Officer To Retire After Drawing, Firing Gun Instead of TASER [VIDEO]

Image via YouTube/Bucks County Jail

The Bucks County, Pennsylvania prosecutor has ruled the shooting of an “arrestee” was neither justified nor criminal, but “excused.” The shooting began with scuffle between a 6’4″, 240-pound non-compliant inmate and officers that took place as the suspect tried to conceal and then flush what looks like a bag of drugs.  After shouting “TASER!”, one officer draws and fires his handgun into the gut of the suspect.

Even though the officer carried his TASER in front of his firearm on his strong side, in violation of department policy, he only faced administrative leave until his April 10th retirement.

WFMZ has the details.

“After careful consideration, I have determined that [the officer’s] shooting of arrestee Brian Riling on March 3, 2019, was neither justified, nor criminal, but was excused,” Weintraub wrote in a letter to New Hope Police Chief Michael Cummings.

Weintraub said the law excuses the shooting officer’s conduct from criminal prosecution because of his “honest but mistaken” belief he was deploying his Taser at the time he discharged his service weapon.

Here is the video of the incident. A note caution for violent content and NSFW language.

 

The media report goes on to cover the district attorney’s reasoning behind his decision not to charge – or exonerate – the lawman.

However, the letter continues, because the officer believed he was deploying his Taser and not wielding his service firearm, he did not possess the criminal mental state required to be guilty of a crime under state law.

As noted in Weintraub’s letter, Section 304 of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code (Title 18) states that a person has a defense to a criminal charge if he makes a mistake as a matter of fact for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse.

Investigation of the incident further revealed the officer wore his Taser on his right side, in front of his firearm, in violation of police department policies.

Policy dictates officers should wear their Tasers on their non-dominant side, in what is known as a cross-draw position.

This violation of policy, however, does not constitute a violation of law, the post said.

In reviewing the totality of the circumstances, Weintraub also considered the officer’s decades of service to the citizens of New Hope as evidenced by dozens of commendations and letters, as compared to relatively few minor historical infractions on his service record, the post said.

Brian Riling is probably lucky to have survived the incident. Look for him to cash a substantial settlement check from an upcoming lawsuit he’ll no doubt file against those involved.

 

comments

  1. avatar binder says:

    Sometimes I really wonder about police firearm training.

    Best example is the number of time you see their fingers inside the trigger guard when not appropriate. You do that during IDPA and your going to have a SO yelling out finger.

    They need to use the blue guns that beep when your finger is in the guard when training.
    https://smartfirearms.us/

    1. avatar Casey says:

      When I was first asked to provide above-and-beyond firearms training to officers, I thought they wanted advanced tactics, better handling, speed and accuracy drills, etc.

      Very first thing, I ask everybody to step up, draw and fire. It was supposed to be a “make the first one count” thing, but I figured it would also give me an idea of what I was dealing with. Silhouette target at 5 yards, give me two to the body, fast as you can hit the A zone.

      What I was dealing with was 12 cops who between them had 3 cleared targets, 5 with one out of the A zone, 2 with one-hit on the paper total, one failure to fire because there was no round in the chamber and one gun thrown downrange.

      I’ve since taught a lot of “above and beyond” training, and you can tell pretty quickly which departments foster a culture of firearms competence, versus the bulk of them where I don’t even know how they passed the far-too-easy qualifiers.

      1. avatar Frankly says:

        One gun thrown down range????

        1. avatar Binder says:

          I have seen really fast draws in IDPA that sent a gun downrange. You get a DQ and really dirty looks. You would be surprised the number of competition guns that don’t have a firing pin block

      2. avatar Binder says:

        You need to start with “Step up, draw” even before you go with Fire.

      3. avatar Sian says:

        Sounds just like the stories from a police trainer I used to work with.

  2. avatar enuf says:

    Special Rights & Privileges for LEO’s. Were it you or me that fucked up so badly we’d of been promptly and not a second thought handcuffed, hauled in, booked, held for trial and prosecution.

    1. avatar napresto says:

      Hell, last I checked the “no criminal mindset” defense didn’t even apply for innocuous traffic tickets, which I would contend deserve quite a bit more leeway than accidentally shooting a guy. Where do I pick up my “get out of trouble free” card?

    2. avatar Jeff says:

      Yup. It’s good to be member of the ruling gov’t class.

      1. avatar Mike says:

        Okay, black lives matter. Everyone saying “yup” has never put their life on the line to enforce the law and protect citizens.

      2. avatar Mike says:

        Also,when are you ever going to carry a taser and a handgun at the same time while arresting a criminal? NEVER, if you are not a LEO. It is hilarious to see people on ttag judging an officer with a distinguished record and the justice system while they sit cozy in their armchairs. You sound exactly like BLM leftists.

