Friday, March 11, 2011

No excuse.

How many of us, if we negligently killed someone at work today, would still have a job tomorrow?

That is, those of us who aren't SWAT cops in Framingham, MA?
As he stepped to his left, (Duncan) lost his balance and began to fall over backwards,” the report states. “Officer Duncan realized that his right foot was off the floor and the tactical equipment that he was wearing was making his movements very awkward. While falling, Officer Duncan removed his left hand from his rifle, which was pointing down towards the ground and put his left arm out to try and catch himself. As he did so, he heard a shot.
...and by "heard a shot", he means "pulled the trigger because his finger was inside the trigger guard where it damned well shouldn't have been and everybody knows it".

So this guy violated Rules #2 and #3 and an innocent man is dead because of it. How do you suppose this scenario would play out in Framingham if the shooter had been Joe Homeowner instead of Johnny Law?

(H/T to Unc.)

47 comments:

Boat Guy said...

Another "Only One"...
You KNOW the answer to your question...

Montie said...

I can tell you that had Joe homeowner neglegently discharged into the officer, there would have been two deaths due to the rest of the team returning fire. If by some miracle he survived, he would undoubtedly be charged.

Boat Guy said...

Even better; upon rereading the account, it seems the SWAT folks ALREADY had their suspect in custody when they hit the house.
yup "trained professional"-type behavior...
Compliant resident shot...further words fail me...

Anonymous said...

If your gear is making movement awkward, you have the wrong gear. Or you're "doing it wrong".

Montie said...

Boat Guy,

I have gone on lenghty rants in the past here in the comments section of VFTP about the over-use of dynamic entry tactics by police departments these days and the often negetive outcomes associated with that practice, so I'll refrain at this point. Tha being said, I would need much more information to make an informed judgement as to what the purpose of a dynamic entry was on the residence since their warrant target was already in custody.

Tam said...

Equipment that makes your "movement very awkward" strikes me as rather anti-tactical, actually...

Montie said...

Tam,
Nothing says "tactical" like having your booger hook on the bang switch while attempting to cuff and/or frisk somebody. (thats the job of a non long-gun toter, or at least somebody who knows hoe to sling-arms).

Montie said...

Oops, who put that e key so close to the w key ;-)

Borepatch said...

In Framingham, Joe Homeowner would suddenly be considered to be "unsuitable" to possess firearms, his LTC would be revoked by the Chief of Police, and he would have to get rid of all his guns.

He could re-apply for the LTC (which would be turned down, see "unsuitable", above), or for a Firearm ID (FID) card. The FID is shall issue, so the local Po Po couldn't stop him from getting it, but he could only legally possess .22 long arms or shot guns with it.

Full disclosure: I used to live in the next town over from Framingham.

GuardDuck said...

I would need much more information to make an informed judgement as to what the purpose of a dynamic entry was on the residence since their warrant target was already in custody.

Not a lot of guessing needed. The standard "everyone in a 'drug house' is a suspect because they know about the drugs", "need to do dynamic entry so they don't flush the drugs" and "need to find the drugs in the house in order to confiscate the 'proceeds' of illicit activity".

Jay G said...

Here's something to dwell on:

That cop won't be disciplined, even though his negligent actions killed an innocent person.

Travis Corcoran has been deprived of his property and his Second Amendment rights because he wrote something that got people's panties in a bunch.

All in the same state, folks.

TJIC said...

> Joe Homeowner would suddenly be considered to be "unsuitable" to possess firearms, his LTC would be revoked by the Chief of Police, and he would have to get rid of all his guns.

Do you really think that things are that bad in MA?

Oh. Wait.

Jim said...

Good grief. In a just world the thug will hang and the family will receive a meaningful settlement for having their grandfather negligently murdered.

Jim

New Jovian Thunderbolt said...

I haven't killed anyone at work today with my negligence. Must be a good day, then. I'll try to keep this streak up.

Anonymous said...

I'm wondering, purely as an academic exercise and not dependent on location within any particular jurisdiction or under any particular circumstance, at what point seeing the po-po on your property constitutes a direct and immediate threat to your life, safety and property (I'm thinking "dogs" specifically in regards to property) which justifies prophylactic self defense measures.

staghounds said...

You don't have to make it joe homeowner with a gun.

How about Joseph Carpenter with a pneumatic nail driver?

staghounds said...

