Friendly Fire isn't !!

[Jeff White]

Off duty St Louis officer leaves his home to assist in a chase that ended in a gunfight and is shot by a fellow officer.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_761b9cc4-75d1-5023-a38f-c4096f99d114.html

The discussion about how and when to intervene comes up here fairly regularly in all kinds of situations from an active shooter/terror attack to a domestic dispute in a restaurant or other public place. This is a good example of why it's almost never a good idea to get involved in a situation that doesn't directly involve you or a loved one.

But sources say the off-duty officer was shot by a fellow cop who did not recognize him as an officer, in a separate encounter away from the initial crash. Officers told the off-duty cop to get on the ground and surrender, and he complied with their commands, sources said.

When another officer recognized him and told the others to let him get up, another officer shot him, sources said.

In this case one of the officers involved recognized the other officer as a "good guy with a gun". I'm going to speculate that the officer who shot his fellow officer didn't hear the other officer tell the off duty officer to get up or in the adrenaline rush of the chase and subsequent gunfight, it just didn't register with the officer who shot his comrade.

In the end if the off duty officer hadn't left his home to help he wouldn't have been shot.

When I was still working I had occasion to call the sheriff one morning about 0330. I had completed my shift at 0200, came home and parked my squad car in the garage where I kept it when off duty. I did my usual end of shift unwinding routine of dumping my duty gear and logging onto THR to wind down. Around 0300 I went to bed. At 0330 my doorbell rang. I got up armed myself and moved to where I could observe the front door and discovered no one was there. I called the sheriff to have a deputy respond. It's a small LE community here, everyone knows everyone and I had spoken to the deputy that responded before I went off duty.

However when he arrived I called Dispatch and had them tell him I was coming out and I was armed. It would have spoiled my whole day to be accidentally shot by a friend and fellow officer.

 

[Jeff White]

Another account:

NEW DETAILS: Off-duty officer injured by 'friendly fire' during shootout in North City overnight, police say. Complete story on app.


(Via KMOV News)

Eventually, the suspects' car stopped at Park Avenue and Astra in north St. Louis and the suspects exited the car and exchanged gunfire with officers, according to police. An off-duty officer who lives in the area heard what was going on and went outside of his house armed with his department-issued gun.

When the off-duty officer went outside, the two officers involved in the pursuit of the suspects ordered him to ground. The off-duty officer complied, at which point the officers recognized him, told him to stand up and walk towards them.

While the off-duty officer was walking towards the on-duty officers, a third officer arrived on the scene. The third officer reportedly did not recognize the off-duty officer and, fearing for his safety, fired his gun, striking the off-duty officer in the arm.

There is almost always a lot of confusion in the seconds that an incident like this usually takes. Call it fog of war or something else. You can't always tell who is the good guy and who is the bad guy.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

It would have spoiled my whole day to be accidentally shot.

You could have ended that sentence right there

 

[shafter]

Unless you're paid to do so, people should learn to take care of themselves and loved ones so someone else doesn't have to risk their safety to do so. Anything else is selfish. Both for the person who isn't prepared to take care of himself, and for the person who rushes in to help that person, and by doing so risks his family visiting him in prison or never seeing him again at all.

Look out for children, handicapped, and very old people. Everyone else can make a choice to not be a victim.

 

[9MMare]

Jeebus. Is there such poor communication between officers? Can training not overcome this kind of tunnel vision? (Kind of sounds like that...as if the officer focused only on one thing and didnt take the entire scene into consideration on arrival)

 

[lemaymiami]

For those who've never been in a full out dangerous street scene... it can be hard to realize just how crazy things can get. In my years on the street I learned of more than three crossfire situations where more than one officer needed a bit of doctoring from rounds fired by other officers... One of the items our trainers emphasized during range sessions was situational awareness for anyone in an armed scene (all too easy to send rounds towards other cops when things get hairy and you're all puckered up....).