    3. avatar Fully Involved says:

      Yup.

  3. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

    So the idiots there didn’t have Quick Clot? They yelled at him AFTER he was shot to get up and sit on the bench?? The officer can’t tell the difference between a taser and a gun?? He is allowed to just retire because he was a good guy for decades?? I wish we were all excused like that after a shooting. We simple folk don’t have years of training with guns and tasers and we are held to a higher standard. We can’t just “retire” if we shoot someone . It happened in a controlled environment with other officers present. He was unarmed (I’m sure he was frisked before he was put into that room.)
    What happened to that female officer who killed a guy with her “taser” that wasn’t?

    1. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      Bullet may not have hit major vein or artery from what I watched, but if it hit any of the intestinal track Sepsis is gonna happen. Sepsis is gawd-awful when it gets into your bloodstream good. I only wish it on people I really dislike. lol

      But yes, I carry quickclot pretty much in all my bags. Switched from the granular stuff we used in Middle east to the gauze stuff. A surgeon told me that picking the grains out is a PIA.

      1. avatar jared orlosky says:

        Gut shots are non-compressible wounds. Theres no way to get the quickclot to the source of the bleeding inside or apply sufficient pressure. Hope it didnt hit anything too valuable and get them to surgery is all you can do.

  4. avatar Buff cousin Elroy says:

    Another incompetent cop that doesn’t have to take responsibility for his f-up. Broke dept policy resulting in an accidental shooting, but it’s ok because “he didn’t possess the criminal mental state required to be guilty..”

    But if us normal peons without a badge broke policy and negligently shot someone we go to jail, doesn’t matter if we meant to or not.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      ??? Normal peons without a badge have no policy and should only be using firearms in self defense.

      That being said, criminal negligence charges at the very least should have been brought. I doubt that it would be hard to prove that he knowing broke department policy, and the result was serious injury.

      1. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

        Policy Schmolicy, you DON”T shoot someone like that. That means everyone with a brain bigger than a pea. Doesn’t law trump any “policy”?

      2. avatar binder says:

        Dude, relax and try and re-read my post. I was responding to this guy saying that if civilians did not follow policy.

        Also every one here has to understand that law enforcement is going to make a mistake that is going to hurt someone at one time or another. The issue here is that he disregard a policy in place to prevent this problem. That is criminal negligence.

        If he had killed the guy with a tazer become of some medical issue then that is not negligence. Also if I was the other cop I would be pissed at a whole nother level as that dumbass could have just as easily put a round into me.

        1. avatar drunkEODguy says:

          Agreed, criminal negligence applies here. Especially because he violated a safety policy made, I can only assume, TO PREVENT THIS VERY THING.

  5. avatar Michael says:

    What in the world is “NSFW” language? I understand “violent content”. If it’s what I think it is, I’ve been employing it all my life. Both are very effective and necessary when reasonable communication breaks down. The 2nd is ABSOLUTE, and protects the 1st. -30-

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      Huh?

      NSFW language is a warning to those who may be watching a video in an environment where they could get in trouble if there’s a lot of profanity or similar emitting from their phone.

    2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      Not.
      Safe.
      For.
      Work…

    3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Michael,

      The acronym “NSFW” comes from, “Not Suitable For Work”, meaning it probably has profanity, nudity, criminal activity, and/or extreme violence, which would be a serious problem for most people in the workplace, even during a lunch break or when off the company clock.

  6. avatar RA-15 says:

    What kind of moron is this cop ?? And furthermore is the District Attorney just as idiotic as the cop ? Duh I thought it was my tazer, that I was wearing on the wrong side. Seriously , how can a veteran leo not know what weapon he’s holding. I hope the cop & D.A. are sued to the max. That is some disturbing shit right there !!

    1. avatar Binder says:

      No the District Attorney is not a idiot. The DA would be one if he prosecuted. The last thing a DA needs is the cops against him.

      1. avatar L says:

        Why would the cops be against him if he filed charges? They can watch the video for themselves, and see what regulations he broke, it was a bad shoot.

      2. avatar User1 says:

        The U.S. is so corrupt a government lawyer cannot do his/her job due to fear of retaliation from “law enforcement?” Sounds more like Mexico.

        The DA can do what they want as long as the AG doesn’t get involved. Cops have no authority or jurisdiction over them. The cops can shove it…

      3. avatar Chunk says:

        There’s a difference between what a DA is supposed to do (prosecute crimes) and what the DA ‘needs’ (to get reelected).

