(8 am. – promoted by ek hornbeck)
As many of you may already, a BART cop shot a suspect in the back. I’ve been watching this story with a little interest. Here is the recent development; the cop claims he was simply “going for the taser“.
I’m here to debunk this claim…
First, my qualifications to do so; I spent 6 years in law enforcement, graduating 3rd in my class, and, winning the firing range “top gun” award for our class. Now, why is this BART cop’s claim false? Let me tell you why…
1) The police officers patrol belt
Yes, it sounds eerily like a Batman utility belt, but, this is the lifeblood of an officer. It carries his gun, baton, OC spray, extra magazine pouches, and radio. The officer sets this belt up so he/she knows exactly where everything is at if they need it. I’ve known some officers who go through everything on their belt, so they know exactly what they are working with. In recent years, it’s not uncommon for an officer to read reviews such as taser reviews online, so they are more familiar with the items on their belt.
2) Routine qualification
Officers go through routine qualification on their weapons. The department I was at we went through pistol qualifications quarterly, ie, every 3 months. That is 4 times in one year you went to the range with your patrol belt and proved you could qualify on your duty weapon. Why is this important? Because an officer is trained to find their duty weapon, on the belt THEY SET UP, unholster it, and shoot the weapon, by INSTINCT. Simply, there is absolutely NO way an officer with more than 6 months on duty pulled something from his/her belt by “accident”.
3) The use of deadly force
I’ll let the article speak first…
“The judge said Mehserle’s statements ‘seem to be inconsistent’ because if Mehserle truly believed that Grant had a gun then Mehserle would have been justified to pull out his gun and use deadly force and wouldn’t have needed to use his Taser,” said KTVU.
Absolutely correct, and, here is where the “story” by the BART cop got “confused” with fact. In order to use deadly force, the officer must satisfy three elements in a heartbeat decision; ability, opportunity and jeopardy.
If the BART cop thought the man had a gun, was reaching for a gun, and TRULY believed that his life was now in danger, he could argue for the use of deadly force. But, he stated he was going for his taser. Sorry, as the judge knows, you don’t reach for your taser when the suspect is going for his gun, and, if he is merely being combative, you don’t pull your gun.
A rookie may get spooked by a situation and pull his gun, fire, in fear, but, by the time you’ve finished your rookie year, most cops have a bit more “fortitude” then to get that spooked. From what I’ve read, the officer in question had 2 years in that department (correct me here if I’m wrong), and, that leads me back to the final point…
4) Field officer trainer
As a Field Training Officer (FTO), it is your job to train the rookie. Every department keeps their rookies under an FTO for different periods of time. Yes, there are smaller departments who may simply give the officer a ticket book and say “good luck”, but, they are not the norm, and, surely not a department that large.
So, just what was this officer taught? To pull his taser at the mere sight of resistance? Give me a break!
I was a Field Training Officer for my department. I trained rookies. If a person resists and you have two officers on scene, no need to do more than what we called “dogpile on the rabbit”, ie, TACKLE down, wrestle them between the two till you get them cuffed up. Talk shit? Not on my shift, nor, did I train officers that way. Shoot first and ask questions later? Not even if hell froze over.
So, there are only two things at play here;
1) the officer was trained to act this way, or, 2) he was predisposed to act this way and the department didn’t know, or, didn’t care.
Either way, it is wrong, and, so is the argument.
2 comments
Author