Looks like the off duty officer did about everything wrong here.
Never good to lose an officer, but they, like the rest of us, have to use their heads.
I also have to question the decision to shoot by the officer that shot him.

link to story

Damn! Sorry for the family.

I'm thinking the officer who fired first (obviously without verifying wtf was going on) did more wrong than the off-duty guy.

ditto


if he'd capped a civilian like that he'd be looking at a grand jury and a law suit.

I suspect he will this time as well.

so theres 5 people involved and only one in uniform.
and the only one without a gun is the perp.
NY and DC are the only 2 places i think should be absolutly without firearms.But I also think they should be fenced off to suppress the spread of stupid.

No, arm everyone in NYC and DC and let attrition take it's course.

I like it.

That's the only thing that would work. The stupid would get dead and the rest would get polite.

Bloomberg's finest . This is the problem you have in a city with total gun ban. Police shoot everyone they see with a pistol in their hand with no verification before shooting. I'm surprised he actually hit him twice .

What a shame.

Fired 6 times and only hit him twice.? send the dumb azz back to the firing range.

as long as they only shoot their own it's ok.

I suspect the first officer had no choice but to have his pistol in hand...or leave it in the car. Most officers don't holster their weapons when off-duty.

The Police are trigger happy, this time they shot one of their own, there should be a national protest/debate over shootings in general

I know I am happy when I pull a trigger...

Depends on who I am pulling it on Pat.

Several lives here will never be the same zen and all you can do is come up with more of your crap.

Jim

"I know I am happy when I pull a trigger..."

You know, I'll just bet you are, and it probably doesn't make much difference who dies either.

saying that to Itppowell is hardly warranted. If you were talking about hunter1960, I would go along with you.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
KMA, what do you know about it? You ever worked the street with any of the LEO's here? Oh! of course, it's your Internet vibes. Same old story, old man. You don't like anyone who doesn't bow to you.

Nah, I'm with Sam on this one, but you have gotten better hunter, but for someone to make a comment like that to powell, they are showing just how foolish they are.

What was your reason for posting this? Was it to show how LE can fail? Fratricide in the US Mil. has killed more folks over the years then LE ever has to each other.

If you do your research you'll see that these types of incidents in LE, are rare. There's more death of LEO's due to veh. accidents then there is of fratricide. What interests me is that folks who throw out all of the PoPo did wrong stories, have never done the job themselves. They have no hands on knowledge or experience other then watching TV or other media sources.

Many admit that they couldn't or wouldn't do the job, for a multitude of reasons. Some feel that LE is all about walking little old ladies across the street. I'd enjoy taking some of you out and truly showing you what happens on the streets of America.

You'll soon find out that you don't spend your time with Grandma. You spend the majority of time with her Grandson, who's burglarizing homes to support his drug habit, or selling drugs to provide his income.

I'd like nothing better to roll up to a call of urgency or seriousness, and say deal with it. Even in your little towns and rural areas, serious criminal issues are happening and you don't even have a clue. Many of you live such a sheltered life as to what's going on around you.

That would require him to get off his hemhoroid donut and step away from the computer....

Don't think that's likely...

Prayers offered for all involved, period.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I don't have a hemhoroid donut and my computer time is my business. BTW what do you do?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Actually, it was a sad situation all around.

"Spray and Pray"

It's a common technique that I've witnessed many a time.

I don't suscribe to it myself tho . . .

Hard to know who was in the wrong with so few facts.

Prayers for the family and friends. Hopefully, lessons will be learned from the tragedy.

E-courage is a helluva thing!

You know, there's a wide variety of people and opinions here. Some contibute in different ways, but the vast majority do contribute something even if it's disagreeable to some or many. But I haven't seen you contribute anything but e-pollution here, and it wouldn't hurt my feelings a bit to see your a$$ nuked by Rick.

Good to see ya back posting!

He and Zen lighten my day, leave 'em alone.

George

27 years, 15 spent working UC from El Paso to Miami and I haven't shot anyone yet. I'm pretty proud of that. But I DO get happy when I pull a trigger, unless it's one of those damn 3.5" 12's.

hunter1960 suffers from several varieties of mental illness. He is a disgrace to his profession, his brotherhood, and his State. I have always felt empathy for the Citizens that have been abused by this thug.

Sam, It's not like you to beat around the bush like that.