        That’s a bad shoot, and it is at the least criminally negligent due to the officer’s failing to follow department policy. If prosecuting that incompetent or malevolent cop ends up costing the DA the election, then the DA has done their job and the voters have voiced, once again, their preference for a two-tiered legal system that creates a criminal class and a class that is above the law. We need honest, competent prosecutors and honest, competent cops; too bad we keep voting for the same old crooked bags of shit.

    2. avatar Kendahl says:

      I know of two other incidents in which a cop shot a suspect while intending to use his Taser. One was a reserve officer in Oklahoma who had bought his badge by making generous donations to the department to buy equipment they could not otherwise afford. The other was a rookie in Lawrence, Kansas. Her partner attempted to arrest a driver who refused to provide license, etc. in a traffic stop. (His license was suspended and he had warrants so he was going to jail no matter what.) When the suspect put her partner on the ground, the rookie yelled, “Taser!” and put a bullet him him. (In my opinion, her real mistake was selecting the Taser when her gun was the right tool. If the Taser failed, which isn’t uncommon, the suspect would have put her down, too.)

      In this case, the cop is vulnerable because he violated departmental policy. So are his supervisors if they knew about it and did nothing.

  7. avatar GluteusMaximus says:

    Wow i was an MP in the Army and i just don’t understand cops these days. In my day it was God help you if you pull that gun. Today they seem to just mag dump at the drop of a hat. What kind of training are these people getting?

    1. avatar WI Patriot says:

      And that’s why military training is FAR superior to LE training, in the military, we understood the consequences, in LE, they just don’t have any consequences…

    2. avatar User1 says:

      I hear often from police trainers that when there is a threat you shoot to kill, you shoot to end the threat, you do not shoot then assess. They say shooting to wound is bullshit. We must eliminate the threat.

    3. avatar Chunk says:

      They’re mostly trained to mag-dump at the drop of a hat. Some departments have good firearms training; most do not.

    4. avatar Mike says:

      Okay black lives matter. The vast majority of us are NOT trained to “mag dump”. None of us are trained to “mag dump” actually. We are trained to stop the threat. Keep judging from your comfortable armchair.

  8. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    The armed civilian who carries a gun is better trained than the average cop. If you go to a range once a month or even bi-monthly, you will get more range time than most cops in this country.

  9. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

    Remember, these are the people our politicians want to be armed instead of us. They can kill the people that pay their salaries and get off as heros.

    I felt bad for both the cop and the arrestee UNTIL the cop continued to yell commands to an unarmed civilian, already in custody, in a controlled environment AFTER knowing he just shot him.

    That ticks me off more than anything else. The whole “yelling commands” to a guy shot 10 times and then using their noncompliance as reason to shoot them more.

    1. avatar User1 says:

      I have seen the yelling at a dead body situation too many times to guess. They dump 50 rounds into a human and expect him to have a conversation with them and do Simon says. Sometimes they definitely killed the guy yet they still have to yell, “Show me your hands, now!”

      At this point, I think they are simply not bright individuals and are taught to be scared of everything.

  10. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

    Most of you guys know how I feel when it comes to L.E.O. However, it looks like this guy seriously screwed up. It looked like to me the suspect was compliant until the officer pushed him down onto the bunk initiatating the physical confrontation. Additionally, this appears to take place inside a correctional facility. Probably a county jail. If so; why was he armed? If I had carried a firearm into a correctional facility I would have suspended without pay for two weeks. Minimum. Shoot an inmate when I wasn’t supposed to be armed? Fired.

    1. avatar DDay says:

      Agree.

      Why in the world would a firearm be in a jail room that close to an arrestee. There are two cops there, the arrestee was certainly searched prior to being taken there. There is no need for a firearm in that setting.

      Also agree, the non shooting cop initiated the physical confrontation. He should be suspended for unnecessary force. Even if the guy was mouthing off, you need to keep your cool and not escalate anything.

  11. avatar NORDNEG says:

    I personally respect the thin blue line , I have many relatives in several different states in all capacities of law enforcement, from F B I to chief of police, to patrolman, to instructors for recruits , 99% of cops are just trying to get home at the end of their shift. Smart people do what their told to do by the man… the one’s that don’t are the ones that get the headlines. Most people can’t handle the stress these people are under,,, occupation wise they have the highest rate of divorce, mental breakdowns, paranoias & plus other problems dealing with society, If this perp would have followed orders every thing would be Kosher, now the jerks going to get rich on taxpayers money.

    1. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

      Sorry, I don’t agree. If your excuse is “they’re under stress” then find another job. If I shoot someone under stress, I don’t get the free pass. There are a lot of stressful jobs. Have you ever worked with the mentally ill? Time bombs waiting to go off. Do you get to clobber them because you just got clobbered? No, just call the cops, they’ll shoot them. It happened in a nursing home in Chicago. The 90yr old was in a wheelchair. Shot with a shotgun. (That old guy won’t be a threat to society again.)