Here's how I learned to cope during high speed chases and scenes where gunfire was happening... I'd silently chant to myself "look out for the cops" over and over again, until whatever it was going on was resolved... and more than once that mindset saved me (much more from other police cars than other police shooters... if the truth be told). As a supervisor, on more than one occasion I ordered all plainclothes officers to stay out of a hot scene unless they were wearing a clearly marked raid jacket (and when I had plainclothes officers -they were required to put on a jacket clearly marking them as "POLICE" in large letters.... if they were going to be holding a weapon in public...).

Down here in south Florida there are so many different police departments, plus various state and federal outfits that it wasn't uncommon to have officers from multiple different agencies involved in a fluid situation that might have passed through several jurisdictions in just a few minutes... The day I came out of the police academy (early spring, 1974) there were 27 local police departments in Dade county alone... Today there are at least a half dozen more - and that's just in the one county, but now it's called Miami-Dade county...

The best advice I could give any young cop if they want to assist during their off duty hours - use a telephone....

 

[JTHunter]

Jeebus. Is there such poor communication between officers? Can training not overcome this kind of tunnel vision? (Kind of sounds like that...as if the officer focused only on one thing and didn't take the entire scene into consideration on arrival)

The off-duty officer came out of his house, in street clothes, from a different district than the cop who shot him, so he was an "unknown" MWAG.

 

[9MMare]

The off-duty officer came out of his house, in street clothes, from a different district than the cop who shot him, so he was an "unknown" MWAG.

I realize that but *it seems* like he arrived on the scene and shot first and asked questions later. Because the other cops HAD given the ok for the off-duty cop and I'm sure their words and body language were completely missed by the new cop. If he h ad made any attempt to communicate or actually take in the scene things might have been different...instead, he reacted. Boom.

We as citizens are not allowed to do that and would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law if we did. Cops are human, I realize that. But there seems to have been a serious, deadly gap in his training or practice of that training.

 

[MedWheeler]

lemaymiami writes:

Down here in south Florida there are so many different police departments, plus various state and federal outfits that it wasn't uncommon to have officers from multiple different agencies involved in a fluid situation that might have passed through several jurisdictions in just a few minutes...

Ain't that the truth. I remember one of your chases ending up in my town, in Palm Beach Gardens. There had to be forty cruisers in that chase if there was one, from M-D, Miami (city), NMB, Broward SO, Ft. Lauderdale, and a few from southern Palm Beach County.

At east five helos, too, though at least one was likely news media.

 

[Jeff White]

I realize that but *it seems* like he arrived on the scene and shot first and asked questions later.

The key words here are "it seems like". These type of incidents are over with in seconds. When you roll up on a scene like that you have little idea about what's going down. You may have heard a lot of radio traffic from other officers involved in the pursuit. But you really don't know what's actually happening. You arrive on the scene and you see what you assume to be an armed suspect advancing on your fellow officers. Are you going to ask; "Hey guys did you tell this guy it was ok to advance on you?" or do you act before the "suspect" has a chance to shoot someone? You have to look at the totality of the circumstances. You are working patrol in North St Louis, one of the worst areas in all of the US for violent crime. Shootings and murders occur there on a daily basis, there is an officer involved shooting every few days. You are involved in a high speed chase with shots fired. You are full of Adrenalin from the chase and you pull up on the second scene where the last information you have is that they have a man (the off duty officer) in custody. But when you arrive the armed man that is "in custody" is walking to towards the other officers. Is he being non-compliant? Do the other officers see that he's armed? In under a second he could kill you or a fellow officer. What do you do, based only on what you know at the time you arrived on the scene?

Remember, you've got under a second to figure out what's happening here and take action or you or a fellow officer could be dead.

It's hard for someone who's never been in a similar situation to understand how fast all this happens.

That's why that night after my doorbell rang at 0330 after the house went dark, I waited inside until the deputy arrived and had dispatch tell him I was coming out to help him check the detached garage where I kept my squad car. If I had just come out the door when he pulled into the drive he might have assumed that I was someone who had for all he knew, entered my house and murdered me and my family.

