San Bernardino DA: Lethal force used against ex-LAPD cop Christopher Dorner was justified

The officers involved in the standoff and shootout that ultimately led to the death of ex-LAPD cop Christopher Dorner acted lawfully by using deadly and non-deadly force against him. The conclusion is included in the San Bernardino County District Attorney's Office final report on the incident, which was made public on Tuesday.

. . .

Next, the San Bernardino Sheriff's Department made what would become a controversial decision: After announcements over a loud speaker went unheeded, the department: "decided that pyrotechnic gas, or 'hot gas,' would be utilized because the other types of gas deployed had no effect."

San Bernardino DA: Lethal force used against ex-LAPD cop Christopher Dorner was justified

Burning out suspects is not justified, it appears.

Now, here we have something very interesting. Many of us were very angered (although not surprised) that the police essentially tried to burn Dorner out of the cabin, and this report pretty much confirms that after other attempts at extraction failed (shooting, gas, SWAT), they resorted to pyrotechnic gas, which is essentially FIRE—and that using said fire was found to be A-OK.

I will agree that deadly force could easily be justified due to the circumstances (I'll even agree that it WAS justified, just not the EXTENT of deadly force, e.g: Fire), but the fact that the deadly force included fire—and that has been determined to now be a legally justified use of deadly force—is what is troubling. Sure, they could have set up a perimeter and waited Dorner out (which could be days or weeks and is very impractical), but the fact that their tactics increasingly changed and escalated to include controversial means that have just now been determined to be appropriate sets a very troubling precedent in police procedure.

I think one of the key points is this:

The cabin then caught on fire. The report concluded: "Dorner had ample time to surrender and exit the cabin but did not do so

We set your house on fire, but YOU choose to not surrender or leave. That's all on your. Our actions were justified.

The report goes on to say:

The report concludes that law enforcement at the scene: "had no choice" but to engage Dorner. This was not their choice, it was his."

I still want to know about the two cops who shot up the newspaper delivery woman and why NOTHING happened to them after they recklessly opened fire, nearly killing those women, without at least a remote bit of proof that it was Dorner.

reply to post by Liquesence


Dorner was exposing and exacting revenge for top-down corruption in LAPD. I'm sure those officers who burned him alive will not only escape prosecution, but will likely be honored and promoted for their actions. The most important thing of all was for them to plug that leak at any cost. Standard Operating Procedure in a whistleblower situation.

I still want to know about the two cops who shot up the newspaper delivery woman and why NOTHING happened to them after they recklessly opened fire, nearly killing those women, without at least a remote bit of proof that it was Dorner.

The two women got a new truck.

The two cops got disciplined...

They have concluded that case.

reply to post by Urantia1111


He wasn't exposing corruption. He was an atheist who was mad that he could not control his reality so he snapped and started killing those who he *perceived* to be responsible. He wouldn't stop talking about his name and how proud of it he was and how atheists don't need God to have morals and blah blah blah. Go read the manifesto. If only they would have had the common sense to not train someone like that in the first place. People like him are the reason the corruption he was so mad about exists in the first place. People who think their perceptions should guide their thoughts and think they are in control of something.

People who want to fight corruption first have to relinquish control and let go of their perceptions of what is happening. Otherwise, they will just end up being more as corrupt if not worse, as Dorner so clearly demonstrated.

reply to post by Liquesence

I still want to know about the two cops who shot up the newspaper delivery woman and why NOTHING happened to them after they recklessly opened fire, nearly killing those women, without at least a remote bit of proof that it was Dorner.

The women were compensated 4.2M
That doesn't change what happened though. Disgraceful police work. Seems there is little discipline or training in their Dept.

The cabin then caught on fire. The report concluded: "Dorner had ample time to surrender and exit the cabin but did not do so

The LAPD seems to operate more on mafia tactics than police tactics.

Well when this first happened why did they lie about given the order the burn the house down. You could cleary hear on the radio the officers saying burn it! burn it!
And then they did and about face and said no order was given.

reply to post by Liquesence


I am very critical of the corrupt police procedures in many cities, but I can get behind them on this one. I would have burned that MF down too. People have families they want to go home to. Try to remember that police ARE people.

FreeWillAnomaly
reply to post by Liquesence

 

I am very critical of the corrupt police procedures in many cities, but I can get behind them on this one. I would have burned that MF down too. People have families they want to go home to. Try to remember that police ARE people.

So much for the rule of law and judicial procedure.

Let's just take the easiest route to our ends. *eye roll*

reply to post by FreeWillAnomaly


But what about those families that want to see justiced served though. and for the accused to stand trial?

reply to post by kx12x


You're, right, it doesn't changed what happened. I could care less about the settlement, I want to know what happened to the cops who shot more than 100 rounds at two innocent people with

"no commands, no instructions and no opportunity for surrender."

, as Attorney Glen Jonas, who represents the women, said.

THAT'S what I want to know.

Plus, if they're THAT bad of a shot, where 100 rounds at two people in a vehicle and neither are CRITICALLY injured, they don't need to be cops. Bad shots, bad judgement, bad procedure.