      1. avatar Chunk says:

        Agree with you 100%.

    2. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

      I completely disagree. If the job is too stressful, they need to quit and find other employment. Nobody forces them to be police officers. There are plenty of other professions where they can go home safely every night.

      This is the idea that just because somebody wears a badge or as a representative of government does not excuse them from behavior that would otherwise be unlawful to a regular civilian.

    3. avatar User1 says:

      A long time ago when my people did what the “man” said they were robbed, kidnapped, raped or killed. In other words, we shouldn’t follow orders just because the “man” says so.

      When you do something wrong our culture is to take responsibility regardless of the punishment. American culture today is the opposite of that. Hence why people on both sides get into bad situations. White, black and brown Americans do not like responsibility; even American women are willing to murder babies to escape their responsibilities.

      Unfortunately, modern American culture bleeds into other countries. In Korea they did away with their law against killing unborn babies because “SJW” culture has successfully taken that country over.

    4. avatar 5.11 says:

      “If this perp would have followed orders every thing would be Kosher”

      Well there ya go! NORDNEG, and his completely unbiased opinion, free of any excuses, solved the problem. Don’t listen to any “command” at any time, and they get to shoot you..

      See simple, thanks for that NORDNEG. Be sure to keep solving all the worlds problems, NORDNEG.

    5. avatar Eric Comer says:

      He should get rich off taxpayers. Yet another “win” in the drug war for people like you who fully endorse the police state and feel law enforcement is never wrong and above reproach. He was following department policy and that is the direct cause of this shooting. That is the criminal intent/negligence whether the prosecutor charges him or not. A man shot them screamed at while in tremendous pain over a personal use amount of drugs. They had video but were scared to lose the evidence? Try letting someone shoot you with a paintball at close range in the same spot and see how much you “don’t move!!!!”. People like you disgust me. You claim to support 2A but when it comes to any other right you couldn’t give a fuck less because that person is a “perp” and didn’t blindly follow police orders after being assaulted. People like you gives us bullshit like the Patriot Act and every other assault on our civil liberties. And of course law enforcement is never wrong. Ever. Doesn’t matter to you who does or what happens as long as the officer gets to go home each night. Police today have very poor training in deescalation and are just taught to shoot first. And it’s getting worse and worse. But you love it and the subsequent loss of rights that come with it.

    6. avatar Chunk says:

      If the cop hadn’t been an incompetent fool, he wouldn’t have shot the arrestee and the arrestee wouldn’t be “getting rich” off of the county.

  12. avatar GlockMeAmadeus says:

    Theres not supposed to be any guns inside the jail. Cops in most jurisdictions put them in lockboxes and only carry non lethal inside the jail.

    This was screwed up on so many levels. But, it was in the COMMIEwealth of Bucks Co. PA so its par for course.

    1. avatar possum says:

      I’ve been locked up a bunch, in the pen once, the only gunms I saw were on the guard towers. And besides the guy that got shot was a criminal, so who cares right.

  13. avatar Hannibal says:

    Ok. Let me start by saying that I am certain he did not intend to shoot this dumbass, and that exculpates him from many statutes that require a malicious mens rea. But it sure looks like it fits the definition of § 2705 in PA, reckless endangerment. He was carrying a taser in contravention of department policy and right next to his gun. Then he gets to shoot someone without criminal penalty because his actions weren’t intentional? I have little doubt that this was a case where the prosecutor was looking for an excuse not to charge where he would have thrown the book at someone else. I see that as a problem here.

    If this was the first time this had happened to anyone, maybe I could understand. It’s not, at all. A big part of taser training and equipment placement is AVOIDING THIS EXACT SCENARIO. It’s not murder or attempted murder, but it’s also not as simple a ‘mistake’ as bumping someone’s car backing up in your cruiser. At some point you shouldn’t be able to excuse away any actions just because you’re a dumbass. Reminds me of the FBI agent acting like a moron on the dance floor who ended up shooting someone.

    Being able to ‘retire’ is good for the next guy he would have shot but doesn’t really seem like justice in this case.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      edit: that is to say “he was carrying the taser right next to his firearm, in contravention of policy…”

    2. avatar Red in CO says:

      You’d know this better than I would but why was he armed at all? I’ve worked in several county jails (I’m a subcontractor concrete worker) and in every one I’ve seen officers’ firearms are ABSOLUTELY not allowed inside the facilities for obvious reasons

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        Got me. It was a police station holding cell (nod a dedicated jail) and from the website it looks like the department might have like 12 sworn personnel (including the chief). Small departments like that have a way of not always being great with policies and keeping up with the times.