There is one person who is responsible for the off duty officer being shot. The off duty officer who decided to "help". If there is anyone needing remedial training, it's the off duty officer, who after 11 years on the street should have known better.

 

[Kleanbore]

There is one person who is responsible for the off duty officer being shot. The off duty officer who decided to "help". If there is anyone needing remedial training, it's the off duty officer, who after 11 years on the street should have known better.

Well said.

 

[9MMare]

The key words here are "it seems like". These type of incidents are over with in seconds. When you roll up on a scene like that you have little idea about what's going down. You may have heard a lot of radio traffic from other officers involved in the pursuit. But you really don't know what's actually happening. You arrive on the scene and you see what you assume to be an armed suspect advancing on your fellow officers. Are you going to ask; "Hey guys did you tell this guy it was ok to advance on you?" or do you act before the "suspect" has a chance to shoot someone? You have to look at the totality of the circumstances. You are working patrol in North St Louis, one of the worst areas in all of the US for violent crime. Shootings and murders occur there on a daily basis, there is an officer involved shooting every few days. You are involved in a high speed chase with shots fired. You are full of Adrenalin from the chase and you pull up on the second scene where the last information you have is that they have a man (the off duty officer) in custody. But when you arrive the armed man that is "in custody" is walking to towards the other officers. Is he being non-compliant? Do the other officers see that he's armed? In under a second he could kill you or a fellow officer. What do you do, based only on what you know at the time you arrived on the scene?

Remember, you've got under a second to figure out what's happening here and take action or you or a fellow officer could be dead.

It's hard for someone who's never been in a similar situation to understand how fast all this happens.
.

I know how fast these things happen. And IMO, nothing you wrote excuses his actions. They are "explanations" but dont justify, IMO, his actions. He just reacted, without properly identifying his target.

Again, not a single non-cop would escape prosecution in such an incident.

 

[9MMare]

Well said.

Wow.

Not properly identifying the target, period. No problem huh?

Ranks right up there with the cop and the corrections officer that went looking for someone else, entered a bedroom, and shot the wrong guy, in his bed, 16 times. And didnt kill him.

I think you are right tho...that was found a 'good shoot' also. (Altho the county paid a huge settlement anyway).

 

[Kleanbore]

And IMO, nothing you wrote excuses his actions. They are "explanations" but dont justify, IMO, his actions.

Do you have any idea what constitutes justification for the use of deadly force in such an incident?

Not properly identifying the target, period.

What do you mean by that?

 

[Jeff White]

I know how fast these things happen. And IMO, nothing you wrote excuses his actions. They are "explanations" but dont justify, IMO, his actions. He just reacted, without properly identifying his target.

Since this forum is all about sharing experiences and learning, why don't you put yourself in the situation the officer found himself in and explain the proper procedure to us?

By the way, it's real easy to sit in the safety of your home behind your monitor with a cold beverage and make a snap judgement and be right every single time. It's somewhat harder in real life.

So please tell us what you would have done. Remember, if you're wrong, you or a fellow officer might die right then in that moment.

 

[9MMare]

Since this forum is all about sharing experiences and learning, why don't you put yourself in the situation the officer found himself in and explain the proper procedure to us?

By the way, it's real easy to sit in the safety of your home behind your monitor with a cold beverage and make a snap judgement and be right every single time. It's somewhat harder in real life.

So please tell us what you would have done. Remember, if you're wrong, you or a fellow officer might die right then in that moment.

Yes thanks for the usual accusation of Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

I already wrote what I think, based on the information.

You can explain why he did what he did all you want...that doesnt make it justifiable IMO. Again...no non-LE would get away with such a thing.

 

[9MMare]

Do you have any idea what constitutes justification for the use of deadly force in such an incident?

What do you mean by that?

