Ex-BART leo freed from prison after 11 months for manslaugter conviction. [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Ex-BART leo freed from prison after 11 months for manslaugter conviction.


ICARRY2
06-13-2011, 08:39
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/06/13/sf-bay-transit-cop-convicted-in-killing-released/?test=latestnews

Hopefully, he can put this behind him and enjoy his wife and new child.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BART_Police_shooting_of_Oscar_Grant

MeefZah
06-13-2011, 08:59
I'm glad he's out. Poor guy. Sure as hell didn't deserve to be branded a criminal for doing his job... liability falls on the POS that was resisting LE and a failure to train on the part of his agency...

"There's much rage in our community," he said. "It's a shame that our children still have fear from police officers that come into our communities."

:upeyes:

siblueg
06-13-2011, 09:16
Sucks for everyone who was involved.

Deployment Solu
06-13-2011, 10:31
I'm glad he is out. I wish him the best.

Mayhem like Me
06-13-2011, 11:19
I'm glad he's out as well, however, he was criminally negligent, he shot a man he meant to taze.
Some people do not belong in this line of work becasue they vaporlock under stress I am sorry that he had to find that out on the job.

Narc1911
06-13-2011, 11:49
I'm glad he's out as well, however, he was criminally negligent, he shot a man he meant to taze.
Some people do not belong in this line of work becasue they vaporlock under stress I am sorry that he had to find that out on the job.

I agree

ray9898
06-13-2011, 13:51
I really hate that he destroyed his life in the blink of an eye but his mistake killed someone. I understand how the mistake happened however I still expect more than that from a trained LE officer. Hopefully he can get on the right track and move on to do sort of good in the world.

Dukeboy01
06-13-2011, 19:26
I said it in the original thread and I'll say it again: His second mistake was resigning. If he'd made the agency move against him instead of quitting, he'd have had a lot stronger argument during trial that his actions were the result of a training failure. That was the most important lesson I learned and I suggest we all take it to heart. Never resign. Make them fire you and defend their decision. Accidently killing a guy in the line of duty is tragic. Going to prison for it is more so. Glad he's out.

CAcop
06-13-2011, 22:11
I would be on the first Greyhound to Idaho if I were him. If he stays anywhere near the Bay Area his is a marked man.

AA#5
06-13-2011, 22:21
I'm glad he's out. Poor guy. Sure as hell didn't deserve to be branded a criminal for doing his job... liability falls on the POS that was resisting LE and a failure to train on the part of his agency...



:upeyes:

You'd be singin' a very different tune if this idiot wasn't an LEO.

Or if the victim was your son.

Newcop761
06-13-2011, 22:53
You'd be singin' a very different tune if this idiot wasn't an LEO.

Or if the victim was your son.

We'd all be singing a different tune if Oscar Grant et al had followed the lawful orders of the police officers that night.

Mister_Beefy
06-14-2011, 00:33
We'd all be singing a different tune if Oscar Grant et al had followed the lawful orders of the police officers that night.


oh, shut up.

the man died because the cop was negligent. I suppose you think women who are raped should expect it because they have breasts and wear skirts.

yeah, poor helpless cop was a victim of circumstance.

We'd all be singing a different tune if the nitwit could tell the difference between at tazer and a firearm.

moreover, we'd all be singing a different tune if he had become a bus driver or accountant rather than a cop.

you know, we'd all be singing a different tune if the yellowstone caldera had erupted and killed us all the day before this happened.

you make me sick

ricklee4570
06-14-2011, 03:00
We all realize that he did not do it intentionally. But it was negligent. Along the same lines of a person who isnt paying attention while driving and runs over someone.

I know a man who was having gasoline stolen from his property (he had a trucking business). He was 67 years old. He called the police at least weekly to complain about the theft. One day he looks out the window and sees two guys pumping fuel out of one of the big tanks. He grabs his shotgun and shoots into the bushes to scare them away. His thinking was that it would teach them a lesson and they wont return. He knew they would be gone before the cops could get there.

Turns out that these two scumbags had brought their two teenage sons with them. They were hiding in the bushes. One of them dies.

He was sentenced to 8 years in prison for manslaughter. It was a death sentence for him. He died in prison two years later of a heart attack.

This cop got off lucky compared to a lot of others.

Morris
06-14-2011, 05:56
you make me sick

Then I would make you vomit pea soup.

Go away little man. When you decide to FACTUALLY review the ENTIRE case, you will see culpability with both parties involved. Or in a math equation, 1+1=2/an unfortunate incident. Then come back and post in a rational manner rather than knee jerk reactionary dribble.

MeefZah
06-14-2011, 06:08
You'd be singin' a very different tune ... if the victim was your son.

I would raise my son to not be a piece of ****.

