Oklahoma City police officer shoots, kills man holding metal pipe

Authorities found the man, identified as Magdiel Sanchez, on the porch of a house after they were called to a hit-and-run crash about 8:15 p.m., Oklahoma City Police Department Capt. Bo Mathews said at a news conference. Lt. Matthew Lindsey confronted Sanchez, who had a pipe in his hand. Police initially said Sanchez had a stick.

Sgt. Christopher Barnes arrived after Lindsey called for backup. Both officers ordered Sanchez to drop the pipe, but he refused and continued to move toward Barnes, police said.

Source: Oklahoma City police officer shoots, kills man holding metal pipe

Deserved you might say? The suspect should have listened to the LEO and dropped the pipe? Sounds easy, huh? Not in this case. There is an important complication here....he was deaf. The LEO's were informed of this and yet he was still shot and killed. However, another interesting aspect is that there were 2 LEO's responding.

Lindsey deployed his taser and Barnes fired his gun, striking and killing the man, officials said.

So, one deployed his taser, the other fired his sidearm killing the deaf man. It seems one LEO assessed the situation and thought it required less-than-lethal force, while the other immediately went to his sidearm.

IMO this is definitely a case of an unjustified kill due to that set of differing behavior alone.

I am usually a defender of the LEO's. They have a difficult and dangerous job. But they also have a huge responsibility that goes along with that license to kill. You need to be confident enough in those situations to logically assess the situation and choose the appropriate level of force to stop the threat. This instance demonstrates that one of these LEO's overacted and immediately went to the kill shot.

a reply to: Krakatoa



Was he blind and stupid? Did he not see their guns drawn? or mouths yelling orders? OR did he think it was a good idea to advance towards police with guns drawn while wielding a metal pipe. A deaf man can kill police with a pipe the same as a non deaf man. Let me explain use of force for police very succinctly to laymen. Police are trained to always be one level above the assailant on force, ie if they have fists you can use a baton, if they have a stick, or bat, or pipe, or knife, you use your gun. No one ever holds the individuals involved responsible for their actions that lead to the shootings.

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Krakatoa



Was he blind and stupid? Did he not see their guns drawn? or mouths yelling orders? OR did he think it was a good idea to advance towards police with guns drawn while wielding a metal pipe. A deaf man can kill police with a pipe the same as a non deaf man. Let me explain use of force for police very succinctly to laymen. Police are trained to always be one level above the assailant on force, ie if they have fists you can use a baton, if they have a stick, or bat, or pipe, or knife, you use your gun. No one ever holds the individuals involved responsible for their actions that lead to the shootings.

Oh, well when you put it that way, fire away officers...

I'd say the tasers and the backup officer already puts them a few steps beyond.

Most idiots know, not to take a pipe or a stick, to a gun fight. But from time to time, we come across these kind of idiots. Cop right. Sanchez bad,.. move along.

a reply to: sine.nomine


I am stating they were within the legal use of force scale to draw their weapons and shoot

a reply to: Krakatoa

We hear more and more of these cases of officers over-reacting to a situation that could have been met with less than lethal force. Are these police officer watching the news lately? Why would any police officer want to put themselves in a situation where they could jeopardize their own freedom? Why use lethal force in situations where a suspect could be unarmed by other less lethal means?

It seems like police officers across this nation need to go through re-training on when it's appropriate to use lethal force.
They also need to be armed with other less lethal weapons that can subdue a suspect from a distance without having to take their lives.

a reply to: norhoc

Bull#. These officials represent us and we need to hold them to a higher standard. The guy had a pipe. A friggin' pipe. And because he didn't follow orders they can kill him? You've got to be kidding me. These guys need better training before they go out in the street.

My father was a police officer in Boston for 39 years. He was in the tactical patrol force and drug squad for many years. He never once fired his weapon. When he started on the job he walked a beat and did not have a radio. In order to get assistance he would have to go to the nearest call box. He learned to deal with people without shooting them.

a reply to: WeRpeons



You have been a cop? You can QB this all you want from behind your computer but you would wet your pants if put in even the least scary situation LEO's get put in and have to make a snap decision. The guy advanced on officers with a weapon in his hand and got shot.

Guess he didn't hear the gun barrel.

a reply to: TobyFlenderson



Your father was a cop in a whole different era than today buddy, And last I checked a metal pipe can kill you.

a reply to: sine.nomine

Maybe the taser was attempted and missed, and the other officer wasn't willing to put himself or partner at any more risk as the guy continued to advance. Maybe he simply started advancing menacingly with the pipe raise for action. Do you know how fast a guy can close a gap on you? If two officers have their weapons drawn and you continue to advance on them with a pipe, seems to me your handicap might be being "dumb" and not deaf.
There are way too many details missing to draw a firm conclusion here. There were apparently multiple witnesses, so maybe we could wait for the investigation to play out before the officer is pilloried?

a reply to: norhoc

Does that make it right?..not talking about what is allowed legally.
I won't argue advancing with pipe in hand was not a good move, seems though one LEO thought the taser was an appropriate response before a lethal response was applied..makes his effort to preserve life kinda pointless to have the guy beside him blast away.
I guess more info is needed.

a reply to: RadioRobert

That's a lot of maybes. Maybe the cops lied on the police reports. Maybe the guy didn't have a pipe at all. Maybe they were not in uniform, and instead wearing clown masks.

You wield a metal pipe against a law-dawg, there is a good chance you are going to eat some lead.
Just the facts.

originally posted by: sine.nomine
a reply to: RadioRobert

That's a lot of maybes. Maybe the cops lied on the police reports. Maybe the guy didn't have a pipe at all. Maybe they were not in uniform, and instead wearing clown masks.

Yeah, that seems a much more logical conclusion based on what limited info we have...

There were multiple witnesses. There will be a review. If lied and he didn't have a pipe, they weren't in uniform, but dressed in clown outfits, then I say we hang him.

a reply to: norhoc

He retired in the 90's and in the 80's Boston had its highest homicide rates. It was a different time, a time when it wasn't acceptable to kill people because they could hypothetically hurt someone though they hadn't threatened nor assaulted anyone.

If an officer approaches you he has no more of right to order you to do something than does anyone else. They were called to a car accident case. They had no reason to believe this man was a threat to anyone other than the fact that he had something in his hand that could be a potential weapon.

To me, it is unjustified homicide and the cop who shot should be prosecuted.

a reply to: vonclod


Yes it makes it right, that cop has a right to go home at the end of his shift and if someone is advancing on you with a weapon you use the appropriate force to stop the threat to include deadly force. Hell, size can be a deciding factor in whether you use deadly force ( if you weigh 150 and an assailant that is the size of a linebacker), persons fighting skill level can justify deadly force( if you know they are a professional fighter that could cause serious bodily harm or death with their bare hands) And as far. And just because the one pulled a taser doesn't mean the other one was wrong to have his gun out.

a reply to: RadioRobert

Agreed. We can't tolerate that at all. Seriously though, I'm just getting tired of cops getting away with murder. And you're right, there's a good chance it was "justified," but that doesn't necessarily make it right.

a reply to: TobyFlenderson


"no reason to believe he was a threat" ? Other than the pesky fact he was advancing towards them with a metal pipe. But, hey, let's not let facts get in the way if they don't fit your narrative .

a reply to: sine.nomine



So the cops should have holstered their weapons and let him do whatever he wanted to do with that pipe? OK, You have no idea you were not there and have never had to deal with a situation like that and would not know what to do besides wet your pants and run away