Is the standard different for cops? I know that it is when a suspect is escaping and may present a danger to the public. That was not the case here.

And if he had properly identified his target...the standard for anyone with a firearm (or about to use lethal force)...do you think he would have shot him?

 

[Kleanbore]

Again...no non-LE would get away with such a thing.

Do you have a basis for that assertion?

Surely a "non-LE" would not chase suspects, but when fired upon, a "non-LE" with reason to believe that an armed person coming at him with a gun, particularly when shooting has started, constituted an immediate threat of death or sous injury, would certainly be justified in the use of whatever force was reasonably necessary to defend himself.

Is the standard different for cops?

No.

And if he had properly identified his target...

One more time....what do you mean by that?

 

[9MMare]

Do you have a basis for that assertion?

Surely a "non-LE" would not chase suspects, but when fired upon, a "non-LE" with reason to believe that an armed person coming at him with a gun, particularly when shooting has started, constituted an immediate threat of death or sous injury, would certainly be justified in the use of whatever force was reasonably necessary to defend himself.

No.

One more time....what do you mean by that?

I did not read where the off-duty cop fired upon the arriving officer that shot him. Nor made anything threatening moves towards other cops. He obeyed their orders...the arriving officer did not (properly) assess the situation, he reacted. (THis is how it read to me). I cannot speak to how the arriving officer perceived the off-duty cop's actions...but he was wrong.

He did not properly identify his target...if he had, he would not have shot him. Cant make it more clear than that.

 

[9MMare]

Do you have a basis for that assertion?

A citizen would be held liable if they showed up at a scene, saw people standing around with guns (including cops), not shooting, and not actively threatening anyone, and shot one of them.

 

[Jeff White]

I already wrote what I think, based on the information.

You wrote what you thought, but you didn't offer YOUR solution. What would YOU have done?

I know that it is when a suspect is escaping and may present a danger to the public. That was not the case here.

That depends. In 1985 the USSC ruled in Garner v. Tennessee that you can't routinely use deadly force to prevent the escape of a suspect. The Supreme Court ruled that deadly force was only justified in the case of certain crimes.....forcible felonies. If you look at what most states define as forcible felonies you'll find that a danger to the public doesn't really figure into it.

And if he had properly identified his target...the standard for anyone with a firearm (or about to use lethal force)...do you think he would have shot him?

Tell me how he was supposed to do that? Should he have asked for ID? The off duty officer was NOT in uniform. The St Louis Metro PD lists 1292 sworn officers. It is also likely that officers from some of the smaller jurisdictions in the area would be involved. It's virtually impossible for every officer to know every other officer by sight.

I did not read where the off-duty cop fired upon the arriving officer that shot him. Nor made anything threatening moves towards other cops.

He was on his feet walking towards the other officers and he was armed. What about that looks harmless?

Again, the standard here for the officer or a private citizen is; what did the person know (true or not) when he made the decision to fire and would a reasonable man, knowing only what the person who fired knew, make the same decision.

High speed chase, shots fired. Chase ends and multiple suspects flee on foot. Officers stop one "suspect" and report they have him in custody. Suspect is not a suspect at all but is in fact an off duty officer in civilian clothes who thought he could help. One of the officers holding the suspect/off duty officer recognizes the officer and tells him to get up off the ground. Off duty officer gets up off the ground and walks towards the other officers. The officer who fired arrives. He expects to see the other uniformed officers holding the the suspect. Instead he sees an armed man advancing on the other officers. He fires. End of story. Please tell us how you would have ascertained that there was no threat. Remember, the suspects have already fired at officers.

A citizen would be held liable if they showed up at a scene, saw people standing around with guns (including cops), not shooting, and not actively threatening anyone, and shot one of them.

What part of walking towards the other officers while armed do you see as harmless? If we met under similar circumstances and I was walking towards you armed, in the immediate aftermath of a high speed chase with shots fired, would you wait until I pointed my weapon?

