Police Helicopter Captures Fatal Shootout With Texas DPS Officers

Texas DPS Shootout

courtesy YouTube

Video was recently released of a fatal February shootout involving Texas Department of public safety officers. Edward Montelongo was stopped by DPS for a traffic violation. The officer then attempted to arrest him after he provided a false name. Following a scuffle, Montelongo, of San Antonio, took off with a DPS helicopter guiding the pursuit.

Montelongo eventually stopped after blowing a tire. The helicopter pilot could see the driver reaching under his seat and warned the officers in the patrol cars.

The subsequent shootout was captured on video.

Montelongo shot one officer in the right arm. He was then shot in the stomach by another officer with an AR.

The video clearly shows the officers attempting to apply a tourniquet to the injured officer’s arm. Montelongo was airlifted to a local hospital, but died the next day.

 

comments

  1. avatar jwm says:

    This is why society gives sworn officers more lee way than the average citizen. We expect the officers to get in there and deal with this situation.

    If there were no cops and no .gov then I could use my mosin nagant to regulate traffic thru my neighborhood.
    Hmmm….that just might work…..

    1. avatar GR says:

      Until the day you pull your Mosin (or anything else) on someone better than you.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        We both better be happy we got cops and a system.

        It ain’t the best. But it beats hell out of the alternative.

    2. avatar FedUp says:

      Prosecuting the DGU is not even a question in this incident, but since you brought it up…

      It’s OK to require citizens without the benefit of LE training to outperform LE or go to prison, because LE ‘puts their lives on the line for you’?

      Sorry, I’m not buying it. Hold the pros to a higher standard of performance, not lower.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        No. I expect the courts and the system to back the legit dgu. Doesn’t always happen, I know, but that’s my expectation.

        But we do not expect a citizen to jump into the middle of a situation that doesn’t concern him. We do expect the cops to jump in. And with that expectation society, as a whole, is willing to let the cop have the benefit of the doubt.

        1. avatar Frank says:

          Yeah except for all those rulings that say the police do not have a specific duty to protect you. Castle Rock V Gonzales, Warren v DC etc…

        2. avatar Mark N. says:

          That really isn’t the question here Frank. Those cases simply say the police do not owe an individual duty to individual persons, but rather to society as a whole, and therefore cannot be sued when they don’t arrive in time or at all. The question here is what standard should be applied to officers when they do decide to “jump in” and engage in a shoot out. I think it is fair to say that if someone is shooting at a cop, the vast majority of people will automatically assume that the officer was justified in shooting back. Moreover, the real issue in police shootings are when the cops start shooting when they shouldn’t, like the cop on trial in Cook County Illinois who shot a kid with a knife who was thirty feet away–and then shot the kid again after he hit the ground. No other cop–and there were something like ten or twelve of them–didn’t fire their weapons. Or the cop just convicted for manslaughter who shot into a car leaving a party where there was underage drinking, killing a 15 year old in the back seat of a car. His partner testified that he had not drawn his weapon and was not feeling threatened when the car pulled away form the curb.

          It makes you wonder if these early to draw early to shoot scenarios are due to military training or police training. Then again, we always have to wonder whether these incidents are increasing or are simply being more regularly reported. John Lott seems to think that police of black/hispanic shootings are fairly level (sorry Collin, you lose), while shootings of white suspects has gone up 60%.

        3. avatar jwm says:

          Mark N. Criminal behavior on the part of a cop is, criminal, and should be addressed accordingly. But just as adam lanza does not represent all ar15 owners the cop rightfully charged with murder does not represent all cops.

        4. avatar ANONNYMOUS says:

          @ jwm says: September 6, 2018 at 18:10

          QUOTE …
          But we do not expect a citizen to jump into the middle of a situation that doesn’t concern him. We do expect the cops to jump in. And with that expectation society, as a whole, is willing to let the cop have the benefit of the doubt.
          … END QUOTE

          I hear what you are saying, but there is a concern, given that expectation you speak of (cops to jump in), can and does lead to instances of abuse of power and to swatting. Society, generally speaking, is on this …

          “see something.say something” trip.