THAT suggests you are a fool.



THAT proves it.

Fool, prick, tool, the options are endless.

A few days ago, I posted this question. Knowing how some of the LEOs react to any type of imigined threat or slur, I worded the question as polite and respectively as I could. All I wanted was information--no snide comments, and no sarcastic comments.

I made it a point not to mention porn or false arrest or anything of the sort.

This is the question:

"A police officer thinks you have something in your house that is illegal and tells you he is going to get a search warrant and come back and get it.

You have the item, but the officer hasn't been back with his search warrant in a couple of days, and you decide to store the item at another, undisclosed location. You do this, not because you are breaking the law by possessing the item, but because you are concerned that the police will either keep it for themselves or destroy it.

A couple of days later the cop shows up with his warrant and the item is gone. You refuse to tell him where it is and he calls you a liar and threatens to take you to jail if you don't tell him where it is. He accuses you of destroying and/or tampering with evidence.

My question is, after waiting for a reasonable length of time, two days in this case, for the officer to come back with the search warrant, and you legally own the item, can you do anything you want to with it before he serves the warrant?

Does the police telling you that an officer is going to come back with a search warrant and seize the item put any type of hold of the property?"

The first reply was by issac, who said "no it does not." I was hoping for more detail, but perhaps I didn't make that clear enough.

This was my second question, asked because I wanted more detail and clarification, and still being respectable, because all I wanted was information. I did not want to stir up a stinky storm:

"Then, if the officer threatens to take you to jail for destroying evidence, and forces you, by threat of a 25 year jail sentence for destroying evidence, to tell him where the item is stored, then the officer is violating the law, is that correct?"

No one answered this question.

"My next question, still trying to be respectful and seeking information:

They took it, checked it out, brought it back, and I still have it.

I'm just wondering if they had any legal right to threaten me or to prevent me from doing anything I wanted to with the item while I was waiting on them to come back with the warrant.

Actually, after two days, I didn't know if they were coming back to serve a warrant."

Then, along comes ltppowell:

"Originally Posted By: 1234567
My question is, after waiting for a reasonable length of time, two days in this case, for the officer to come back with the search warrant, and you legally own the item, can you do anything you want to with it before he serves the warrant?

"Does the police telling you that an officer is going to come back with a search warrant and seize the item put any type of hold of the property?"


"Ugh...I can't really answer "What is a "reasonable" length of time to wait before destroying evidence". Is this the kiddy porn thing again?"
_________________________
Pat

"Asking me what is a reasonable length of time to wait before destroying evidence assumes that there was evidence there to destroy."

Then "the kiddy porn thing again?"

He is implying that there was kiddie porn on my computer, when I have already explained to anyone who cares to listen that I was cleared by the SS of the kiddie porn. The detective didn't know if there was any evidence on the computer to destroy, when he accused me of destroying evidence.

I think, if I were in his position, and I thought there was something illegal on the computer, kiddie porn, or anything else, that I would have asked a patrolman to stay there and guard the computer while I went to get the warrent. Then, there would have been no question about destroying evidence, assuming there was any to destroy.

Anyone know why the detective didn't do it that way, or is all I can expect is more nonsense and sarcastic remarks?

Now, I am told that "saying that to Itppowell is hardly warranted." If you were talking about hunter1960, I would go along with you."

I didn't know there were any restrictions on the type of crap you can throw back when some one tosses the first clod at me. The best way to keep from being splattered by something stinky is not to stir the pot, and if anyone has any comprehension skills at all, you will realize that I was not the one who stirred the pot.

A few more posts, then ltppowell again: "My gut instinct is to tell him to stop giving the law a reason to want his computer."

"Stop giving the law a reason to want his computer"

This assumes that I was doing something illegal, and I was not. Another clod of stinky thrown, although I was still seeking information and being respectful.

Then, Hunter 1960 sticks his nose in the pot and takes a big sniff. Maybe kisses the pot and licks his lips a few times. He sounds like the type of person who would do that.

"hunter1960 hunter1960
Campfire Tracker
Registered: 10/21/03
Posts: 5866
Loc: Southern Middle Tennessee"

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please tell me you were joking about the kiddie porn on his computer and i didn't miss one of 1234567's woe is me stories.

"We've got a fellow who does cyber sex/porn investigations/stings for us. I don't know what it is about these older men, 60 & 70 years old and 13,14,15 year old girls? I was really shocked at the numbers arrested in that age range.