As for if a citizen had done that, it would once again depend on the totality of the circumstances and what the citizen knew at the moment he fired based on the information that was available to him at the time.

I find it interesting that you mention a citizen intervening because that is why I posted this, as a good example of why it's not a good idea to get involved in these kinds of things. In this example an off duty officer who got involved was shot for his trouble. Thankfully he wasn't seriously injured.

 

[Kleanbore]

A citizen would be held liable if they showed up at a scene, saw people standing around with guns (including cops), not shooting, and not actively threatening anyone, and shot one of them.

I think Jeff addressed that quite well.

 

[Kleanbore]

He did not properly identify his target...if he had, he would not have shot him. Cant make it more clear than that.

One more time, what on Earth do you mean by "properly identify his target"?

How, pray tell, should he have gone about doing that?

Consider a situation in which shots have been fired in an open space. You are an armed private citizen. A man comes toward you and toward uniformed officers with gun in hand. What would you do? Ask his name and occupation?

How much time do you think you would have if he were to decide to shoot you?

Read up a bit on the justification of the use of deadly force for self defense. Learn about ability; opportunity, jeopardy, and preclusion. Learn what imminent threat means. Understand the concepts of immediate necessity and of reasonable belief.

And avail yourself of some quality self defense training.

 

[9MMare]

You wrote what you thought, but you didn't offer YOUR solution. What would YOU have done?

Hopefully not shot the off duty officer.

That depends. In 1985 the USSC ruled in Garner v. Tennessee that you can't routinely use deadly force to prevent the escape of a suspect. The Supreme Court ruled that deadly force was only justified in the case of certain crimes.....forcible felonies. If you look at what most states define as forcible felonies you'll find that a danger to the public doesn't really figure into it.

Yes I know but that's not relevant to this thread. Nor 'most' states. Didnt say all. Not only that, I didnt make a blanket statement...did you read what I wrote? Please focus on the actual discussion instead of stretching things outside relevancy.

Tell me how he was supposed to do that? Should he have asked for ID? The off duty officer was NOT in uniform. The St Louis Metro PD lists 1292 sworn officers. It is also likely that officers from some of the smaller jurisdictions in the area would be involved. It's virtually impossible for every officer to know every other officer by sight.

Are you really asking this? Um, when do any of us, cops included, get to 'ask for ID?' This shows that you are not taking this discussion seriously IMO. [/quote]

He was on his feet walking towards the other officers and he was armed. What about that looks harmless?

And what were the other officers doing/acting/saying as he was doing that? How were they reacting? This is a huge part of assessing the scene IMO.

Again, the standard here for the officer or a private citizen is; what did the person know (true or not) when he made the decision to fire and would a reasonable man, knowing only what the person who fired knew, make the same decision.

I think I've made my opinion clear on this. More rehash isnt needed, if you dont agree that's fine with me.

As for if a citizen had done that, it would once again depend on the totality of the circumstances and what the citizen knew at the moment he fired based on the information that was available to him at the time.

This has been acknowledged many times, as has the statement where I've said I was going by what the article said.

 

[9MMare]

One more time, what on Earth do you mean by "properly identify his target"?

How, pray tell, should he have gone about doing that?

Consider a situation in which shots have been fired in an open space. You are an armed private citizen. A man comes toward you and toward uniformed officers with gun in hand. What would you do? Ask his name and occupation?

How much time do you think you would have if he were to decide to shoot you?

Read up a bit on the justification of the use of deadly force for self defense. Learn about ability; opportunity, jeopardy, and preclusion. Learn what imminent threat means. Understand the concepts of immediate necessity and of reasonable belief.

And avail yourself of some quality self defense training.

It seems to be your lack of reading comprehension that leads you to assume I dont have a good understanding of those things.

Your question was answered more than once, I cant help that you dont like it.

The assumption you make about the level of my own training is scary if you translate that into assumptions you'd make on the street.

I have expressed my opinions. Not going to continue to rehash. Let the discussion move on for others.