That incident was completely instigated by the deceased, therefore, he is ultimately responsible for his own demise. Sure, the officer pulled the trigger, but the officer was inserted in that situation by the actions of the deceased.

I've never had a cop prone me out and shoot me in the back. Know why?

ricklee4570
06-14-2011, 06:25
Here is one for ya: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOI9ahGxMfk

If the suspect were to have died, should the cop do time?

FiremanMike
06-14-2011, 06:25
I'm glad he's out as well, however, he was criminally negligent, he shot a man he meant to taze.
Some people do not belong in this line of work becasue they vaporlock under stress I am sorry that he had to find that out on the job.

I'm glad someone said it.

Mayhem like Me
06-14-2011, 06:45
Here is one for ya: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOI9ahGxMfk

If the suspect were to have died, should the cop do time?

yes! she is another that should not be where she is.
The gun did not go bang by itself, she pulled the trigger.

Much like a guy texting mows down a pedestrian , it's criminal negligence and needs to be punished.

Every year we see more and more get into this line of work now because they need a JOB..This is not a job it's a calling it really is not for everyone no matter what the ADA says, certain people should not pin on the badge, and it has nothing to do with body type it has to do with whats behind the badge, character, integrity and compassion.

RussP
06-14-2011, 07:15
oh, shut up.

the man died because the cop was negligent. I suppose you think women who are raped should expect it because they have breasts and wear skirts.

yeah, poor helpless cop was a victim of circumstance.

We'd all be singing a different tune if the nitwit could tell the difference between at tazer and a firearm.

moreover, we'd all be singing a different tune if he had become a bus driver or accountant rather than a cop.

you know, we'd all be singing a different tune if the yellowstone caldera had erupted and killed us all the day before this happened.

you make me sickIf you want to continue this train of thought, start a new thread in the Civil Liberties Issues forum, don't do it here.

RussP
06-14-2011, 07:18
Someone answer this.

What is the procedure for granting an early release from jail/prison? Who makes the final determination?

Sam Spade
06-14-2011, 07:42
Someone answer this.

What is the procedure for granting an early release from jail/prison? Who makes the final determination?

In CA, there's that whole SCOTUS ruling. Otherwise, decision is pretty much by DoC formula--this wasn't parole with a board. Our local "hacks" (Hi, Hack!) can give more detail.

And note that beefy at least cracked the code and figured out it was negligence and not murder.

dano1427
06-14-2011, 09:07
In CA, there's that whole SCOTUS ruling. Otherwise, decision is pretty much by DoC formula--this wasn't parole with a board. Our local "hacks" (Hi, Hack!) can give more detail.

And note that beefy at least cracked the code and figured out it was negligence and not murder.

He served half time, with credit for time served and good behavior. He's been paroled to a No. California County, his last place of residence. He'll be on unsupervised parole for one year.

CAcop
06-14-2011, 09:54
In CA, there's that whole SCOTUS ruling. Otherwise, decision is pretty much by DoC formula--this wasn't parole with a board. Our local "hacks" (Hi, Hack!) can give more detail.

And note that beefy at least cracked the code and figured out it was negligence and not murder.

They look at sentence length, offense convicted of, priors, disciplinary history in the can, and time served prior to conviction.

One of our murders took so long to go to trial that when the jury handed out the involuntary manslaughter one of the defendants since he was just the wheelman was released immediately.

Mister_Beefy
06-14-2011, 10:37
Then I would make you vomit pea soup.

Go away little man. When you decide to FACTUALLY review the ENTIRE case, you will see culpability with both parties involved. Or in a math equation, 1+1=2/an unfortunate incident. Then come back and post in a rational manner rather than knee jerk reactionary dribble.


** I originally called you a name. Nothing mean or profane, but probably enough to incur punishment in these hallowed e-halls.

So let me rephrase. I think your point of view on this matter is extremely foolish.

Stay safe out there, and remember if anything bad does happen, you'd have been singing a different tune if ... never mind.

Gear
06-14-2011, 11:31
oh, shut up.

the man died because the cop was negligent. I suppose you think women who are raped should expect it because they have breasts and wear skirts.

yeah, poor helpless cop was a victim of circumstance.

We'd all be singing a different tune if the nitwit could tell the difference between at tazer and a firearm.

moreover, we'd all be singing a different tune if he had become a bus driver or accountant rather than a cop.

you know, we'd all be singing a different tune if the yellowstone caldera had erupted and killed us all the day before this happened.

you make me sick

How about you come in here AND LEAVE YOUR ATTITUDE AT THE DOOR! People like YOU make me sick. This is the LEO section not the come in and whine section. If you don't like what you see then feel free to get out. I surely won't miss you. There are much better ways to go about disagreeing with people and OBVIOUSLY this isn't it. I'm sorry that the John Q Public doesn't understand the brotherhood behind Law Enforcement. Or maybe your just jealous I'm not really sure. Take you BS some where else I'm tired of seeing it in COP talk.