Our culture is deeply divided when otherwise "good people" (that is, ones like us) accidentally, negligently, or even- if the motive is one we might share- intentionally cause terrible harm.

Cf. the way we react when a mother negligently boils her own child to death in its own juices, using a car instead of a pot on the stove.

"She's suffered enough" seems to be the default.

Anonymous said...

Just keep racking up those collateral damages until every no-knock turns into Mogadishu, guys.

Have at it.

Keep squeezing.

Apropos:
http://www.theagitator.com/2011/03/09/swat-officer-killed-by-non-lethal-flashbang-grenade/

zeeke42 said...

@Borepatch: The FID allows possession of 'non-large capacity' rifles and shotguns. Doesn't make it any less ridiculous, but we should be factually accurate.

Anonymous said...

"How many of us, if we negligently killed someone at work today, would still have a job tomorrow?"

Voire dire question, your honor?

Do I work for IMPD whilst doing the killing?

Shootin' Buddy

Will Brown said...

As should be perfectly obvious to all by now, they are the Law's enforcement and we are the intended recipients of those enforcement efforts. Thus, Officer Duncan's actions are entirely consistent with the design model embodied by said law enforcement, so of course he will not be disciplined - he spontaneously demonstrated the effectiveness of the design model, that's all. Even from a position of extreme dis-advantage, a potential threat was killed with no loss of law enforcement personnel. +1 Attaboy for all that with 1 Awshit for lack of prior coordination with fellow enforcers = a net neutral with full pay.

It's all in the context you present your actions taking place within, you know.

[And, just to make it completely obvious (/sarcasm)]

Stuart the Viking said...

"How many of us, if we negligently killed someone at work today, would still have a job tomorrow?"

How many of us, if we negligently killed someone at work today, could live with ourselves?

s

Jim said...


How about Joseph Carpenter with a pneumatic nail driver?


You kidding? He'd be nailed to a cross for that.

...Well, might as well pack my bags, I'm almost certainly going to hell for that one!

Jim

Matthew said...

Well, they all went home at the end of the shift. So that's something.

Matt G said...

What's most amazing to me is how sensible and restrained the common sense remarks by the victim's family are. I'm actually not kidding, here.

Lewis said...

The law is for protection of the people
Rules are rules as any fool can see
We don't need no hairy headed hippies
Scarin' decent folks like you and me

Oh so thank your lucky stars you've got protection!
Walk the line and never mind the cost!
Don't wonder who them lawmen were protecting
When they nailed the Savior to the Cross

(This moment of early 70s radical folk singer-songwriterism is brought to you without irony, by the good folks at Lewis Industries)

Firehand said...

Suspect already in custody, and not only did he have his finger on the trigger but either he had the damned safety off or his rifle was defective; any guesses which?

Old NFO said...

Sad, and pointless, especially with the man in custody. And you can bet this will NOT be covered more than a day by the media... And the REAL perp will walk.

Roberta X said...

"Voire dire:" French for "jury tampering."

yYt another reason to avoid MA: ill-trained SWAT cops. If the elite, get-all-the-kewl-toys guys are that bad, how much worse is the uniform working traffic? I sure wouldn't want to ever see that guy have to draw his weapon, and not just because I'm wishing him an uneventful career....

Tam said...

Matt G,

"What's most amazing to me is how sensible and restrained the common sense remarks by the victim's family are. I'm actually not kidding, here."

Srsly, me too.

Odysseus said...

Given the recent drunk on duty officers in Indiana and Police Steroid scandal in NJ and NY, I have to wonder if anyone thought to do a blood test on Officer Boggerhook. If such isn't standard procedure on ANY shooting police or civilian should it be?

Montie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Montie said...

Matt G,

Cosidering the crap we endure from families and associates of people who seriously NEED shooting, I have to agree with you.

Derfel Cadarn said...

Guardduck, so its ok to kill innocents to make a drug arrest. Let me point out that regardless of the amount of alleged trafficking that the crime is not punishable by death. There is no doubt that the alleged perp. could have been apprehended without the smash raid to deny this would be ignorant. The police are not your friends!!!

perlhaqr said...

Derfel: I don't think GuardDuck was defending those positions, just stating that they are what the police will claim.

Hobie said...

How many of us would WANT that job the day after negligently killing somebody?

Borepatch said...

How many of us would WANT that job the day after negligently killing somebody?

Hobie, you're talking about us. The sickening state of the Massachusetts public pensions is a rant for another day.