It must be that Grand Fatherly thing, he rolls them in by the basket full. From all over the country to come and meet these girls."

I asked what I thought was a reasonable question, not being insulting or anything. Just asking for information and the above is what I got, now you bunch of crybabies whine and howl about getting a little bit of the same crap on you that you were slinging at me.

.280Rem, you fit in there somewhere, but you are not worth spending any time on.

If any of you reply, be truthful. Prove me wrong. Prove that not all LEOs are liers and thieves and that you deserve respect and commendations for the job you do.

I don't want to get even. I don't even try to. My son attacked me with a butcher knife and I fought him off. I thought it was over. I went back to what I was doing before he came barging in.

He is the one who went to the police because he got the short end of the stick, or maybe I should say the long end of the sword. I was pleased at the outcome--no one got hurt.

I didn't go to the police station trying to cause trouble. It was the police pounding on my door, and pointing guns at me, not the other way around.

I was just as much a victim as the person mentioned at the start of this thread and who was shot by a police officer.

Actually, I was just asking if the reason your computer is getting taken is because of child pornography...again. Or you still talking about the first time, or has it happened again?

Well, as Paul Harvey (RIP) would say . . .

"Now we know the rest of the story!"

I was trying to figure out where you were going with that one.

I don't personally have too much love for LE types. Must be the 90% of them that ruin it for the 10% decent folks.

They've tried to humilate me in front of my son. They've tried to humilate my mother in front of her grand kids. The list goes on and on and on . . . .

Respectfully 1234567 but you got bigger problems than what is said or typed to you online.

Kiddy porn, attacked by son with a butcher knife, what else?

"Prove me wrong. Prove that not all LEOs are liers and thieves and that you deserve respect and commendations for the job you do."

That's an exercise in futility if there ever was one.

Not all cops are perfect and I can get pretty dam mad the bad SOB's wearing a uniform but take a deep breath and come back to earth.

Your hatred will eat you alive.

Good luck.

I don't feel I need to prove anything to YOU, but it's too easy to ignore. Here ya go:

1. I am an LEO
2. I do not lie (we can overlook telling the wife that I NEED a gun, right?)
3. I am not now, nor have I ever been, a thief.

Thus, we can conclude that not all LEOs are liars and thieve.

As to deserving respect and commendations, nah. I'll earn those by the job that I peform, thank you.

George

"Stop giving the law a reason to want his computer"

I'll stand by that advice. If you think it implies that you are guilty of something, then I guess you don't have to much confidence in your own conspiracy theory.

Well put George.

Respect is earned, not demanded.

You must be one of the 10-percenters

He's okay for a Sergeant...

George and Pat are the kind of bosses a young copper needs.

The kind that believe in long ropes, right?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Your right old man. I abuse the schit out of the citizens. And to think that i am so slick about it, that my Sheriff hasn't even noticed for the past decade. This along with the TBI. The best of all the citizens don't even complain. I wonder why that is Sammy?

"Or you still talking about the first time, or has it happened again?"

No it was the first and only time, last year, after the altercation with my son.

"Stop giving the law a reason to want his computer"

Never have, never will, never wanted to. Never even thought of it until someone made the call.

I know that you couldn't give a rat's behind about what I think, but the Cherokee County Sheriff's department, where I live, along with other LEAs (Law enforcment agencies) have developed a new type of software that tracks kiddie porn. Buying it, selling it, making it, I don't know how they share it or distrubute it, but there have been several raids here in Georgia in the last few months, and a lot of middle age to older men were arrested for having it on their computer.

Just the other day, someone from Georgia was arrested in Winchester, TN, for trying to sell some to an undercover officer.

Before you ask, it wasn't me.

You probably won't believe this, and don't want to believe it, but don't you think, with my computer just recently having been returned, (December, 2008) that I would be at the top of the list of suspects, and the first one they would check when doing a raid, if there was anything on my computer?

Being accused of looking at kiddie porn is not something to be proud of. Can you understand that? Someone even thinking that I would do it is not something to be proud of. Can you understand that?

When someone even hints or implies that I would do something like that, I go from being a nice guy (in my opinion) to 100% azz hole in about a second.

They kept my computer from July, 2008 to December 2008. I knew that I had not put any kiddie porn on my computer, but other people had access to it, including the person who reported me.

