Police Kill Armed Man, Hostage in Fla.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gunsnrovers

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,476
Location
Lost Angeles
Police Kill Armed Man, Hostage in Fla.
October 07, 2005 5:46 PM EDT
TAMPA, Fla. - Police officers shot and killed a man and the woman he was holding hostage early Friday after he fired a sawed-off shotgun at them, police said.

Tampa police Chief Stephen Hogue said the officers had been forced to return fire to defend themselves.

"It developed very quickly, and the suspect forced the issue by coming out of the room with the hostage and shooting at police," Hogue said at a news conference.

Officers saw the armed man and the hostage inside a room at the Luxury Motel, police spokesman Laura McElroy said. They heard two gunshots, and minutes later, the man came out of the room with the woman.

"He has the woman in a headlock with the gun pointed at her head," McElroy said. "He spots an officer to his right, levels the shotgun at the officer and fires at the officer."

Officers shot at Gary T. Brewer, killing him and wounding 33-year-old Tracy Mary Wood, McElroy said. Wood died at a hospital hours later.

Police are still trying to determine how many times Brewer, 45, was shot. He had more than 10 bullet wounds, but some might be exit wounds, Hogue said. The woman was shot "several times," he said.

Hogue called the woman's death tragic, "tantamount to a police officer getting killed."

The four officers, all veterans with at least 10 years experience, were put on administrative leave pending an investigation. None was injured.

The SWAT team and a hostage negotiator had been called but hadn't arrived by the time the shooting started, Hogue said.

Shortly before the shootings, Brewer had held another woman, his girlfriend, hostage at her condominium for more than seven hours beginning late Thursday, McElroy said. She broke away and called police, but Brewer fled before officers arrived. The girlfriend told police he had used crack cocaine throughout the night.

Investigators were still trying to determine how Brewer knew Wood, who had lived with her boyfriend at the $35-a-night Luxury Motel for several years.

The first gunshots inside the motel room hit the woman's mixed-breed dog, which later died.


http://start.earthlink.net/article/nat?guid=20051007/4345f2c0_3421_1334520051007-1014359723
 
Here's a timeline, FWIW.

Hostage shooting timeline

A synposis of the events leading to Friday's shooting, according to Tampa police officials:

By Times Staff Writer
Published October 7, 2005

9 p.m. Thursday: Gary T. Brewer is armed with a sawed-off semi-automatic shotgun inside the Grand Key condominium, 4207 S. Dale Mabry Highway, Apt. 6307, that he shares with girlfriend, Cynthia G. Chin. He keeps Chin there for several hours. Police later find crack cocaine in the apartment, and they say he was on a drug binge.

4:30 a.m. Friday: Chin escapes the apartment and takes refuge with neighbor Anthony Jackson, who calls police. Another Grand Key resident calls police after he hears screaming and sees Brewer with a gun.

5:18 a.m.: Police go to the Luxury Motel, 4608 E Hillsborough Ave., after William Beamon calls 911 from the Citgo gas station across the street to report that a man he knows as Brewer is holding his girlfriend, Tracy Wood, hostage in Room 11.

5:37 a.m.: Officers knock on the motel room door, trying to make contact with Brewer.

5:38 a.m.: Officers call for the SWAT team.

5:42 a.m.: Officers hear shots fired inside the motel room. They later learn Brewer shot Beamon's dog, Mia.

5:43 a.m.: Brewer walks outside with a gun pointed at Wood's head. He fires once at an officer hiding behind a trash can. Four officers fire several times at Brewer. Brewer and Wood are hit. Brewer dies at the scene. Wood dies later at Tampa General Hospital.

Six minutes from PD arrival to the guy walking outside. Crappy situation all the way around.
 
I can see the flames coming, but this is a real problem to me.

The cop's body armor MUST have been better than the hostage's.

When they take the oath to protect and serve are they paying attention? Maybe it's like, shallow?

How far does "officer safety" go? Can they shoot their employers? An innocent? Multiple times?

What if the bg was carrying an infant?
 
Cops were put in a bad situation.

I'm sure this will haunt them till they die. :(
 
I can see the flames coming, but this is a real problem to me.


We don't live in a perfect world and not every shot goes on target.

When your being shot at, it makes things different.
 
When they take the oath to protect and serve are they paying attention?

They may have failed to protect the hostage, but the guy didn't get a chance to hurt anyone else. And frankly, if someone shoots at me, I'm shooting back. I won't fault anyone else for doing the same.

