The article says he was given a twelve year sentence, and paroled after serving seven. Can they add years to his sentence? The article doesn't say whether or not he died as a result of the shooting. It could have been due to medical malpractice, or he may have just given up on life and died. If it was due to the shooting,(which it almost certainly was) could they add to his sentence, or would they have to try him again?
Followup on 4 cops v 1 felon in San Antonio
- Thread starter Blackhawk
- Start date
- Status
Maybe it was 12, but I thought an earlier article said 15, but it doesn't matter since he was paroled early.
I don't think he could be tried again for the same crime. Double jeopardy, you know. The prosecution gets one bite at the apple but the defense can chew away constantly.
Quadriplegics have a constant battle with infections, circulation problems, blood clots, bed sores, and you name it. None of the physiological problems come close to describing the torture it must be for an active brain confined without any ability to connect with the environment on its own must be. Who would WANT to live under those circumstances?
This guy probably couldn't eat, chew, talk, etc., either, so his injury was almost certainly why he died.
I don't think he could be tried again for the same crime. Double jeopardy, you know. The prosecution gets one bite at the apple but the defense can chew away constantly.
Quadriplegics have a constant battle with infections, circulation problems, blood clots, bed sores, and you name it. None of the physiological problems come close to describing the torture it must be for an active brain confined without any ability to connect with the environment on its own must be. Who would WANT to live under those circumstances?
This guy probably couldn't eat, chew, talk, etc., either, so his injury was almost certainly why he died.
"As Evans lay on the ground without his bullet-proof vest, Lichtenwalter stood and shot him three times — in the chest, stomach and arm," "Evans staggered out of the restaurant." "Evans began banging on the front glass window"
And he lived and is recovering in the hospital.
"Bocko was back on his feet, but he was dazed and stumbled through the restaurant. The gunman then started firing at him, and he was grazed by a bullet across his back." " When Lichtenwalter ran out of bullets, he kicked and pistol-whipped Bocko with the empty Glock, Ortiz said. "
Why didn't this guy fire his own weapon. I realize that he was seriously dazed but................
"The dozen or so diners in the restaurant ducked underneath tables. "
This is a real shame.
"When a group of backup officers arrived, Muñiz , too weakened to move, was still lying underneath the gunman. "
This guy Muniz is a man's man. I am proud of him as a man, and a law enforcement officer, and as an American.
I hope some people remember this article the next time they feel the urge to start yet another thread on one shot stops, handgun effectiveness etc.
And he lived and is recovering in the hospital.
"Bocko was back on his feet, but he was dazed and stumbled through the restaurant. The gunman then started firing at him, and he was grazed by a bullet across his back." " When Lichtenwalter ran out of bullets, he kicked and pistol-whipped Bocko with the empty Glock, Ortiz said. "
Why didn't this guy fire his own weapon. I realize that he was seriously dazed but................
"The dozen or so diners in the restaurant ducked underneath tables. "
This is a real shame.
"When a group of backup officers arrived, Muñiz , too weakened to move, was still lying underneath the gunman. "
This guy Muniz is a man's man. I am proud of him as a man, and a law enforcement officer, and as an American.
I hope some people remember this article the next time they feel the urge to start yet another thread on one shot stops, handgun effectiveness etc.
There's a Metallica song that made me think about that, and how bad it would have to be.Click here for lyrics.
denfoote
Member
I'm reevaluating my adherence to the 9mm and .40 S&W as a defensive cartridge!! I think it's back to .45ACP or 10mm for me!!!
Matthew Courtney
Member
A few months ago, a man who was convicted of a double homicide committed in Lake Charles during the course of a home invasion was sentenced to time served by the "honorable" Judge Wilford Carter and released. He had been in jail for about 4 1/2 years awaiting trial.
"Unless and until we can get C4 packed and fuzed modified hollow points, I'm going to be even more obsessed with practicing head shots...."
Blackhawk, you get it. It doesn't matter near as much what handgun you are shooting, they are marginal. Placement is all that matters.
Blackhawk, you get it. It doesn't matter near as much what handgun you are shooting, they are marginal. Placement is all that matters.
MuzzleBlast
Member
I like Dennis Miller's take on that: "You want a weight room? You already have one. It's called your cell. NOW GET IN THERE AND WAIT!"