Morris
06-14-2011, 12:14
** I originally called you a name. Nothing mean or profane, but probably enough to incur punishment in these hallowed e-halls.

So let me rephrase. I think your point of view on this matter is extremely foolish.

Stay safe out there, and remember if anything bad does happen, you'd have been singing a different tune if ... never mind.

Sorry. All I heard was some whining. My thought are based on 16+ years of doing cop stuff and cleaning up messes we and the public (far more the public) makes. So, where is your table of experience to draw from when you get queasy over all of this?

I return to my earlier stated position:

When you decide to FACTUALLY review the ENTIRE case, you will see culpability with both parties involved.

This was begun by one man and finished by another. Both bear culpability for the end result.

Sharky7
06-14-2011, 12:30
Beefy is some 18 year old freshmen in college who thinks he knows the world, but has some major insecurities in regards to authority or law enforcement. Once I found out his age, it was all put into perspective. He will grow out of it....maybe. Not worth the frustration....if this was real life we would be turning our backs on him and rolling our eyes.

IndyGunFreak
06-14-2011, 12:50
I'm glad he's out as well, however, he was criminally negligent, he shot a man he meant to taze.
Some people do not belong in this line of work becasue they vaporlock under stress I am sorry that he had to find that out on the job.

I would be on the first Greyhound to Idaho if I were him. If he stays anywhere near the Bay Area his is a marked man.

Agree w/ both of the above.

IndyGunFreak
06-14-2011, 12:53
Someone answer this.

What is the procedure for granting an early release from jail/prison? Who makes the final determination?

It's different in each state... Quite a few states, you go in front of a "board" after a specified amount of your sentence is served, and they decide if you're fit to be released.

In Indiana, the minute you are sentenced, 50% of your sentence is knocked off (you'll serve 10yrs of a 20yr sentence)... If you do not behave yourself in prison, they will start revoking "good time" and moving you closer to that 20yrs.

Indiana seems to be in the minority in doing it this way from what I've saw.. In Indiana though, when you count Mehserle's time served in jail prior to conviction, it sounds like he served about 50% of his sentence.

IGF

DaBigBR
06-14-2011, 13:29
Someone answer this.

What is the procedure for granting an early release from jail/prison? Who makes the final determination?

I'm not in California.

In our state if you go in for something other than a forcible felony, they literally cut your time in half the minute you get there. Not good time, not parole, not anything...DOC just cuts your time in half. Got ten years for first degree theft? You'll be out in five. Get five years for selling drugs? Out in two and a half. Then add on to that credit for time served in county jail pre-trial and pre-sentencing (if applicable) and good time, and you might be surprised how little time you can spend in prison.

A forcible felony is supposed to get you 85% time, minus whatever deductions they can work out.

Mister_Beefy
06-14-2011, 18:02
Beefy is some 18 year old freshmen in college who thinks he knows the world, but has some major insecurities in regards to authority or law enforcement. Once I found out his age, it was all put into perspective. He will grow out of it....maybe. Not worth the frustration....if this was real life we would be turning our backs on him and rolling our eyes.



Your information on my age is inaccurate, though I am in college.

I used to work with a bunch of ultra liberal types and the eye rolling and head shaking is always how our conversations about politics and issues would end. :rofl:


Sorry if I upset anyone. I'll try harder to disagree without being so disagreeable in the future.

Merkavaboy
06-14-2011, 19:09
I'm glad he's out. Poor guy. Sure as hell didn't deserve to be branded a criminal for doing his job... liability falls on the POS that was resisting LE and a failure to train on the part of his agency...

I agree 100%.

The only reason he was convicted is because of Political Correctness and pressure from the black community.

CA Penal Code

195. Homicide is excusable in the following cases:
1. When committed by accident and misfortune, or in doing any other lawful act by lawful means, with usual and ordinary caution, and without any unlawful intent.

He had absolutely no INTENT to kill another person. Therefore:

199. The homicide appearing to be justifiable or excusable, the person indicted must, upon his trial, be fully acquitted and discharged.

lawman800
06-15-2011, 01:24
This was a sham trial done for race pimps and community agitators to appease a violent subgroup, that's all there is.

If it was a black cop who shot a white wangster who would not obey repeated lawful commands, would this sequence of events have played out the same way? I am pretty sure there would be no riots where the neighborhoods were torn up, for starters.

I am not saying Mehserle is totally faultless but it seems like nobody is looking at the party that started the whole ordeal. Oscar Grant was far from a saint and I don't give a crap about talking ill of the dead. He is dead because he wanted to play stupid games and he got a stupid prize. Nothing anyone says changes that fact.