  14. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    Where was the supervising lieutenant? This was not the first time he wore the Taser in the incorrect position.

    The law suit needs to be filed after the sergeant retires so as to tag his pension and savings

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      Looking at the website there are like 12 officers including the chief.

  15. avatar Some dude says:

    I was surprised at how long it took the guy to realize he was shot! In some ways the mental processes that allowed the cop to shoot without realizing what he was doing and the guy not realizing he was even shot are related… in that we are all human and a little stupid, especially in times of stress and especially when that stress is unexpected…

    The degree of perfection that is, these days, expected from any of us, cop or civilian, politician or citizen, is beyond most of our abilities to deliver in all circumstances. The best that can be hoped for is that we act in good faith without nefarious or ulterior motive, and for that reason I agree with the DA’s decision not to prosecute, especially since the victim didn’t die, the cop’s career is ended on a sad note, and the victim ultimately will get a monetary settlement for his suffering after starting out as a dick anyways…

    Yeah, the cop fucked up, but the victim was a fuck up… it all sorta balances out in a stupid human sorta way.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      I am not one to accept perfection from anyone, especially someone in a high-stress environment or facing someone who may be trying to kill them. I’ve been there. However, that does not excuse everything. This officer intentionally placed his taser next to his firearm against department policies that were created for the express purpose of preventing this sort of fuckery. Then he pulls his gun and blasts this guy and gets to skate because he’s just a dumbass?

      Note well that this was not a life-or-death situation until the officer made it one. This was not a case of a cop seeing a potentially armed suspect grab for his waistband. This was a controlled environment where he was trying to gain compliance, not defend himself. At some point there should be criminal penalty for being so reckless. And normally, there would be.

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        *expect

  16. avatar Ark says:

    See, the shielding of officers like this who do things that are blatantly, unambiguously wrong is why people don’t trust the police. He negligently put a bullet in a man’s gut and is walking away from it. This was partially the result of a willing, repeated violation of a department policy that exists specifically to prevent this from happening.

  17. avatar thesixthmoon says:

    When this happened to a BART cop a few years ago, he was convicted of manslaughter. Rightfully so — he had no intention of shooting the guy, it was an honest brain freeze. But still negligent use of deadly force, the exact thing that the crime of “manslaughter” was invented for.

    This incident didn’t result in death but there should still be criminal liability.

    And, yes, there are no guns in jails, at least not in California where I used to work.

    1. avatar Ticktalk says:

      Involuntary manslaughter.. and the only reason he was convicted of that is because it was caught on 50 phone cameras..

  18. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

    Did you see the guys run after it happened? Like a bunch of kids: “Oh sh*t, let’s get outta here” kinda thing. (Yea, I could read their minds.)

  19. avatar guest says:

    I respect cops, but…

  20. avatar Robert K says:

    I am not making excuses but why are tasers shaped like pistols. You can’t mistake the feel of pepper spray or baton for a pistol during the physiological stress of fighting. This is not the first “mistake” and it won’t be the last as long as tasers are in the form of pistols and carried in holsters. It’s one thing to make a preparatory draw and another when grabbing for a tool while fighting.

    1. avatar GridSquare says:

      That’s actually a very good argument. Tasers could easily be shaped in another manner and it would probably help cut down on such incidents.

      1. avatar User1 says:

        They are shaped like that because that is the best shape to the human hand to use. Changing the shape would make it easier for someone to remove it from your hand.

        If you are stupid enough to mistake your taser for your gun you shouldn’t be allowed to carry a gun. That’s what they do in other countries.

        1. avatar Hannibal says:

          Yeah, they’re shaped for the same reason guns are shaped that way. There’s a reason that tasers are colored bright yellow and are typically carried on a crossdraw, chest draw, or any draw OTHER than one similar to that of the firearm. So some doofus Barney doesn’t blow someone away like this. But the idiot managed to circumvent the idiot-resistant system.

  21. avatar Death says:

    You anti-cop [email protected] can eat shit. The bottom line is the asshat should have done what he was told to do. You wanna be tough guys.

    1. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

      And it is this attitude that excuses armed police going door to door confiscating guns and killing civilians. After all, they are just “following orders” and “if the noncompliant civilians just followed the unconstitutional laws” they wouldn’t get killed. Am I right?

      1. avatar Death says:

        No asshat, it does not. Don’t extrapolate when you can’t differentiate.

    2. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

      Right, and when my kids don’t obey me I can beat the sh*t out of them, too. I need to run out and buy a taser now……………

      1. avatar Death says:

        Duh. You’re an idiot.