El Rojo
Member
I carry a sawed off M1 Garand in my jacket as I know that anything less than a full sized .30-06 round or a .45 ACP won't stop bad guys in 1 shot or less. Plus you can shoot them in the finger and they won't want to get up. :banghead: It is shot placement and all about shot placement. If the body doesn't work, use his head.
Mike Irwin
Member
"Muñiz had an issue Glock 22, .40 S&W, and shot the perp 6 times, close range, and NONE of his shots were instant stoppers."
And that's an indictment of the round how? Does it say where the guy was struck? Arms, legs, lower torso? Areas where a 1-shot stop wouldn't necessarily be assured even with a shotgun or heavy rifle?
Or are we just ASSUMING that this officer delivered 6 picture perfect heart shots in .00000000000000000000025 seconds?
The only "instant" stopper you get with any handgun round is a shot to the spine or head, and a head shot isn't 100% certain.
Stomach and arm hits with ANY handgun round is likely not to stop someone. A "chest hit" can include anything from a shot to the heart to a grazing shot along the ribs to a bullet through the pectoral muscles.
I guess all of this is proof, though, that a single .45 fired anywhere in the general direction of any of these individuals would have immediately broken ever bone in their bodies, boiled their blood, and pulpled every vital organ, resulting in a "1 shot hypersplatterization" with massive infrastructure damage over a 4-square-block area...
Come on, guys. Stop trying to read so damned much into a NEWSPAPER article! Aren't some of you the same people who wouldn't believe a newspaper article if it told you you were on fire, and now you're depending on it to set your criteria for a carry round?
Anyone else see what's wrong with this picture?
I mean Jesus, from the same newspaper article I guess we can also conclude that the polymer-frame, metal slide Glock makes a LOUSY handgun for pistol whipping someone?
And that's an indictment of the round how? Does it say where the guy was struck? Arms, legs, lower torso? Areas where a 1-shot stop wouldn't necessarily be assured even with a shotgun or heavy rifle?
Or are we just ASSUMING that this officer delivered 6 picture perfect heart shots in .00000000000000000000025 seconds?
The only "instant" stopper you get with any handgun round is a shot to the spine or head, and a head shot isn't 100% certain.
Stomach and arm hits with ANY handgun round is likely not to stop someone. A "chest hit" can include anything from a shot to the heart to a grazing shot along the ribs to a bullet through the pectoral muscles.
I guess all of this is proof, though, that a single .45 fired anywhere in the general direction of any of these individuals would have immediately broken ever bone in their bodies, boiled their blood, and pulpled every vital organ, resulting in a "1 shot hypersplatterization" with massive infrastructure damage over a 4-square-block area...
Come on, guys. Stop trying to read so damned much into a NEWSPAPER article! Aren't some of you the same people who wouldn't believe a newspaper article if it told you you were on fire, and now you're depending on it to set your criteria for a carry round?
Anyone else see what's wrong with this picture?
I mean Jesus, from the same newspaper article I guess we can also conclude that the polymer-frame, metal slide Glock makes a LOUSY handgun for pistol whipping someone?
Last edited:
"hypersplatterization"
Absolutely. You mean you didn't think that was the "between the lines" point of the article? Myself, I thought the point of the whole thing was to say that 40 S&W is 40 Short & Weak, and Glocks are crappy mankillers. They shoulda hada 1911.
Mike Irwin
Member
Obviously you've missed your "reading between the lines 101" classes, Ahenry.
The hidden story here is that the 4 wounded officers violated this man's civil rights by interfering with his target practice.
The hidden story here is that the 4 wounded officers violated this man's civil rights by interfering with his target practice.
I'm waiting for the lawsuit... "The glock failed to stop the attacker in an appropriate timeframe."
Why blame training? This way the police could make some money out of it!
Mike, I think you meant they were interfering with the Glock's target practice.
Why blame training? This way the police could make some money out of it!
Mike, I think you meant they were interfering with the Glock's target practice.
I seem to vaguely recall in one of the gun-rags about 30-35 years back that the San Antonio PD had switched from 38Spl/357Mag class of revolver up to the 41Mag, with much greater success in ending gun battles quickly. Maybe should re-visit that issue.
The whole story saddens me.
There are several points that make me upset. Why was the guy out of prison to begin with? Why weren't the officers more alert? Why, after shooting someone several times and him not going down, didn't the officer's use shotguns or better shot placement? Why weren't the plain clothes officers wearing a vest?