          They call, LEO responds and approaches what was ‘reported’ as suspicious behavior –instead of approaching the complainant/caller, and/or –first observing the ‘reported suspicious behavior’. Most times after LEO arrives on the scene, the potential criminal activity goes away in short order. Other than that, this is how $h*t starts.

          In this day and age, I would not give anyone the benefit of a doubt unless it were my immediate biological other and life/limb were at stake OR a mentally undeveloped adolescent.

          Feedback ?

    3. avatar ANONNYMOUS says:

      What did I learn from this …
      MENTAL HEALTH!

      This fool/tool must have known the vehicles description/plate was broadcast, how far did he (or anyone) think they would get on an open Texas Highway before enough LEO’s arrived. My guess is he was either going to take-out the officer, borrow his ‘marked geo-tagged’ vehicle, then later on –do the same with a civilian, possibly killing the driver and borrow their vehicle.

      If this case is not a mental health example, then I have not a clue what is. I’m not entertaining any thought of …

      “he was just beginning to turn his life around” OR, ” he just made a bad decision/mistake”

      Apply this behavior to road rage, It’s apparent that this non-officer can in fact accurately hit a human within what appears to be approximately 5-7 yards; space/distance is your friend. That said, what was the officer thinking getting that close to someone who he, the officer with his sidearm pointed at suspect, standing with no cover in front of the suspects vehicle, was just chasing at a fairly high rate of speed, or blocking with his cruiser. The officer actually left any possible cover (his patrol vehicle) behind.

      Why, just because you have a badge and a gun? I do applaud anyone’s bravery when confronting any human displaying hardened criminal behavior then directing that behavior at me.

      For all the beginners, Space/Distance is your friend.
      Anyone else want to chime in and help with my education?

      1. avatar DANILO DEANO says:

        I agree that brave as the officer was, approaching the deranged and dangerous suspect in the open and knowing fully well that the latter was armed, was fool-hardy and could have had worse consequences. The suspect’s car was disabled, he was surrounded and he was not going anywhere. In an IDPA match, the officer would have incurred a procedural penalty for leaving cover. In a real life scenario such as this, he could have lost his life.

  2. avatar Kevin says:

    At the 1:57 mark, you see why anyone who carries a firearm with them daily should have a tourniquet nearby.

    This DPS trooper obviously had it on his person because he is attempting to get it on himself until assistance arrives.

    1. avatar Ranger Rick says:

      The tourniquet and the nearby DPS copter probably saved the trooper’s life.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        I agree completely. (See more detail in my comment below.)

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Interesting observation Kevin.

      And it is a good thing, too because you can see a LOT of blood on the ground. I have a hunch that Officer Friendly would have bled out from that arm wound before arriving at the hospital if he had not had that tourniquet.

      Serious wounds to your brachial or femoral arteries (which are in your arms and legs respectively) can cause fatal blood loss in just a few minutes.

      1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        That’s all true. Even before that, though, the massive loss of blood can result in very low blood pressure and you going into shock. Now we’re talking potentially severe, even fatal, organ damage. You have to keep the blood inside your body.

    3. avatar ANONNYMOUS says:

      @ Kevin says: September 6, 2018 at 14:52

      …QUOTE
      At the 1:57 mark, you see why anyone who carries a firearm with them daily should have a tourniquet nearby.

      This DPS trooper obviously had it on his person because he is attempting to get it on himself until assistance arrives.
      … END QUOTE
      Carrying a sidearm everyday does not dictate whether or not to carry a torniquete/tourniquet, it would be a good idea to carry one or more as well as an first-aid kit; but most people don’t have a basic first-aid kit within 7′ of their current location.