If you want to blame someone, I think you can safely blame the guy who took two hostages then came out shooting.
 
Its sad but I dont really blame the cops for shooting at the guy who was blasting at them with a shottie.

Unless it was your wife the guy was holding at gun point. Bad business yes, but there are lots of things to look into here before pronouncing the cops in this one heroes.
 
Which movie was that...

Where the first rule of the engagement was to "shoot the hostage"?
 
First off, its a damn crying shame that the hostage died. The blame for that lies sole with the hostage taker. May he roast eternal for his sins. :fire:
Hogue called the woman's death tragic, "tantamount to a police officer getting killed."
This really bugs me. I don't know about anybody else, but in situations like this, the hostages life takes precedence over that of a police officer. Cops go into the work KNOWING what the risks and dangers are. Hostages are FORCED into the situation.
Where the first rule of the engagement was to "shoot the hostage"?
Speed is where I first heard it. Dennis Hopper as the crazed bomber (ex cop), Keanu Reeves as the hero cop, Sandra Bullack as the perky romantic interest driving the bus with a bomb on it.
 
We dont know all the details yet.

I have to admit it is weird that SWAT showed up and didnt bring any rifles capable of taking a head shot at under 50 yards. You would think a modern SWAT team would have at least one bolt action rifle or ar15 handy for hostage situations or badguys wearing armor. I thought hostage situations were the whole point of having SWAT teams?
 
I doubt SWAT was there. The article states they didn't arrive and the chonology shows that they would have had only about 5 minutes to make it there after they were called and before the shooting started.

Tough situation.

IMO, in a hostage situation you need to pick an approach and then play like you actually MEAN it.

In this case, since they called for SWAT, IMO, they should have backed off to a safe distance and waited. By crowding the door, they had no option but to shoot back when the guy came out shooting.
 
We are all equal

Hogue called the woman's death tragic, "tantamount to a police officer getting killed."
I found that line rather repugnant. While tantamount basically means equal to, the statement subtly implies that an officer's death would have been more tragic.

Just another example of how some people think that they are more tantamount than others.

Carry on...
 
this happened 15 minutes away from my dads house...VERY bad neighborhood over there.

I cant believe some of the replies im reading...actually they dont shock me at all.

someone said "what point was SWAT w/o a bolt action rifle" SWAT wasn't there...btw TPD SWAT is very capable my godfather is part of it.

anyway with
Hogue called the woman's death tragic, "tantamount to a police officer getting killed."

Equivalent in effect or value = tantamount

so whats the big deal with what Mr. Houge said? he said that the womes death was equal to a police officer being killed which in the publics eye is different than just another person...

you have to admit reading in the paper a LEO was killed compared to Joe blow is a bit different.

to everyone involved...I wuldnt want to be in their shoes thats for sure, my prayers go out to them.

Chad
 
I guess its going to come down to the details. Its hard to say at this point.

I do have to say that if this was one of those situations in which an inordinate quantity of ammunition was expended with little of it finding its mark then it was irresponsible shooting. Its one thing to play spray-and-pray in an alley, a whole 'nuther thing with hostages. Anything other than that and it seems like it was more than likely unavoidable.
 
I just love the theory going around here lately that cops take an oath to protect and serve and they are expected to sacrifice their lives for the public. Hell all of us as citizens really take an oath to protect the Constitution and all it stands for? I don't see how a cops salary of $30 to $60K a year can even possibly compare to this oath, so really, we should all be willing to enforce that oath. I mean cops are supposedly no higher than a regular citizen according to the majority of the people who bring up this ridiculous 'willing to give all" line. So if we expect cops to give their lives to protect and serve, we should expect everyone to give their lives for the people. So if you are a CCW holder, you should be willing to take a bullet for a complete stranger. No more lame excuses of "I only protect my family and I am not a cop". No sir. You don't have a CCW? No problem, you are just like everyone else, take a bullet for society. Better yet, let’s turn this around. Why should this poor hostage that got shot be any different? Why shouldn't she be willing to take a bullet for a cop's life? Cops are no different than anyone else. Citizens are no different than cops. So why the double standard? The woman should have been willing to take a bullet for society just as much as the cop should have been willing to take a bullet for society.

