Deputies shoot, kill man after knocking on wrong door

I think this should now be a case if police come to your door start bloody shooting them before they kill you.

reply to post by Liquesence

Very strange situation, even stranger that what with SWAT, helicopters, etc, they entered and left peacefully. *scratches head*

Well, they left peacefully with the item they were searching for, and both of my parents in custody. They kept them overnight, and then let them bond out in the morning. The warrant was in regards to an interstate felony of "theft of an historical document." It was a multi-million dollar savings bond that was part of a lawsuit, and the prosecuting attorney in another state was handling the lawsuit defense for the county, and she thought it would be cute to issue a felony warrant to get possession of the "bearer bond" to weaken the lawsuit grounds. She was fired over the issue, and the lawsuit got new legs, but the bond was destroyed in the process.

The SWAT team had gone over my privacy fence in the backyard, and when my pitbull charged out the backdoor, they were nice enough to flee instead of shooting him. They also stood around after the arrest, and talked with my wife, and petted and complimented the dog. Apparently he is very intimidating when he charges, LOL!

The neighbors were kind of on edge for a few months afterwards. Nothing like having SWAT teams walking through your yards, telling you to stay inside, and then surrounding your neighbor house, while a helicopter pops up over the treeline and puts a spotlight on the house.

I was sitting in a plane, on the Tarmac in New Orleans when my wife called and told me what had just happened. That was the longest wait for departure and flight that I've ever had in my life!

reply to post by xyankee


After they found out they shot the wrong guy they planted the drugs to cover themselves. Bet on it.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

Brandishing A Firearm: Revealing a firearm to one more individuals in a threatening manner. Even if the person legally owns the firearm they are brandishing and the incident occurs on their own property, they can still be charged with this offense. If the accused offender felt threatened and brandished the firearm as a means to defend themselves, then it is up to the defendant's legal defense to argue this in front of a judge.

From this site: Morris Law Group ( a Florida defense attorney)

I think that it may be reasonable to argue that the man may have felt threatened by unannounced persons beating on his door and 1:30 am, especially if he was awakened from a sound sleep.

edit on 16-7-2012 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

Thanks. So it does say even if.... occurs on their own property.

BUT, they could argue that he felt threatened, but I don't know if a knock on the door is enough to justify that feeling. It would have to be a feeling that any rational person would feel. And, the prosecution would argue, if he felt threatened, why did he open the door?

reply to post by getreadyalready


considering the door has several bullet holes in it leads me to believe, nothing of the sort occurred. looks more like and this is purely speculation, police knock without identifying themselves, home owner answers door, possibly asking who it was, slightly opening the door, the police see a weapon and open fire thus putting several rounds through the door and the victim.

again though we as ATS members don't have and may never have all the details.

Originally posted by getreadyalready

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

Brandishing A Firearm: Revealing a firearm to one more individuals in a threatening manner. Even if the person legally owns the firearm they are brandishing and the incident occurs on their own property, they can still be charged with this offense. If the accused offender felt threatened and brandished the firearm as a means to defend themselves, then it is up to the defendant's legal defense to argue this in front of a judge.

From this site: Morris Law Group ( a Florida defense attorney)

I think that it may be reasonable to argue that the man may have felt threatened by unannounced persons beating on his door and 1:30 am, especially if he was awakened from a sound sleep.

edit on 16-7-2012 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

Thanks. So it does say even if.... occurs on their own property.

BUT, they could argue that he felt threatened, but I don't know if a knock on the door is enough to justify that feeling. It would have to be a feeling that any rational person would feel. And, the prosecution would argue, if he felt threatened, why did he open the door?

The Keystone Kops in this case did seem to constitute a threat, they killed him after all. Maybe if we knew how many houses they "canvassed' on that early morning, we could say, 'Oh, they were checking every house', but I haven't seen any indication that was how things went down.
He may have opened the door, he may have owned a gun, he may even have had it on him. We don't know that for sure, since we have to rely on the word of the killers here.

reply to post by getreadyalready

why did he open the door?

Maybe the force that they were using to beat on the door was sufficient, when awakened from a sound sleep, to indicate to him that someone was trying to break in. If the knocking had stopped for 30 seconds before he opened it, maybe he wanted to look outside to see if a burglar or prowler was on his porch.