      2. avatar User1 says:

        And wear it next to your gun because you write the policy. When you are in front of the lawyers you can say I was just following policy and enforcing the rules…

    3. avatar User1 says:

      “If that b**** would have done what she was told…”

      Sounds like what a cop might say… Statistically speaking and all that.

    4. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Show us on the doll where liberty touched you. Poor little thing.

      Oink.

    5. avatar Binder says:

      The bottom line is the COP should have done what he was told to do. There fixed it for you.

    6. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      The cop should die in prison. PERIOD.

      Citizens should be armed, not government employees.

    7. avatar Bad Hat Harry says:

      And the cop should have followed department policy and wore his taser on thd other side from his firearm to avoid confusing them. If hd followed policy, this may not hsve happened either. It is a case of two wrongs.Other posterx pointed out that in many jails, cops do not bring their firearms in to prevent this kind of issue. Face it, a vet cop who should have known better F up royally, and gets to walk away scott free while anyone else would be nailed to the wall.

    8. avatar jwtaylor says:

      “The bottom line is the asshat should have done what he was told to do. ”
      You mean the cop that was told not to put his Taser on the same side as his gun? I agree.

    9. avatar Chunk says:

      You anti-civilian [email protected] can eat shit off of a shiny jackboot. The bottom line is the asshat cop should done what he was told to do – wear his damn TASER on his weak-side so he wouldn’t draw the wrong tool and shoot someone ‘accidentally.’ You wanna be tough guys.

  22. avatar Jim from LI says:

    Totally unnecessary incident. There would have been no incident at all had the first officer not instigated it by shoving the guy down. And while they’re cleaning house, how about tossing the fool screaming “Get on the seat!!” at the person they just shot?

  23. avatar George Venable says:

    What’s department policy on the cops still being armed in this situation ? If the guy has been frisked for weapons before, shouldn’t the tools for deadly force have been in a locker by then ?

  24. avatar User1 says:

    The officer disobeyed a policy that was meant to keep him from shooting someone on “accident.” Going against logic, common sense and the safety rules made the officer negligent to the point he almost unjustifiably killed someone. He was intentionally reckless on official duty. He has many years of experience as a professional.

    There is no excuse to be made. He should be punished through the law like he punishes everyone that doesn’t work for the government. The government lawyers should hold every official to the proper standard of conduct and professionalism through their power to bring charges. They would not hesitate to charge some NRA hat wearing man who did the same negligent act… Charging him doesn’t mean he will be convicted, he would probably take a trial by judge and get off or have very little consequences if found guilty.

    America is so corrupt the government decides whom to punish based on who they are. At the same time, America has laws to criminalize exercising your human/civil rights.

  25. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

    How would they treat us if we shot everyone who didn’t listen to us? If our boss shot us for not working at 100%. If parents shot the kids for not obeying. If dog owners shot the dog for not obeying? Actually my dog gets zapped if he gets too close to the invisible fence. There’s a ‘warning’ shot/beep before the zap. Why do cops get to shoot the non-armed drunks who swing and miss? I think that guy was a little drunk.
    I’m still wondering why there wasn’t a Quick Clot administered to the guy immediately. I have one and a tourniquet and bandages and a blanket in my car. I was a girl scout. Be prepared.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      “I’m still wondering why there wasn’t a Quick Clot administered to the guy immediately.”

      Before I moved late last year my neighbor was a Sheriff’s Deputy. He came over one day and asked me about QuikClot and TQ’s because they had been issued them but not trained to use them (yet).

      So once that was out of the way he left. Comes back a few weeks later after getting the training and tells me about it. It was fine and dandy but he also informed me that their policy was that under no circumstances were they to apply any of that kind of gear or training to a non-officer/deputy. All that First Aid gear and training was for police only. If you get popped by a cop or a BG, when the cops have the place secured they call for EMS. Rendering aid to you isn’t their job and is actually not allowed under their policies. So, you could bleed to death from an injury to your leg or arm while a guy is standing next to you with a TQ in a TQ holster right in front of your face.

      My neighbor informed me that neither he nor anyone he knew from his department would follow that policy but that the local police almost certainly would.

      How that works in other jurisdictions I don’t know. There are bodycam videos of cops shooting someone and then immediately administering aid to the person they shot. There are also videos of them standing around waiting for EMS. Seems to vary by department and has to do with the policy of the department for which the cops in the specific situation are working.

      1. avatar User1 says:

        When you see a bodycam of a police shooting where a man is clearly dead and the cops still put handcuffs on him that is because of department policy. Sometimes they will handcuff a guy that needs medical attention then take the handcuffs off so they won’t get in trouble for violating policy.