Try living with that for 5 months, knowing that there is no way in the world to prove that if any kiddie porn was found, that I wasn't the one who did it. Just try it, then let someone make a crack that implies that you did, when you are the only person in the entire world who knows it is not true.

Being in LE, you know as well as anyone that it is not innocent until proven guilty. It is guilty until you can prove yourself innocent, and that can be difficult to do.

It court, it is not guilt that is what a jury decides. It is what a district attorney convinces them to decide.

If you think I have been too outspoken toward you, then I apoligize. You might be an honest and dedicated LEO. Yes, I think there are some of those around.

Unfortunately, I have had some bad experiences with some who are not so honest and dedicated.

Yes, I got my computer back, but I still haven't gotten the guns back.

There has been several comments made about my intellegence, or lack of same. I won't argue the point, but assuming that I am as dumb as a bucket of rocks, do you still think I would mention something like my computer and kiddie porn and the SS on a public forum such as this? If you do, then the two of us must share the same bucket of rocks.

Did you know that it takes two to make an argument? One to start it and another to keep it going? It will take some effort, but from now on, I am going to make an effort to bypass the hunter's campfire portion of this forum.

In that line of work, you make a mistake and it can cost plenty.

My sympathy goes out to all involved except that damned thief who started the whole mess.

Should have at least gave him some stick time.

Okay, if you ever answer a question posed to you answer this one.

What, exactly, do you think we're arguing about?

Beats me, but someone sure got their panties in a wad because of something I said.

Actually, it is the way you phased your comments. You phased them so that they could be taken as accusory, and then, if challenged, you could turn it around and make it sound like a plausable denial and that you were only trying for clairfication.

You were trying to have it both ways--accusory if it suited your agenda; claiming to be asking for clairification, if exposed and if that was your objective.

I think you were actually being accusory, but you wanted to leave yourself an out if confronted. Not good for someone who wants to be thought highly of and respected as an honest LEO.

You pretended to misunderstand, but you understood perfectly. I made sure of that with the wording I put into the narrative. By pretending to misunderstand, you could make a plausable denial for making an unfounded accusation.

It is not much of an argument, but I sure as heck disagree with most (all?) you have said, and especially the way you phased it.

I think it is called some type of double speak.

.280Rem did sort of the same thing, but he is not as good at it as you are.

I'm not surprised that the Lt. is better at double-speak than a lawyer. They're taught that stuff at the secret school that they attend when they put on the white shirts.

George

I've heard of that school. They also get sunglasses that let you see thru peoples clothes.

Hey .280! NANANANABOOBOO!

George, you and the new coonass better behave!

Bad neighborhood, nighttime, and it all went down in seconds. A tragedy to be sure. Second generation cop, too. His dad was on duty in a different precinct.

I'm just as sure the internet badazzes would be wetting their pants if they had to walk the block, let alone deal with something actually happening.

And BTW, ltppowell, in NYC, off duty cops have to carry, always. The beach and few other places the rule gets broken.

I didn't know about the required carry in NY. We carry too, but as often as not, it's a Glock stuck in the back of your pants. For some reason, I pictured a guy coming home from shift with his pistol laying in his Sam Brown beside him when he jumped the burglar. Either way, you can't run without having it in your hand. Sorry for your loss, and welcome to the fire. Good to have you here.

Ippwell:

When you ask a stupid question, and you get an intellegent answer, why do you come back with a stupid remark?

If you could see yourself as others see you, I think you would dig a hole, get in it, and pull the lid over you.

That is, if you had enought sense to dig a hole, which I doubt, because I think using a shovel is too complicated for you.

Whoever gave you a badge and a gun and turned you loose on an unsuspecting public has got to be the dumbest SOB who ever lived. Of course, there are others on this forum who fit the same catagory.

LEOs can be decent people and some just the opposite. I think you chartered your own course and choose the a--hole route.

Fuggin get over yerself, I personally know pat, and I would talk to him long before i even acknowledged your whiny ass!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Oh! as the saga continues.

Nah. Pat's a goodun. He just doesn't suffer fools. Most here don't.

"Fuggin get over yerself, I personally know pat, and I would talk to him long before i even acknowledged your whiny ass!"

If you personally know him, all I can say is that the both of you are really desperate for friends and/or acquaintences.

Did I invite either of you to butt in? Were you invited to the party? Did someone pull your chain?

You people are so easy to bait that it not even funny. Don't bite down on something rotten looking, because it might have a hook in it and you get caught again.

You would talk to him before you would talk to me? If I have my way about it, I will never talk to any of the three of you. That much stupidy has got to be contagious.

Of course, that is the logical outcome when the only reason you are even on this earth is because of anal sex or leakage from a colostomy bag. That is guarenteed to produce something like you three.

yet we have a passel of fools that keep trying.............

Did I just get compared to colostomy bag left overs? Now that fuggin hilarious!

Dipschit, you have done nothing but shine since you have been here, I personally think that your son may have been trying to put you in a Nursing home due to your deficient mind. You got violent so he called the cops on you. I'm betting the judge wouldn't allow you to represent yourself, as he made the call that you are certifiable. Honestly surprised your not sitting in the happy farm wearing a nice hug me jacket, eating friggin jello out of a bowl. You are living proof that Alzheimer's is very detrimental to people. best thing the Judge could have done would have been to lock you up for your own safety. Les

Colostomy bags. Yep, I used to get some of those in my MRE's.

Never tried to build a man out of one though...

I can't give it much thought today. I am too busy grieving over having my website removed from my signature line

Me too!

Ah Hell, here we go, they have now Identified that the cop that shot the plain clothes officer was white, and plain clothes cop was Black, ol' Charlie Rangel is raising big stink over it.

Errol Louis
You never read this headline: 'Black cop shoots white cop'

Friday, May 29th 2009, 10:29 PM




Many will assume that the killing of Officer Omar Edwards was the result of a tragic but honest mistake, an accident with no malice or racial bias at work.

That would be a reasonable conclusion - and a dead wrong one.

There is nothing reasonable about the fact we never see black or Latino cops accidentally gunning down white undercover officers, but the reverse has been true in several high-profile cases.

It's true that Edwards may have violated Patrol Guide procedures by wheeling around with a weapon in his hand instead of instantly freezing and dropping his gun when ordered to do so.

The officers who killed Edwards may have violated policy, too. We don't know what kind of warning was shouted, and the fatal bullet reportedly entered Edwards' back, raising questions about why and when he was seen as a deadly threat.

For now, we must leave it to departmental investigators and the courts to sort out what happened.

But even before the evidence is in, what every New Yorker can do is acknowledge - and battle - the malicious myth that most black men are up to no good and likely to commit criminal violence.

It's a mindset that leads the public to believe nuts and fraudsters - most recently, Bonnie Sweeten of Florida, who set off a national search by falsely telling FBI agents she and her daughter had been kidnapped by two black men in a Cadillac.

The story wasn't true - and Sweeten faces criminal charges for lying - but America fell for it hook, line and sinker, launching national Amber alerts. In a similar case, a campaign worker named Ashley Todd last year falsely claimed a 6-foot-4 black man carved a "B" (for Barack Obama) into her cheek. That, too, was a lie.

And so was the 1994 tale spun by Susan Smith of South Carolina, who said a black bogeyman carjacked her two sons - who, it turned out, had died when Smith killed her children by rolling her car into a lake.

This isn't South Carolina or Pittsburgh or Florida: We New Yorkers like to pride ourselves on being tolerant and sophisticated. But we, too, are susceptible to the bias trap.

One news headline described Edwards as "mistaken for a thug" - a reminder of the slurs cops throw around on the job and off. People get classified as thugs, perps, skells, punks and worse.

An onslaught of gangsta rap and other cultural garbage bolsters the bias. We pay a heavy price by letting racist imagery, words and accusations slosh around society unchecked and unchallenged.

In the tense, split-second needed to separate a cop from a crook on a dark street, those myths may have cost a good man his life.

[email protected]

hey, its New York.

ltppowell,
I'm not on the job, I see my post may read that way. I do hang around and shoot with a bunch of 'em, but I'm just a plain ol' taxpaying fool.
------------------------

We all know the basis of the problem is the extremely high murder rate and crime rates committed young black men.

The politicians and similar bottomfeeders (Rev. *spit* Al) will do what they always do, but that doesn't change the crime rates.

IIRC it was 4 years ago, similar deal but on the subway, and the on-duty cop was black. The off-duty cop was black and thankfully survived.