There are a lot of reasons that a person might open their own front door at 1:30 am with a gun in hand after someone was beating on it (and not announcing that they were police officers, when they were just that).

reply to post by butcherguy


Therein lies the problem. We have to rely on the word of the killers, and the legal system sees the word of a cop as almost infallible, so there will not be any repercussions.

None of us know what happened, and we do know the wrong guy is dead.

There are too many cops, arresting people for too many stupid things, and they have far too much authority. We can all agree on that I think. My devil's advocate argument was just that we are all responsible for our own safety, and this guy obviously didn't do a very good job in that respect. If he had handled it differently, he would probably still be alive.

Even if the person legally owns the firearm they are brandishing and the incident occurs on their own property, they can still be charged with this offense.

That looks to be written to make it easy to arrest someone with a legal gun at home.Makes me suspicious.

My devil's advocate argument was just that we are all responsible for our own safety, and this guy obviously didn't do a very good job in that respect. If he had handled it differently, he would probably still be alive.

Not buying that one. What if it had it been a robber and he had been killed. Armed could have saved him.

Is a roll of the dice, cops or bad guy.

reply to post by xyankee


Seems like a good reason to have a good fence and security system, good doors and bolts.
Then a safe room to boot.
Let the intruders know they are on tv, then fill the house with pepper spray...from legally purchased cannisters of course.

Originally posted by roadgravel

My devil's advocate argument was just that we are all responsible for our own safety, and this guy obviously didn't do a very good job in that respect. If he had handled it differently, he would probably still be alive.

Not buying that one. What if it had it been a robber and he had been killed. Armed could have saved him.

Is a roll of the dice, cops or bad guy.

How? What difference did it make if it was a cop or a burglar? Assuming the burglar was armed like the cop was, he would have still gotten himself killed. He did a piss-poor job at identifying the threat, securing the door, and wielding his gun. If he had done anything right he might still be alive, but he seems to have done everything wrong.

In this case, the fact that it was a cop outside the door should have made him a little safer, but it didn't. If it had been a burglar, he would still have probably been killed.

He might have assessed the situation better, yes.

But if a person enters an intersection on a green light and gets hit by a car running the light, does not seeing the car running the light make the other person any less breaking the law.

Originally posted by roadgravel
He might have assessed the situation better, yes.

But if a person enters an intersection on a green light and gets hit by a car running the light, does not seeing the car running the light make the other person any less breaking the law.

I don't know, do they have their lights and sirens on?

Seriously though, when I learned to drive, my Mom always taught me to look both ways whether the light was green or not. And it has come in handy a couple of times. Just like she taught me to always look over my shoulder when changing lanes and don't trust my mirrors. That has saved me a whole lot of times as well!

reply to post by getreadyalready

If you are scared of the people at the door, you don't just swing it open holding a gun and get shot to death. You investigate a little, you ask who it is, you peek out another window. If you are going to open it, you make sure you are ready to shoot!

At the same time if you are apprehending a murder suspect you investigate a little, find out who they are, where they are and if it's the right person.



Crime or society problems should be fought with intelligence. Not brute force. Answering your door should not require brute force either.

I was in a cab the other day which was cut off by another cab. And the young driver said something like "Can you believe this guy cut me off, doesn't this old man know I could beat him and he could do nothing about it."



Settle down Rocky.

Why must the world have such major small penis syndrome?

reply to post by boncho


Good point.

I think there are too many of us living in too close of quarters. Its hot. We're frustrated. Everything is a threat, we're barely getting by. The police are as bad as the criminals and the government is even worse. We're living in a pressure cooker! Working harder, and longer, for less money that will by less things, and we miss our families, and our leisure time is not that leisurely.

It's only going to get worse I'm afraid.

reply to post by getreadyalready


I was pointing out that non defensive driving does not lessen the error of the other person. Laws are not filled with should haves and mights and would be bests.

Guy played it wrong, maybe, but should not be dead.

Florida in the news again???

When will it stop?

Originally posted by roadgravel
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

I was pointing out that non defensive driving does not lessen the error of the other person. Laws are not filled with should haves and mights and would be bests.

Guy played it wrong, maybe, but should not be dead.

Agreed.