RIP courtesy BART PD

[drewkitty]

BART PD has another controversial fatal shooting on their hands.

A BART police officer shot a man lying on his stomach, in the back, who later died at the hospital. No weapon was found on the now deceased person. This took place on the platform, in the midst of a mass arrest situation following a fight on the train.

Inquiring minds want to know:



1) What was the deadly threat that required this action? We're kind of short on the traditional excuses here (you know, 3 AM, long black finger). Irony would be if the man was pulling out his own cell phone to record the action.

2) Was this a case of "Oops, I meant to Taze you . . ." and the officer reached for the wrong object?

3) Why did BART PD "collect" all the cell phones from the people recording the action, except the one who wisely gave her camera's video directly to the news media? What happened to all this phone footage? Will people get their phones back, let alone any damning video that may appear on them?

4) Why the @#*&! is anyone, anyone at all, talking publicly about the capabilities of BART cameras? These are damn near the only counter-terrorist precaution on the entire fragging BART system, and public discussion of them could kill a lot more than the handful gunned down so far by BART PD.

5) Was the suspect handcuffed after being shot (standard police procedure) or was he handcuffed prior to being shot? If the latter, can we go for Murder One on the officer?



I am a staunch supporter of law enforcement. I've carried a firearm in public for a living. This shooting stinks to high heaven and there need to be felony criminal charges.

Comments

[drewkitty.livejournal.com]

I have not yet looked at the videos in detail. The closest I can find to a reasonable explanation is that the deceased may have been reaching under himself suddenly, such as to answer a cell phone call.

Important safety tip: when dealing with the police, do exactly what you are told and keep your hands in sight at all times. This is for your safety and for their safety.

I have been known to volunteer for a relief agency whose neutrality is well known. We give bottled water to police, and they trust us enough to take it. Given our neutrality, why do we give water to police? Because we want the folks with the guns and other weapons to be well hydrated and make good decisions, that's why!

If you are resisting the police, and your hands are out of sight, you are going to get hurt. The assumption is that once your hand comes back in sight, you're going to have a weapon in it with which to murder a police officer. They can't afford to make any other assumption.

A proper police response would have been an immediate, extremely aggressive verbal command. "STOP!" "FREEZE!" "NO!" or equivalent, additional profanity optional but recommended. Example:

"STOP! FREEZE! DO NOT MOVE, A$$H0L3! I MEAN IT! Now LISTEN to me or you're going to get hurt! Is there ANYTHING in your hand? No? When I tell you, I want you to pull out your EMPTY hand, REALLY slow. Got it? OK, really slow. No, slower. Keep going."

Compliant suspect: "Now as far from your body as you can reach. Good. Now the other EMPTY hand, slowly." Proceed to lying-down handcuffing technique, etc. with or without pain compliance hold as indicated.

Semi-compliant suspect: YANK with full pain compliance hold on the wrist as soon as it is exposed. Proceed to lying-down handcuffing maintaining pain compliance until hands are secured.

Non-compliant suspect: Use a Taser (in either mode) or swarm the limbs with multiple officers. Consider breaking his arm or elbow (baton or stomp) if necessary. These lawful and completely justified uses of force are proportional and reasonable to the threat.

Shooting the suspect in the back, once, is completely unacceptable from both a legal and a training standpoint. Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that the deceased pulled out a small handgun. You're only going to shoot him once? That's not the way it works, either in the sense of a single round stopping a deadly threat, or in terms of the training and muscle memory. You put the gun against the suspect's torso and shoot three to five times.

A plausible explanation would be this: the officer was poorly trained and carried the Taser on the same side as a handgun. The officer thought they were Tasing the suspect (one trigger pull) and employed the wrong weapon.

Still horribly bad police work. "Bring your checkbook and Super-Size the 'In The Amount Of' field . . ." is the way a lawyer friend put it.

[rue-gingertabby.livejournal.com]

All very good advice to follow.

I have a tendency get upset when I see people who are in positions of authority, lack proper training and/or control.

"Super-Size" indeed.