He wasn't unarmed was he?

 

You are correct. He had a magic marker. And he had one arm with which to use it along with one leg. There were two policemen who knew in advance that he was mentally challenged... And in a chair. They had tools other than firearms. It is their job to be prepared to protect themselves, the public and even the suspect. They simply were negligent.

 

It was a call for a combative resident at a home for the mentally ill. This was not at a private residence, they knew not to expect rational behavior at the very least. They also knew this wasn't a guy waving a gun around. Answer this question : If this had been two orderlies that had shot him dead don't you think they would have already been arrested?

 

You assume too much. You have no idea what they did or did not know. You only know what one article tells you and you are ready to fire them or put them in prison. Why the rush to judge?

 

And first of all, orderlies wouldn't have a gun. Secondly, they are allowed to defend themselves if someone is trying to kill them.

Edit.

You are correct. He had a magic marker. And he had one arm with which to use it along with one leg. There were two policemen who knew in advance that he was mentally challenged... And in a chair. They had tools other than firearms. It is their job to be prepared to protect themselves, the public and even the suspect. They simply were negligent.

 

I didn't see an answer to my question there...did I miss it?

You seem to know it all. Case closed, no need for an investigation.

 

Is it possible that in a stressful situation where someone is threatening to kill you and your friend, that you might mistake a pen for a weapon?

 

There's a reason these things get investigated. Why are you so quick to assume guilt or negligence?

 

If this had been a drunk in the middle of the street don't you think the two of them would have approached the situation expecting to have to defend themselves and use every possible means to use non-lethal force? Of course they would. This was a home for the mentally ill. They should have expected irrational behavior. They underestimated the victim because he was handicapped. He died for their mistake. They were negligent. I'm done.

You assume too much. You have no idea what they did or did not know. You only know what one article tells you and you are ready to fire them or put them in prison. Why the rush to judge?

 

And first of all, orderlies wouldn't have a gun. Secondly, they are allowed to defend themselves if someone is trying to kill them.

 

And what if one of them had a concealed carry permit?

Don't they teach cops to shoot people in the extremities? With most of this guys already amputated, the head was about the only option...

I didn't see an answer to my question there...did I miss it?

 

No, but I have enough experience with the mentally ill to expect them to be combative and defend myself without shooting them to death, actually without injuring them. And that's one on one... Not two on one.

 

If this had been a private citizen that snapped and suddenly attacked an officer you would not hear anything from me. They knew he was mentally ill, underestimated him, got scared and killed him. Inexcusable.

You were not there neither was I. It is easy to Monday morning QB every situation like this. No he may not have had a 12 gauge, he could have had a knife...or in prison terms a shiv made from just about anything. He did according to the story have his hand concealed either under him or beside him. He could have advanced then concealed his hand to remove a weapon. He made a threatening move towards an officer with what ended up being a pen, but would the second officer been justified in shooting him if he had stabbed the first one? Yes he would have...but something we can't see without instant replay is the flash of movment toward his partner that made this officer decide that he needed to shoot to protect his partner. If he would have been justified in shooting him after he stabbed him, he would be just as justified in shooting him for making the movements that he did. At best these officers, on the front line protecting others, went home to their families at worst a troubled individual lost his life.

 

If this had been a drunk in the middle of the street don't you think the two of them would have approached the situation expecting to have to defend themselves and use every possible means to use non-lethal force? Of course they would. This was a home for the mentally ill. They should have expected irrational behavior. They underestimated the victim because he was handicapped. He died for their mistake. They were negligent. I'm done.

 

Sorry if I'm not one to automatically assume guilt. Especially when I know nothing other than the bare minimum about what happened.

Don't they teach cops to shoot people in the extremities? With most of this guys already amputated' date=' the head was about the only option...[/quote']

 

I seriously doubt any police officer anywhere in this country is taught to shoot at an arm or a leg.

First off, this guy was at a group home for the mentally ill. They had to have known going in that he was unstable so why weren't they prepared with non-lethal means of subduing him? He had been in that home for 18 months, it wasn't like he was suddenly going to produce a 12 gauge or a machete on them. Secondly, "show me your hands" really? HE ONLY HAD ONE ARM. If he was using that arm to advance on the officer then he couldn't have been concealing something in it. There were two officers, why not simply pull the wheelchair back from the first officer--it is on wheels. I could have understood this a little bit better if they were responding blindly to a call and the guy came charging out after them. In this case they were responding to a call from a home for the mentally ill. At best they were poorly trained and poorly prepared.

 

So if the suspect is mentally ill officers should only use non deadly force? Even if the suspect is using potentially deadly force? Why?

Seriously? Two able-bodied police officers that knew going into the situation that the guy had one arm, one leg, was comfined to a wheelchair and was mentally unstable. Yet they are so unprepared that they let him trap one of them in a corner and then are forced to shoot him in the head because they were in fear for their lives? They knew what the situation was going in. They should have been better prepared. Like I said if this were just a response to the man's residence and they didn't know if he had a gun or something I could understand a little bit better. But this was a call to assist someone at a mental home. How do you allow someone with one arm to chase you down with his wheelchair and then attack you? He only has one arm. He cannot do both at the same time.

 

So just because someone shouldn't have a gun you're going to assume that they don't? That's how innocent people get killed, this guy wasn't innocent. It's sad and tragic but seriously get off your high horse and recognize that you weren't there and that's not how police officers are trained.

So just because someone shouldn't have a gun you're going to assume that they don't? That's how innocent people get killed, this guy wasn't innocent. It's sad and tragic but seriously get off your high horse and recognize that you weren't there and that's not how police officers are trained.

 

No, this guy was mentally ill and in a home for the mentally ill. I've seen several mentally ill people with both arms and legs subdued by females... One on one... some of them with potentially harmful weapons... In none of these situations have I ever seen someone fatally shot. If that kind of force were justified there would be a death every week in every home for the mentally ill. This is a case of the police being either poorly trained or negligence in planning.

No, this guy was mentally ill and in a home for the mentally ill. I've seen several mentally ill people with both arms and legs subdued by females... One on one... some of them with potentially harmful weapons... In none of these situations have I ever seen someone fatally shot. If that kind of force were justified there would be a death every week in every home for the mentally ill. This is a case of the police being either poorly trained or negligence in planning.

 

If he could've been easily subdued by a female and wasn't a serious threat then why were the police called? I mean the people at this establishment are familiar with the patient yet they felt he was a big enough threat that they needed the police. It's as though you're failing to recognize that angle of this story. Yes the police we semi aware of the situation they were entering, they were probably aware that the people that work with these folks are well trained and usually don't need their assistance. The fact that they were called in is telling IMO. Also you keep saying poor planning or they should've known more beforehand. You act like they were entering a contained environment where they had a plan already written up with back up plans already in writing as well. Come on man be real here.