        Great system…

  26. avatar Citizen Georgia says:

    I guess being armed in a correctional facility is par for the course now?

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      It was a holding cell in the 12-man police station. No way an actual prison would let someone in armed.

  27. avatar strych9 says:

    Perhaps if the law didn’t require police to initiate a violent confrontation over “what looks like a bag of drugs” this wouldn’t have happened.

    Drugs are illegal, gotcha. Cops have to collect evidence, make sense. Cops cannot allow the destruction of evidence. Palabra.

    However, the idea that we’re going to allow someone to get shot because “muh evidence!” over something that shouldn’t be a crime in the first place. Well, that’s criminally stupid.

  28. avatar Alan says:

    On the DA’s decision, one comment seems all to appropriate. BALONEY! Putting it politely. The officer was without fault, again HOGWASH What about, according to department policy, and the above article, his improper carriage of theTaser.

  29. avatar Mikial says:

    Two things . . .

    1. The officer was not adequately capable to be on the street or to carry. He neither had the mindset nor the capacity to deal with the situation. For that matter, where was his section leader or sergeant when he was violating department policy in how he carried his taser.

    2. Everyone should take note that the bad guy was still pretty functional after a point blank hit to the stomach with either 9mm or .40 service rounds. If this had been an assailant armed with a firearm he would have been fully capable of continuing the fight. Keep this in mind as you prepare to survive in the event of being the victim of a criminal aggravated assault.

    1. avatar Red in CO says:

      .2 is a very good point. I tend to watch a LOT of footage of Officer involved shootings for that exact reason. The largest variable seems to be the difference between individuals who get shot. Sometimes one round drops them, other times it take half a dozen or more. I don’t remember the details and I can’t find it but I watched some footage of a guy who was shot 6-7 times, including what appeared to be an arterial hit (there was a brief ribbon of blood sprayed several feet in the air) and was STILL moving. Not very much, mind you, but he wasn’t 100% incapacitated. Bottom line, always remember that handguns have shit lethality

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        Without a hit to the spine or brain, you can shoot someone as many times as you want and they’ll be physically able to do stuff for awhile. Men killed by rifles in firing squads regularly were seen to be moving minutes after being shot multiple times in the heart (Gary Gilmore as one example- the doctor said that despite his heart being basically blown apart he didn’t actually die for 2 minutes). Another, John Deering, had an EKG on him when he was shot. His heart’s activity was no longer detectable after 16 seconds but he kept struggling for almost a minute.

        Most of why people drop when they get shot is in the head.

  30. avatar Roga says:

    Does not elicit confidence in LEOs to say the least.

    Well trained LEOs should be raising a stink that this incompetent in a uniform was let off so easy.

  31. avatar MOUNTAIN MAN says:

    Another Faggot suburban Faggot cop fuck up…………

    1. avatar Mike says:

      Okay black lives matter.

  32. avatar B says:

    About 10 years ago, BART Officer Johannes Mehserle mistakenly shot and killed Oscar Grant instead of deploying his Taser.

    This occurred during NYE on the crowded Fruitvale Station platform in Oakland, CA. The officers were hugely outnumbered and mutual aid was called to quell a melee that broke out.

    Video clearly shows other officers Tasing multiple suspects on the platform while Mehserle attempts to control a resisting Grant during a chaotic riot.

    Furthermore, the video clearly indicates a confused and surprised reaction on Mehserle’s face after realizing his mistake.

    Grant tragically dies in custody. Just a bad situation all the way around, for everyone involved.

    Was training and conditioning an issue? Was his limited tenure and experience an issue? Was limited Taser training and Department Policy an issue? Was resisting arrest an issue? Of course. All the above.

    Constant changes were made to avoid future problems and tons of money was paid out to the surviving family. All normal after the fact in civil cases. And rightfully so.

    However, what was not right, was Mehserle being charged for: Second-degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter and a gun enhancement.

    All which lacked Corpus Delicti by not meeting the elements of the specific charges. But politically, we see this stuff happen.

    This specific incident was “Excusable” under the the totality of the circumstances and Mehserle was made into a political example as to not cause rioting later.

    Eventually, the jury convicted Mehserle on Involuntary Manslaughter only.

    Grant became an iconic symbol by his community and even hailed as a hero by some politicians.

    Typical of Bay Area mentality in California? Um, yeah….

    San Francisco PD can’t even carry the Taser, an additional tool in force options, because their citizens won’t allow it.

    Such foolishness.

  33. avatar james says:

    In San Francisco, the BART (train) security officer had a man cuffed on the ground, in the train station platform, he wanted to use Taser on him while cuffed (???) but pulled service pistol and shot him dead right there.

