I don't know about this one. Seems like the cops gave him a command at gunpoint, and his hands moved as they would naturally for someone trying to obey the command, i.e., down to support body weight as he dropped down to a kneeling position. He may well have been going for the gun in his left pocket (he was a bad man, after all), but it didn't look that way to my eyes.
I think it was a bad command to give the guy combined with the command to keep his hands on the hood. It would be hard for anyone to obey both commands simultaneously without reflexively lowering his hands to support his body weight as he assumed a kneeling position.
I think bad shoot, he was trying to comply with a command. He did have a gun and was non-compliant, and he was a criminal so no big loss.
That's about how I see it, but what if these same cops, at some later point, detain someone they are mistakenly convinced fits the description of an armed robber on the loose, who is legally armed, and the same thing happened? That's the problem.
11 years as a cop before I left and I would have shot that guy. Repetitive commands though; "I'm not going to tell you again" but he does. Need one person giving commands, they need to be clear and unequivocal; "Sir, put your hands on the hood. You are wanted for questioning in an armed robbery. You have a gun on you. Do not reach for the gun or you will be shot, do you understand? If you reach for the gun, I will shoot you, do you understand?" Or something similar.
Remember, we're looking at this with the benefit of hindsight and no stress. It's entirely different out on the street with armed criminals. When I was dealing with criminals, on the way to the call, I already had a plan in my mind of possible outcomes and how I might handle them. The body can't go where the mind hasn't already been.
I was covering a trailer one day with my AR. VERY bad guy, known armed robber, with warrants for shooting people, was supposed to be inside. We were trying to call him out. I had already decided if he came out of the door with a weapon in his hands, I would shoot right there because my other guys were so damn close, it was almost impossible for him to miss them. We made multiple announcements for him to come out with his hands up, open and empty. A weapon in them meant he wanted to fight so I wasn't going to give him the chance.
These officers may have made that same decision; when he moves his hand towards where the gun is, that may have been enough to trigger the shooting. Action always beats reaction. Were there other ways to handle this? Yep. Was this wrong? Nope. Bad guy doing bad stuff F'd around and found out.
I think bad shoot, he was trying to comply with a command. He did have a gun and was non-compliant, and he was a criminal so no big loss.
That's about how I see it, but what if these same cops, at some later point, detain someone they are mistakenly convinced fits the description of an armed robber on the loose, who is legally armed, and the same thing happened? That's the problem.
A legally armed citizen would be telling the cops that. He'd also be 100% compliant, rather than doing what this clown was doing which was trying to throw the cops off with BS, all while waiting for the opportunity to either run or draw down on them. Don't conflate what criminals do when armed and caught in the act and what innocent, lawfully carrying citizens do, they ain't the same thing.
Simple: Command: "Put both hands on the hood and take two steps back! NOW!"
With both hands on the hood and feet out from under him, there is no way he can reach for anything and not face plant on the hood.
Now, I am not and never have been a LEO, but this makes sense to me.
....and yeah, I've seen "Cops" where there was more than one cop yelling different instructions to a very confused perp! Seeing that the majority of perps aren't Mensa candidates, being confused is a constant state of mind.
Edit: Good shoot? Bad shoot? That's not for me to decide. Got into it with a black guy once about the shooting of Philando Castille. He kept talking about the cop was wrong and Castille was murdered. "But you weren't there. You have no idea what Castille was doing with his hands!" "But he didn't have to shoot him!" "YOU weren't there. The video doesn't show Castille's hands or what he was doing." About the 5th or 6th exchange, you could see him click. "You're right! I wasn't there." I concluded with, "I'm not saying the "shoot" was good or bad, just that we weren't standing in that cop's shoes or know what Castille's intentions were."
I think bad shoot, he was trying to comply with a command. He did have a gun and was non-compliant, and he was a criminal so no big loss.
That's about how I see it, but what if these same cops, at some later point, detain someone they are mistakenly convinced fits the description of an armed robber on the loose, who is legally armed, and the same thing happened? That's the problem.
Can't see the video without signing up. From comments, it sounds like there was a conflicting array of orders being issued. One best freeze until some semblance of order is established.
It’s possible that the main cop who has the body cam didn’t hear the command of the other officer. Even if he did hear it his left hand was an inch away from his gun. Good shoot !
The perp wasn’t obeying commands from the main guy why would he start obeying commands from the other officer who he couldn’t see at that point?
“No one in hell can ever say I went to Christ and He rejected me.
Bad shoot. He was told to get on his knees right before he was shot. Making it worse for the cop is that’s the first thing that he says after being shot.
That’s not a job that I’d want. The a-hole didn’t comply to reasonable commands to keep his hands on the hood over and over before being shot.
After watching it again He wasn’t trying to get on his knees, he was taking full advantage of the inconsistency between the officers so he could continue his defiance of officer #1. Good shoot
Like the_Gman said he FAAFO
“No one in hell can ever say I went to Christ and He rejected me.
I think bad shoot, he was trying to comply with a command. He did have a gun and was non-compliant, and he was a criminal so no big loss.
I disagree.
He was positioning himself to draw his gun.
Good shoot.
Could have been, which is why it would have been a good shoot if he hadn't had to position himself the same to comply with the order. It was the order to get on your knees that made it a bad shoot.
Good shoot. The "conflicting commands" were a bit apart. He wasn't shot because he took his hands off the hood (first command). He was shot when his hand went to his waist and he cocked his elbow in what anyone would see as a drawing motion. He was told they saw the gun, don't reach for it, or he would get shot. When told to get on his knees, he reached for the gun. Any clear thinking person when told to get on their knees, after being told to not reach for the gun, would put their hands in the air, or on their head.
He was a cocky, non-compliant SOB, and did exactly what he was told not to do, and had been told the consequences he'd face if he did.
Now, I will say, just commanding someone to "get on your knees" is not exactly a great command. It should have been sequenced as though it were a felony traffic stop. Put your hands on your head and interlace your fingers. Take 5 steps back. Now kneel down. Now cross your legs.
This is nothing like the Vegas hotel shoot "simon says" cluster pphuck.
Would a single person here, after knowing an officer knows you have a gun on you, under any circumstances, put your hand anywhere near said gun?
Last edited by DaveR; 12/21/23.
Guns are responsible for killing as much as Rosie O'Donnel's fork is responsible for her being FAT.