Liquesence

FreeWillAnomaly
reply to post by Liquesence

 

I am very critical of the corrupt police procedures in many cities, but I can get behind them on this one. I would have burned that MF down too. People have families they want to go home to. Try to remember that police ARE people.

So much for the rule of law and judicial procedure.

Let's just take the easiest route to our ends. *eye roll*

I can tell you have never been shot at.

When you might not make it home to your family, procedure goes out the window. The procedure is do what you gotta do. And in truth, that is defined under the law.

Liquesence
I still want to know about the two cops who shot up the newspaper delivery woman and why NOTHING happened to them after they recklessly opened fire, nearly killing those women, without at least a remote bit of proof that it was Dorner.

LA reaches $4.2 million settlement with women shot by LAPD during Dorner manhunt

TORRANCE, Calif. (KABC) -- The city of Los Angeles has reached a $4.2 million settlement with the two women who were injured when police opened fire on their pickup truck during the manhunt for Christopher Dorner.


Each woman will receive $2.1 million each. The agreement is in addition to a $40,000 settlement reached in March for the loss of the women's pickup truck.

"I am pleased that a fair settlement was swiftly reached in order to resolve any outstanding claims," said Los Angeles City Attorney Trutanich. "In reaching this settlement, we hope Margie and Emma will be able to move on with their lives, the city will be spared millions of dollars in litigation expense and time, and this unfortunate chapter of the Dorner saga will be put to rest."

The two LAPD officers were placed on administrative leave pending the result of the IA investigation. The conclusion of that investigation was the officers violated departmental policy. The civilian oversight board agreed with that result, which places disciplinary actions for the officers on the Chief.

The 2 women who were shot opted to take a settlement from the city in the amount of $4.2 million dollars, $2.1 million to each as well as $40,000 for the truck. The 2 victims ended there action against the LAPD / LA City with the settlement.

California State Law prohibits the release of disciplinary information (IE The department can confirm the officers were disciplined but they cannot release what that discipline entails).

I would guess the reason for no criminal prosecution of the officers revolved around the settlement reached with the 2 victims. Contrary to what people might think, there are very few laws that can result in prosecution without victim cooperation (Domestic violence as an example).

ETA - In total 8 LAPD officers (2 above) were investigated / disciplined.


As for the op article -
When you have a person who is armed and willing to kill without thought. When you have a person who resisted all forms of available less lethal. When you have a person who has law enforcement training. When you have a geographic location that favors the suspect.

What choice was left? The item used that resulted in the fire is not prohibited (just rarely if ever used). Dorners actions telegraphed his intent to kill or be killed.

When you have a suspect with that mentality, which he demonstrated in actions, why risk a scenario where officers would attempt to take him into custody alive when the suspect wont be taken alive?

reply to post by Xcathdra


So thesea two cops cast the city 4.2 mill and no one bats an eye

But walmart employees get 81 mil from the state to pay heathcareand there is uproar.

I will never get call

Another_Nut
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

So thesea two cops cast the city 4.2 mill and no one bats an eye

But walmart employees get 81 mil from the state to pay heathcareand there is uproar.

I will never get call

Im not sure what you mean in this post. Clarify please?

I'm not sure how or why some ever thought this guy special or a folk hero or whatever some were coming to think of him.

In looking into this originally, I'd pretty easily found that he'd gone postal and homicidal after losing his lawsuit against the LAPD. Now, that wasn't some lawsuit for justice or to 'root out corruption'. He'd been fired for being exactly what he proved true in the end and he lost his case to get his job back.

How a cop bad enough for his own people to call bad, can go to being good, never did make sense for me.

reply to post by Liquesence


So was it also justified against the 3 women they also shot though missing one.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


He filed the lawsuit for corruption, he put himself out there when he didn't have to. I'm not saying what he did was good, and I don't think people consider him a folk hero.

People just know that this was the LAPD's mess. Their (notorious) corruption drove one of their officers over the edge. then they shot up the entire city while they searched for him. Shooting plenty of innocent people with zero justification.

Xcathdra


I would guess the reason for no criminal prosecution of the officers revolved around the settlement reached with the 2 victims. Contrary to what people might think, there are very few laws that can result in prosecution without victim cooperation (Domestic violence as an example).

I would guess it's because cops always get off lighter than civilians. It's not like they wouldn't have gotten the money with criminal charges filed too. I would imagine the crooked system in place to protect cops took advantage of their naivete and got them to drop the charges seemingly for the money. I doubt they were just patriotic Americans willing to take one from corrupt police they know so well.

Actually, I change my guess. I would guess the reason for no criminal prosecution of the officers is because they women would have to move out of the city if they filed.

reply to post by FreeWillAnomaly


Well that's absurd. He was talking about his name because the LAPD ruined it, something that is detrimental to a cop after their indoctrination.

Do you know what it can do to a cop to not have the justice system side with them? A cop goes to court expecting to be sided with always.