I know, the story answers most of those questions. I just don't like the answers. Being an officer myself, I try not to "second guess" something that happens when I wasn't there. But, dog gone it, there seem to have been so many mistakes here.
I tend to place the errors right back in the lap of the public, and administration. When I say "the public" I don't mean everyone. I'm talking about those who have their heads stuffed in the TV Guide, whatching soaps and Walker all day. They won't let officers do the job the way it needs to be done (this doesn't include officers who feel it's ok to run roughshod over everyone, just because they wear a badge). Today, we are taught that to treat anyone as a threat (standing away from them, giving firm commands, taking charge of the scene, ect.) is a violation of their "rights". Admin is worried more about being taken to court than the well being of it's officers.
What we see in police work today is the result of many years of "social change". We see it here, on this board, from time to time. Have an officer stop someone who is a CCW'er, and an all around good guy, and if the officer does the things listed above rather than pat the guy on the shoulder and talk guns with him, then the officer is a jerk. Everyone speaks of the need for officers to be more "aware", yet when they try to be, they are taken to task for not being able to read the suspects mind. We don't know who may be the one to kill us. We just don't know. So, if we try to treat everyone as a possible threat, we're lambasted as "badge heavy" or "on a power trip".
Again, I'm not talking about those officers who DO INDEED act this way. They're out there. We know it and you know it. But, rather than try to get rid of these officers, something the public has taught the Depts that they will catch hell for (via Unions, the NAACP, Laywers, and the Feds), they are allowed to remain. Their answer, give every officer more "sensitivity training". This teaches officers to be more "user friendly", we can't keep our distance, we can't be firm with oyr directions, we can't "harm" antone when we have to fight them, we can't, IN ANY WAY, treat them as if they are a threat, and, God forbid, we can't use our gun for anything.
We all know who is to blame for most of these rules. Yet we don't want to them applied to us either. We don't want an officer to be firm and busniess like with us. We want him, how I don't know, to understand when he has contact with us that we are the good guys and that he can be at ease with us. And it simply can't work that way, an officer has to be allow to treat everyone as a possible threat. Simply because everyone is.
As long as officers come frome society in general, we will get bad seeds. That's because there are bad seeds in society in general. We all know that. Then why on earth is it so hard for Depts to get rid of them? Because they are more concerned with how the dept "looks" than with why type job it does. Ask any officer, we want the bad cops gone, we don't care about race or gender. If a cop can do the job, great. If he/she can't, then get rid of them. Stop asking us to risk our lives, and YOURS, by keeping bad officers.
None of this should be taken to mean the officers involved in this event were bad, is doesn't. I've just tried to explain how some officers can be lulled into "condition white". We all share the blame. Until we are determined to get rid of bad officers and until we are commited to letting them do the job the way they must, things like this will continue to happen.
The public gets the type of police they demand. In the past few decades the public has demanded more "touchy feely" police. And they have demanded that we keep "bad" officers, whether they be white, black, male or female. It has demanded we promote officers based on how they look rather than how they act or how much they know. It has demanded that officers react to them as dinner guests rather than possible threats. It expects officers to be able to read their minds, to know if they are a threat or not.
How we want/expect officers to act has a direct bearing on whether they live or die. If you want an officer to treat you diffrent, just because you are a "good guy", it will, most likely get him killed somewhere down the road. If you don't want us to be able to get rid if the bad officers, most likely "someone" will die at sometime.
What do we want?
There are several points that make me upset. Why was the guy out of prison to begin with? Why weren't the officers more alert? Why, after shooting someone several times and him not going down, didn't the officer's use shotguns or better shot placement? Why weren't the plain clothes officers wearing a vest?
I know, the story answers most of those questions. I just don't like the answers. Being an officer myself, I try not to "second guess" something that happens when I wasn't there. But, dog gone it, there seem to have been so many mistakes here.
I tend to place the errors right back in the lap of the public, and administration. When I say "the public" I don't mean everyone. I'm talking about those who have their heads stuffed in the TV Guide, whatching soaps and Walker all day. They won't let officers do the job the way it needs to be done (this doesn't include officers who feel it's ok to run roughshod over everyone, just because they wear a badge). Today, we are taught that to treat anyone as a threat (standing away from them, giving firm commands, taking charge of the scene, ect.) is a violation of their "rights". Admin is worried more about being taken to court than the well being of it's officers.