Sorry, but the attitude that cops should be expected to take a bullet is ludicrous. Unless you can honestly say you are willing to take a bullet as a regular citizen, you have no right to think a cop should take a bullet for anyone. Even then, go ahead and be my guest and take a bullet for a stranger. No piss ant $40K a year is worth that.

Don't get me wrong. I would take action if I had to and if I died, so be it. But I would never willingly throw myself in front of a bullet as a sacrificial lamb. My kids need a father just as much as her kids need a mother or my wife needs a husband just as much as her husband needs a wife. Just because I might wear a badge doesn't make us any different, as many of you so aptly like to point out so many times, but turn around and contradict yourself in situations like these.

To protect and serve. Not to die and sacrifice. Then again, you are right, not to kill and maim either. Sometimes bad things happen. There are no winners here.
 
I just love the theory going around here lately that cops take an oath to protect and serve and they are expected to sacrifice their lives for the public.

i think most of the people here would be content to just be left alone. The fact is that the hostage would not have been any worse off if the police had stayed at home that day. I dont think its unreasonable to expect that our police refrain from victimizing the citizenry on a regular basis.

I am not asking for someone to sacrifice their life. I would ask that if "rescuing" me involves shooting me multiple times that i would rather they didnt bother ;)
 
I try not to -react- to stories like this, but after El Rojo's rousing defense of the police, I just cant' help myself.

Police tactical control of the situation was lousy.

I am assuming that the police were dispersed and behind cover while waiting for SWAT to arrive - if not, shame on them.

Shots are heard inside the room, then the gunman emerges and takes a shot at one of the cops. At that point, the cop who was shot at should have taken full advantage of cover and the other three should have been looking for a clean shot at the gunman. In short, the police should have maintained control of the tactical situation.

Instead, it sounds like the gunman's first shot at a cop was taken by the cops as an instant license to immediately unload in the gunman's direction, without regard for the hostage. The cops could have exercised control over their response, but they just reacted and started shooting. In short, the cops let the gunman dictate the tactical situation.

Don't get me wrong; I am in no way advocating a cop "taking a bullet" for a civilian. But I do expect cops to be prepared (i.e. wearing their armor) and act intelligently (get behind cover when someone is shooting at them) rather than just shooting indiscriminately when they feel endangered.
 
When Mr. El Rojo said

I just love the theory going around here lately that cops take an oath to protect and serve and they are expected to sacrifice their lives for the public. Hell all of us as citizens really take an oath to protect the Constitution and all it stands for? I don't see how a cops salary of $30 to $60K a year can even possibly compare to this oath, so really, we should all be willing to enforce that oath. I mean cops are supposedly no higher than a regular citizen according to the majority of the people who bring up this ridiculous 'willing to give all" line. So if we expect cops to give their lives to protect and serve, we should expect everyone to give their lives for the people.
he made me sad.

I hope he is not a cop because if he is, he just flunked my essay test on "What is the meaning of to protect and serve?"

When I took my oath I was fully aware that I may have to take a bullet for my fellow citizens. All of us who served in the military are and were.

My next question is.....Would he take a bullet for his partner?

That may shine some light on whether he is an elitist or a, well.....you decide.
 
Once the shooting starts, the officers really have no choice but to stop it as quickly as possible.

If worst comes to worst, the hostage is far less likely to be killed by officers' fire than from a contact gunshot wound to the head. Still doesn't mean it won't happen. Damn shame! :cuss: :cuss: :cuss:
 
Once the shooting starts, the officers really have no choice but to stop it as quickly as possible.
Really? So the first shot fired is the signal to blast away? Do you give that advice in your Officer Hostage training scenario?
 
Wow GC70, you sure know a lot about the locations of the hostage, bad guy, and cops from just reading this story. I read the same story and now where did it say the cops had good cover and could just wait until the shooting stopped. In fact, it didn't say anything about cover at all, so to assume they could find some, well, would be an assumption.

We can armchair quarterback this all we want, but we weren't there. Does this suck? Yes. I guess the cops should have just thrown down their guns and took a bullet for the team. That is the only way this could have been avoided. Or the other answer is to not respond to the call and just let it sort itself out. Those seem to be the two most sought out answers.

If you are a cop and to protect and serve means you are willing to take a bullet for society in general, I respect that. That is a personal decision you have to make. If you are not willing to take a bullet for me as a mere civilian, I respect that too. No cop should be expected to take hits to their body armor as a means of protecting an innocent life. That is absurd.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top