Let's just leave it at Officer Oopsie is likely to be pulling full pension (on disability) in a year or two, which is nice, because he'll have plenty of time to get a full time job.

I've been gone from there for 100 days now, and my blood pressure is still 20 points higher about this.

docjim505 said...

How many more of these "dynamic entry" raids have to go badly wrong before we the the people make it clear to our elected officials - who control the police - are going to be on unemployment if they don't stop?

Regardless of your stance on drugs, I don't see how anybody can support this kind of thing unless there is DAMNED good reason to believe that the suspects are armed and dangerous. I don't want to see police officers killed, but I also don't want to see common people treated like enemy soldiers on a battlefield.

Anonymous said...

Appropriate actions by citizens upon hearing the door kicked open and the flash/bang explosion.

1. Fall to the floor.
2. Spread your arms and legs.
3. Wait to be shot.

After all, if there are drugs in the house, or there ever were drugs in the house, or your address is similar to that of a house that might have once had drugs in it, or the Police think any of the above might be possible, what right do you have to expect to live.

Oh, and "professionals," as opposed to true professionals and trained amateurs, are above the safe gun handling rules.

Billy Beck said...

"Thus perish all compromise with tyranny!"

(William Lloyd Garrison -- setting fire to the U.S. Constitution on Framingham Green, July 4, 1844)

GuardDuck said...

Derfel: I don't think GuardDuck was defending those positions, just stating that they are what the police will claim.

Thanks perlhaqr, I thought I had applied the proper sarcasm formatting, but apparently it doesn't show up correctly on all monitors.

atlharp said...

Another glorious tale of competence and unpossible occurrences of stupidity from the place where America used to exist. Like Illinois, California, and New York; that state is just another write off in the ledger of freedom. After years of electing Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Barney Frank to Congress is anyone truly surprised by this?

perlhaqr said...

GuardDuck: The old style <sarcasm> tags have been deprecated in XHTML 4.01 in favor of using the sarcasm attribute inside of a <div> tag.

Some more modern browsers have never even implemented the old tag at all, having fallen into the sarchasm.

perlhaqr said...

Jesus zardfarking Christ. I just re-read the article, I hadn't realised before that it wasn't "after two months, a trial determined that Officer Boogerhook was not guilty of manslaughter", it was "after two months of pud pulling, the DA decided he wasn't even going to bother with a fucking trial".

Skip "killing a man at work and still having a job tomorrow", this is "killing a man at work and never even facing a court over it". But I'm sure he feels really bad about it. Not as bad as Eurie Stamps' family, of course.

What in the flying fuckity fuck?

John said...

...and here I thought only the BATF and FBI, historically speaking, were getting away with murders.

Well, that's progress for you: now your local uniforms are included on the 'citizens as free, no liability targets' card that used to be issued only at the Federal level.

Thirty+ years ago the BATF'rs shot and paralyzed some guy who responded with a cap and ball revolver to having his door kicked in, possibly in Wash, DC. It was a bogus beef being served, and after going thru several court levels the 'officers' were exonerated.

It stunk then and still stinks, but it was a contested precedent that seemingly opened the doors to an open season on citizens by increasingly careless, heedless, hyper-aggressive LEO's.

The sheep demand protection. Hiring the wolves, then enabling them, seems like such a good way to go, Mr. and Mr's Frightened -- until they huff and puff at y'r door about owning possibly contraband things. Like your money, property, precious metals, furniture that needs to be more equitably distributed, or perhaps to provide housing equality in a 'level class system'..

Or mebbe someone just needs laborers for the magnificent canal, Neva the Second, being dug in honor a New World Everywhere.

Matt G said...

"Well, that's progress for you: now your local uniforms are included on the 'citizens as free, no liability targets' card that used to be issued only at the Federal level."

John, you might want to get a smaller brush; the one you're wielding seems to be spreading tar in some places where it doesn't really belong.

John said...

Matt G,

The LEO's honestly doing their job are, by definition, excluded from my tar. If that isn't obvious, then I should prob'ly explain it in simpler terms.

A badge is not a license to abuse the Constitution and thereby inflict harm upon the citizenry. When that abuse occurs repeatedly in an institution or agency -- local or Federal -- there need be no excuse for calling that activity what it is: despotic tyranny masquerading as law enforcement.

The BATFE and the FBI have set that tone for lesser agencies to follow.