What we see in police work today is the result of many years of "social change". We see it here, on this board, from time to time. Have an officer stop someone who is a CCW'er, and an all around good guy, and if the officer does the things listed above rather than pat the guy on the shoulder and talk guns with him, then the officer is a jerk. Everyone speaks of the need for officers to be more "aware", yet when they try to be, they are taken to task for not being able to read the suspects mind. We don't know who may be the one to kill us. We just don't know. So, if we try to treat everyone as a possible threat, we're lambasted as "badge heavy" or "on a power trip".
Again, I'm not talking about those officers who DO INDEED act this way. They're out there. We know it and you know it. But, rather than try to get rid of these officers, something the public has taught the Depts that they will catch hell for (via Unions, the NAACP, Laywers, and the Feds), they are allowed to remain. Their answer, give every officer more "sensitivity training". This teaches officers to be more "user friendly", we can't keep our distance, we can't be firm with oyr directions, we can't "harm" antone when we have to fight them, we can't, IN ANY WAY, treat them as if they are a threat, and, God forbid, we can't use our gun for anything.
We all know who is to blame for most of these rules. Yet we don't want to them applied to us either. We don't want an officer to be firm and busniess like with us. We want him, how I don't know, to understand when he has contact with us that we are the good guys and that he can be at ease with us. And it simply can't work that way, an officer has to be allow to treat everyone as a possible threat. Simply because everyone is.
As long as officers come frome society in general, we will get bad seeds. That's because there are bad seeds in society in general. We all know that. Then why on earth is it so hard for Depts to get rid of them? Because they are more concerned with how the dept "looks" than with why type job it does. Ask any officer, we want the bad cops gone, we don't care about race or gender. If a cop can do the job, great. If he/she can't, then get rid of them. Stop asking us to risk our lives, and YOURS, by keeping bad officers.
None of this should be taken to mean the officers involved in this event were bad, is doesn't. I've just tried to explain how some officers can be lulled into "condition white". We all share the blame. Until we are determined to get rid of bad officers and until we are commited to letting them do the job the way they must, things like this will continue to happen.
The public gets the type of police they demand. In the past few decades the public has demanded more "touchy feely" police. And they have demanded that we keep "bad" officers, whether they be white, black, male or female. It has demanded we promote officers based on how they look rather than how they act or how much they know. It has demanded that officers react to them as dinner guests rather than possible threats. It expects officers to be able to read their minds, to know if they are a threat or not.
How we want/expect officers to act has a direct bearing on whether they live or die. If you want an officer to treat you diffrent, just because you are a "good guy", it will, most likely get him killed somewhere down the road. If you don't want us to be able to get rid if the bad officers, most likely "someone" will die at sometime.
What do we want?
DerRottweiler
Member
I wish those Officers a speedy and complete recovery!
Island Beretta
Member
:banghead: 
These cops were too complacent!! They should have gone to condition RED right away!!Hope they recover!! Good thing it was only a .40 S&W and not the famous killer 9mm rounds..
And for police admins please more training for our officers!!!
This kind of stuff is going to happen regardless of the training, weapons or ammo.
I read a story about a dude who took 32 9mm Silvertips, before he ceased being a threat.
And another who was hit with several rounds of 00 Buck at less than 15 yards, and continued to fight for several minutes before bleeding out.
waterdog
I read a story about a dude who took 32 9mm Silvertips, before he ceased being a threat.
And another who was hit with several rounds of 00 Buck at less than 15 yards, and continued to fight for several minutes before bleeding out.
waterdog
Monte Harrison
Member
Roger that! Also, I hope they and their department LEARN from this.
TheeBadOne
Member
I hope that some people, after reading this story, realize why so many officers seem so "harsh" during a contact. They are just being careful and trying to make it home at the end of their shift. They never know who they are dealing with and what they might do without a seconds notice. In this call the badguy spoke nicely with the officers, was calm, and the problem was resolved and all parties were through and on their way out. That changed in a heartbeat. Next time you get pulled over for 10 over don't be so mad at the cop for being careful with you, the unknown factor. If these cops had treated this call like a high risk stop they'd probably all be still alive, but all curshed for being jack booted nazi's. It's a fine line out there.
sm
member
Amazing, hope all continue to recover--no surprises down the road.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked