Fort Worth Officer kills woman in her own home

[leVieux]

There is a gigantic difference between "having a gun" and "threatening a police officer with a gun" ! Everyone, especially our police need to understand that, pronto !

leVieux

 

[Kar98]

There is a gigantic difference between "having a gun" and "threatening a police officer with a gun" ! Everyone, especially our police need to understand that, pronto !

leVieux

They didn't announce themselves as police officers. They were creeping around the premises, whispering to themselves, shining lights this way and that, ignoring the open door (behind the closed screen door) they were called about...

She was absolutely within her rights, and she had been within her rights to shoot, too.

Also, being "a police officer" is not 100% legal protection against being iced by a "civilian".

Scroll to the bottom:

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-9-31.html

 

[leVieux]

A bit of contrarian observation: This type of reckless police behavior also endangers other officers in their future encounters.

Then consider the chilling fact that violent home-invaders now announce themselves with loud shouts of "Police, open-up!", or so I'm told.

My response to home invaders would be eight rounds of 00 in less than 3 seconds, followed by a really big amount of .556.

I pray that the REAL Police wouldn't be there at that moment.

I once provided expert court testimony to victims of a misdirected "no-knock" police raid. Our courts tend to convict the victims, no matter the actual EVIDENCE !

When one considers those two terrifying observations, what chance does a homeowner have?

leVieux

 

[easy rider]

A bit of contrarian observation: This type of reckless police behavior also endangers other officers in their future encounters.

Then consider the chilling fact that violent home-invaders now announce themselves with loud shouts of "Police, open-up!", or so I'm told.

My response to home invaders would be eight rounds of 00 in less than 3 seconds, followed by a really big amount of .556.

I pray that the REAL Police wouldn't be there at that moment.

I once provided expert court testimony to victims of a misdirected "no-knock" police raid. Our courts tend to convict the victims, no matter the actual EVIDENCE !

When one considers those two terrifying observations, what chance does a homeowner have?

leVieux

If the police are checking to make sure my home is ok, I would hope they wouldn't be yelling "Police, open up!"

 

[candcallen]

Did I read somewhere that the responding officers were told by dispatch it was something other than a welfare check?

Yes they were told they were responding to an open structure call which they treat as a burglary.

If true, like I said at the beginning re you have to understand what he was told and their procedures, they usually check the perimeter of the structure before making entry or announcing.

Then he was following procedures regarding those type calls. That doesn't make the shoot anything other than a major clusterphuck.

The dept and prosecutors may want to shut the phuck up and slow down cause they may lose any credibility by acting too fast.

 

[Frank59]

I want to know if they talked to the complainant before approaching the house

Could be the key to the whole thing

 

[kozmic]

With the evidence publicly provided thus far, this was a bad shoot imo... I don’t care if the lady inside the house was literally pointing her gun directly at the officer. Time/place/actions by the officer is the proximate cause of death here... not some person doing whatever the hell in their home.

I support folks in blue 100%, but they don’t get an automatic pass for doing stupid shit.

 

[leVieux]

If the police are checking to make sure my home is ok, I would hope they wouldn't be yelling "Police, open up!"

My point is that a person claiming to be an officer is zero assurance to anyone feeling endangered.

And, therefore should not be allowed as evidence of ANYTHING!

I invite my local deputies, police, firemen, ambulance crews, etc. to visit my secluded rural home in the daytime to “get acquainted”.

Meanwhile we must insist that “man with a gun” alone is no call for Robocop or SWAT. How about just asking before shooting ANYONE?

And NO, this cannot be perverted into a “racial” issue. It is pure PUBLIC SAFETY, affects us all, each & every one of us ! leVieux

 

[Rup]

Wait a minute.... didn’t the 8 year old say the she had a gun? If I had my gun and was looking out the window hearing sounds I’d have it at the ready.. what was the cop to to do with a gun pointing at him? If my facts are correct, this is not murder just a horrible accident.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Wait a minute.... didn’t the 8 year old say the she had a gun? If I had my gun and was looking out the window hearing sounds I’d have it at the ready.. what was the cop to to do with a gun pointing at him? If my facts are correct, this is not murder just a horrible accident.

Welcome to the Forum!

 

[easy rider]

Wait a minute.... didn’t the 8 year old say the she had a gun? If I had my gun and was looking out the window hearing sounds I’d have it at the ready.. what was the cop to to do with a gun pointing at him? If my facts are correct, this is not murder just a horrible accident.

First of all, I'm pretty dubious of an 8 year old making a statement as to the facts. I could probably convince an 8 year old of what he thought he saw. The facts are, she had a legal right to be there, she had the legal right to defend herself and home from perceived threats, and she shouldn't be shot by LE for those rights. Certainly it may be an accident, but accidents like that shouldn't be excused, otherwise none of us are safe from those with authority.

 

[tonelar]

Step 1 : When conducting well being checks, ring the doorbell and identify yourself.

(at least that was how we did it in my old dept)

Also, couldn’t the officer have moved left or right faster than drawing and firing? Window wasn’t opened.

 

[Frank59]

Step 1 : When conducting well being checks, ring the doorbell and identify yourself.

(at least that was how we did it in my old dept)

By all indications they were treating the call as a burglary in progress and or home invasion. Tactical application entirely different from a well being check.

 

[benenglish]

what was the cop to to do with a gun pointing at him?

Take a step sideways. Excellent concealment (and maybe cover) was literally one short hop to the left or right. Seeking concealment, then cover, is a perfectly reasonable response to a perceived threat.

BTW, I realize there's a mindset issue, here, and I think that issue is closer to the heart of the matter.

 

[tonelar]

By all indications they were treating the call as a burglary in progress and or home invasion. Tactical application entirely different from a well being check.

Then wouldn’t turning off your flashlight and moving out of the line of fire be considered a tactic? With the lights on inside a room, killing your lamp would pretty much make you invisible.

 

[avvidclif]

By all indications they were treating the call as a burglary in progress and or home invasion. Tactical application entirely different from a well being check.

Still wrong procedure. While you are prowling around the house the burglar runs out the front/back door and is gone.

Contain the outside of the premises first with enough officers before doing anything. Especially before alerting the "burglar" you are there by walking around the building shining a flashlight around with your backup with you. Once the "scene is contained go to front door and knock, if burglary, burglar goes out back door into the waiting arms. If not homeowner comes to front door.

 

[deemus]

The only problem with that is that is was NOT burgulary call. It was a wellness check. There would likely have been more cops if it was a burgulary. No?

 

[ZX9RCAM]

It was called in as a wellness check, it went out, to the officers, as something completely different.

 

[Glenn B]

As a LEO are you going to investigate a welfare call as if everything is safe and sound and nothing will happen? As txinvestigator pointed out calls like these can be dangerous for cops. The guy who requested the welfare check said the front door of the house appeared to be opened and something didn't look right. I sure as hell wouldn't walk into a situation like that casually drinking coffee.

Yes, calls like this one can be potentially dangerous for officers. That is why they need to follow their training, and hopefully they were trained in how to make such an approach properly. If they were so trained: Why did the officer walk up to and stand in front of a window (essentially a fatal funnel), why did he not walk up to the wall that offered at least concealment if not cover - then do a quick peek through the window from one side or the other and immediately go back to whatever cover and or concealment the outer wall provided to him? Why not - negligence may be the answer or thinking his gun was a magic shield may be the bottom line.

The officer who shot the woman certainly did not do it the way I did it many times in my career when moving in on a residence or a business while on a law enforcement operation. Watch how he does his search. There is no announcement that they are police; okay - granted they are under no legal obligation to do so under exigent circumstances unless there is a departmental rule to do so but there is a darned good safety concern reason to do so. Also, there was no mentioned attempt, in anything I read, by the police to call the resident to see if all was okay inside. Such a call may have prevented this tragedy and remember this is, in essence, a welfare check.

The officer walked directly in front of two glass fronted doorways and stood next to the door jamb or in front of each doorway for a moment within the fatal funnel without effectively using cover or concealment, as he searched outside he shined his flashlight into his partner's face (great for his partner's night vision), now mind you - that means the officer already made it obvious someone was prowling around to whomever was inside, then the officers whisper to one another (after already making their presence obvious with the light - why bother whispering and making yourself seem nefarious), then the officer walked up to what appears to possibly have been a fenced off area where he opened what seems to have been a gate and walked through (it is only my guess he walked around to a side yard that was fenced off by a privacy fence) and walked right up to the window pretty much directly in front of it and shined his light inside it probably effectively preventing the person inside from being able to identify him as an officer. What law abiding citizen, legally inside the residence, would not have come to the conclusion that a prowler was sneaking around their house with ill intent! My opinion, based solely on the video/audio is that the officer set himself up to be drawn on by the homeowner, it was not the homeowner who set herself up to be shot by an officer and thus the officer set himself up to shoot someone he never should have shot because she likely believed he was a prowler. In other words, it quite possibly was because of what I think was the officers negligence - in as far as not using what I believe would have been the proper technique in his approach - that this unfolded as it did. Does this elevate the shooting to murder, I think not; but I do believe it was negligent homicide and I think that the officer's overall negligence (as far as neglecting to follow what I can only presume was his training) can be seen in those examples I pointed out in the video as he made, in my opinion, one mistake after another. Just my opinion, I cannot state it as factual without knowing all of the facts that are available to authorities.

 

[Glenn B]

As for the so called statement of the child, remember he is very young, I seem to remember eight years old. I have to wonder how many times he was questioned and exactly how were any questions phrased. It is very easy to lead a child into saying what you want to hear by asking leading questions. I'd love to see the video and hear the audio of the entire interview/interrogation of the child to see if he was led to his statement by way of leading & suggestive questions or if he made it on his own volition because he was describing what he actually witnessed. Not saying it was one way or the other but certainly am curious to find out.