      Walk yourself through that above (quoted) scenario. Your in a gun-fight, you get hit while continuing to take fire. Am I to understand you or the average civilian is going to holster/rest the firearm to apply this tourniquet, or are you going to try and stay in the fight until the threat is over?

      The above is providing the civilian:
      1) decides to make a way to carry a torniquete/tourniquet
      2) during a DGU, would have the calm and presence of mind to effectively apply the torniquete/tourniquet while under fire.

      While I do have a few of these items (torniquete/tourniquet), I tend to concentrate on avoiding the friction, and having a darn good idea of where the closest point of cover is, if and when needed.

      I’m listening, teach me …

      1. avatar California Richard says:

        Gunfight survival priorities:

        -Be prepared when you walk out the door. Training, equipment, mindset, legal knowledge.
        – Avoid stupid people, in stupid places, at stupid times. Have an escape plan. Know your local cover.
        – Know when to fight, when to hide, and when to run.
        – If in the fight, then get cover; your chances of survival are 90%. Return fire (even if you miss); your chances of survival are 99%.
        – AFTER ACTION: know when to run and when to maintain cover. KNOW HOW TO KEEP YOURSELF ALIVE IF INJURED. Know what to say to the cops and what not to say.

        There’s a progression there where each step leads in to the next step, but step 1 (being prepared) includes having equipment that will help if you progress to the higher steps. If you don’t carry a tourniquet, then at least have a plan to use your clothing as field expedient first aid. Nearly all armed encounters last less than 10 seconds. That gives you pleanty of time to win, drive off the treat, or disengage AND apply a tourniquet when needed.

  3. avatar Mr Lizard says:

    The perp looked like he was attempting some laser tag maneuvers when he was shot.

  4. avatar Sian says:

    Thought 1: A gut-shot with an AR is a rude way to die.

    Thought 2: if you carry a gun, carry a tourniquet.

    Thought 3: That chopper pilot was all over this. Great eyes and great communication.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      Thought 4: Practice shooting with your opposite side just in case the first shot hits you in your main arm.

    2. avatar Skp5885 says:

      Thought 5: give me a rifle over a pistol any day in a gun fight.

  5. avatar steve says:

    Why didn’t the officer stay behind his vehicle?

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      Can’t watch the particular video right now but I can tell you that, at the end of a pursuit, there is an instinct of officers to pigpile on the stopped suspect and quickly get him into custody. This is often tactically unsound (for the reasons depicted in this story) and there are attempts to train out of it but to some extent it’s like trying to teach a cat not to grab at the mouse running past it. Adrenaline, stress, etc all make decision-making worse.

    2. avatar DDay says:

      He should have. The copter clearly warned the cops the guy was reaching under the seat. There were plenty of other cops on the scene. He wasn’t smart to put himself so close and without cover.

      1. avatar California Richard says:

        Smart has nothing to do with it. The cop wasn’t thinking so all the intelligence in the world wouldn’t have mattered. He probably had a career of bad habbits, inadequate training, and shallow mindset when he found himself in the situation and he paid for it… There are good things to learn here (never give up and resign yourself to death, fight out of the ambush, etc.) and bad (stay in a position of dominance, don’t move from cover, don’t give your opponent the tactical advantage, break your tunnel vision, etc). Incorporate the good and bad lessons (that he paid for with his blood) in to your mindset/physical training so you become better.

  6. avatar Ned says:

    That was a terrible mistake. Out in the open with no cover after being warned the perp was reaching for what was likely a weapon.

  7. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    Scumbag’s car was disabled, was surrounded by cops, and decides to shoot one of them.

    I guess that’s one way to commit suicide.

  8. avatar Ralph says:

    “Another ground Trooper neutralized the suspect.”

    I really appreciate that bit of understatement.

    Too bad about the car.

  9. avatar joefoam says:

    What I read was that an AR-15 pattern rifle was used to save lives. Imagine that.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email