    Why allow any firearms in that part of the intake area?

    1. avatar B says:

      It’s a tough one, anyway you slice it. Should it have happened? No.

      But a “cuffed” suspect does not mean a “controlled” suspect. Arrest and control techniques are only tools to aid in the goal of apprehension. It’s difficult to tell what a resistor is intending to do or capable of doing during the process. Some suspects are very skilled and been fighting most of their lives. Many suspects have pure hatred for any uniform especially during highly charged events like NYE or concerts and protests with peer onlookers.

      BTW, cuffed suspects, even belly down, have successfully injured officers (especially in the lower quadrants) or accessed the nearby gear of officers.

      Some cuffed suspects have escaped, and even killed officers with their own guns in the past, while still being cuffed. Some have broken right out of certain cuffs after being detained in vehicles or facilities. Prison videos have shown inmates practicing how to disarm officers specifically during detention and arrests.

      But the general public doesn’t know or understand this phenomenon and believe officers are Supermen.

      Mehserle was not seasoned, with a lot to going on at the time of incident. Everybody reacts differently. But, the legal issue is; was his reaction excusable or criminal. According to California law, it’s excusable. But that not how politics works. And that in itself, is also tragic. Just saying. ✌

      1. avatar B says:

        Just for clarity, during the BART incident, Grant was physically fighting and resisting arrest during his attempted apprehension.

        It is a known fact that Grant was physically resisting arrest. Mehserle was unsuccessful in controlling Grant’s hands, thus resulting in escalation of force in the force continuum. Mehserle honestly believed he was deploying his Taser during the lawful act of arrest, and typically justified as the next level tool in the continuum.. Grant was handcuffed only AFTER being shot. He was then taken into custody but died at the hospital hours later.

        The video in this article is totally different, and certainly raises major issues. The civil liability is huge and the county will pay out big. Policies will tighten up fast. As far as criminal liability, the DA cited the law in Pennsylvania, which makes all the difference. But, a bad scenario any which way you look at it.

    2. avatar B says:

      In the BART incident, suspect Grant was not handcuffed until AFTER Officer Mehserle shot him. Mehserle was attempting to arrest the resisting Grant, but was unsuccessful in controlling his hands to the rear. This is a fact and in public records.✌

  34. avatar Q says:

    Had the inmate not fought the officers, they wouldn’t have had to tase or shoot him. He’ll get a huge settlement, blow it and end up right back in jail.

  35. avatar 24and7 says:

    Maybe the DOUCEBAG WILL QUIT BREAKING THE LAW!!

    1. avatar Q says:

      Thank you. Its about time someone on here has some sense. If he hadn’t committed a crime or fought he wouldn’t have gotten shot. Its an unfortunate incident but he doesn’t deserve a settlement for being a combative criminal.

  36. avatar Brian Nutley Ret NYCPD says:

    He is a fekkin ejit. He should retire!!! He would’nt make a pimple on the ass of a NYPD guy.

    1. avatar 24and7 says:

      Nor would a NYPD officer on most State Troopers ..

  37. avatar Ralph says:

    We’ve all read about cases of cops using their firearm when they meant to use their Taser, or shooting a suspect when they actually meant to turn on their weapon-mounted light.

    Why are there no cases of cops using their Taser when they meant to use their firearm? No cases where cops wanted to shoot and turned on their weapon light instead?

    Shouldn’t accidental deployments run in both directions, or are cops just trained to kill without thinking?

  38. avatar raptor jesus says:

    So negligent, not criminal.

    Sue him in civil court.

    1. avatar B says:

      +1, correct

  39. avatar Bret Viets says:

    It may have been mentioned, but why was this officer carrying a weapon this far into a booking area. Before the suspect was taken out of handcuffs, he should have been in area that officers handguns were placed in a locker. This could have gone bad the other direction with a weapon available to the non handcuffed suspect. I can’t be sure, but it does appear that the first officer in the video observing the suspect does not have a handgun in his holster.

  40. Thank God these “Law Enforcement Officer’s” weren’t executing a “Red Flag Confiscation Order !!!”

  41. avatar Chunk says:

    The only thing stupider than getting shot over a bag of drugs is shooting someone over a bag of drugs.

  42. avatar craig says:

    Most of these guys just sit around all day and hardly ever train and then one day they actually have to fight a criminal and it is usually ugly and sloppy. I have one friend that shoots his firearm once a year to qualify then never touches the thing again. They should be doing mandatory training in something, jiu jitsu, krav maga, plus have more stringent physical requirements. But usually every police wrestling match with a criminal looks just bad. They are simply not prepared for any of it.

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