scum"

projectbane
The police opened fire believing the man could pull a gun.

That's a pretty terrifying justification since, in reality, anyone at any time could pull a gun; the ones acting strangely aren't the ones you need to look out for, its the ones you don't see coming.

The two police officers, who have not been identified, have been placed on administrative duty and their actions are still under investigation by the district attorney’s office, law enforcement officials said. They also face an internal Police Department inquiry.

So the two wildly reckless, terrible shot officers have not yet been cleared of charges but they're already charging the guy with the assault. Get this guy charged and convicted and nobody will care if the cops are punished.

What a dangerous precedent to set. Now, anything the cops do you can charge someone with? Well, citizen, we didn't find you guilty of any crime, but we had to speed to get here so you get 6 speeding tickets, 24 red light violations, and a parking ticket.

This is really stupid. Anything the police do should be on them. I can't believe basic jurisprudence will allow this to stand. The DA should be shown the door next election as well.

All in all the cops did the right thing and its just a shame too women got injured in the incident. However, I have noticed that people are the dumbest creatures on the planet, when they see a potentially dangerous situation happening they form a crowd...Not so smart....ask the two women.

reply to post by projectbane


Yes, the cops did the right thing by firing on an unarmed man before they had a clear assessment of the situation.

Yes, it's the man's fault the cops were a bad shot. And missed him, but hit two women.

Yes, it's the man's fault the two women happened to be in the path of the bullets, the bullets which didn't even hit the man and were therefore stray/not on target (for trained personnel).

*eye roll*

And generally, there happens be a crowd—regularly—IN TIMES SQUARE, so the "form a crowd" attempted justification is a very large Fail. Also because people, in large groups, not knowing what is going on any given situation, are want to be confused. For the sake of argument, in said confusion, they might not be aware of exactly which is the safest route of least harm.

But the cops did the right thing, right, and everyone else is at fault? *SMH*

reply to post by Bedlam


Actually, there was an incident here in GA where, i forget the exact details but, an officer was either responding to a call and crashed, or was chasing a suspect and crashed (both because he himself lost control of his patrol vehicle, not because of anything the suspect directly did), and the suspect was charged with the crash and/or assault on a police office.

I'll have to actually look and find exactly what it was.

Finally, a police sergeant knocked Mr. Broadnax down with a Taser.

I thought I had to mention that since no one hadn't yet. And it seems rather important.

So let me get this straight... They fire at the man because his hands were in his pocket. And they miss hitting two women. Then they decide to bring out the taser?

I nearly fell out of my chair..