I wish Mehserles the best and may he get on with his life. He'll never be in LE ever again so I hope he has other talents and opportunities to explore them.

ricklee4570
06-15-2011, 02:32
I'm not in California.

In our state if you go in for something other than a forcible felony, they literally cut your time in half the minute you get there. Not good time, not parole, not anything...DOC just cuts your time in half. Got ten years for first degree theft? You'll be out in five. Get five years for selling drugs? Out in two and a half. Then add on to that credit for time served in county jail pre-trial and pre-sentencing (if applicable) and good time, and you might be surprised how little time you can spend in prison.

A forcible felony is supposed to get you 85% time, minus whatever deductions they can work out.

Most people dont realize this. When I worked in the Dept. of Corrections in the 80's we would have what was called a 120 day call back. It was then that a determination would be made to reduce the sentence. A real shame. People with 5 or 6 year sentences would usually walk out of prison after 120 days of time in the prison.

Hard to justify that to the victims of the crime.

lawman800
06-15-2011, 02:47
CA prisons are on the 1/2-time program. You do half the sentence, minus time served while waiting for trial, good behavior, and any other earned time off your sentence.

Heck, some people don't even get to do that and get kicked out within a day or three thanks to the sheer overcrowding.

DFinch
06-15-2011, 06:19
Your information on my age is inaccurate, though I am in college.

I used to work with a bunch of ultra liberal types and the eye rolling and head shaking is always how our conversations about politics and issues would end. :rofl:


Sorry if I upset anyone. I'll try harder to disagree without being so disagreeable in the future.

That would mean some of have been out here dealing with these rapidly evolving, dynamic, high stress and dangerous situations longer than you have been alive.

I thought I knew what I was talking about back then, too.

ICARRY2
06-15-2011, 08:14
oh, shut up.

the man died because the cop was negligent. I suppose you think women who are raped should expect it because they have breasts and wear skirts.

yeah, poor helpless cop was a victim of circumstance.

We'd all be singing a different tune if the nitwit could tell the difference between at tazer and a firearm.

moreover, we'd all be singing a different tune if he had become a bus driver or accountant rather than a cop.

you know, we'd all be singing a different tune if the yellowstone caldera had erupted and killed us all the day before this happened.

you make me sick

You are way too imature to be owning/carrying a gun. Your comment was absolutely way out of line and demonstrates why leos are so cautious with anyone with any type of weapon (ccw or not) and are willing to use whatever force is necessary to arrest people who fight/resist.

You owe Newcop761 a direct and public apology on CT. You need to grow up!

And no, I am not a leo.


I agree 100%.

The only reason he was convicted is because of Political Correctness and pressure from the black community.

CA Penal Code

195. Homicide is excusable in the following cases:
1. When committed by accident and misfortune, or in doing any other lawful act by lawful means, with usual and ordinary caution, and without any unlawful intent.

He had absolutely no INTENT to kill another person. Therefore:

199. The homicide appearing to be justifiable or excusable, the person indicted must, upon his trial, be fully acquitted and discharged.

Again, I'm not a leo or a lawyer. Was this officer negligent? Yes. Was he criminally negligent? Not in my opinion. I never would have convicted this leo for accidentally shooting this pos in the back. And based upon the above law it sounds like he should have never been convicted.

Any leo's here think he has a good chance of appealing his conviction and getting it overturned? What about an expungement in a few years?

Sam Spade
06-15-2011, 08:33
The questions that no one wants to touch, and the real root of the tragedy:

What degree of culpability goes to BART for inadequate training and equipment? How much of the same issue is present in the rest of the agency, or in other agencies following the same practices?

For the professionals here: when do we as cops assume the liability for our agency's failures? Do we each need to be experts independently of what the Dept. teaches us, or can we rely on what comes from them? In what areas does this matter---firearms, less-lethal, driving, use of force, emergency medicine, ConLaw?

Sgt127
06-15-2011, 08:51
In my humble opinion, the biggest mistake Taser made was designing the Taser to look or feel like a handgun. If should be a radically different shape and, actuated by the thumb or middle finger. Something. You can't "feel" the color difference between a black Glock and a yellow Taser.

The Taser should feel like brick or a loaf of bread in your hand rather than a handgun. Its a different tool for a different job.

I think the sword cuts both ways, I think in deadly force situations, holding a Taser makes an Officer feels like he's holding a deadly force weapon that will actually "stop" a deadly force threat, hence, Officers chasing potentially armed suspects with a Taser in hand rather than a handgun.

FiremanMike
06-15-2011, 08:52
The questions that no one wants to touch, and the real root of the tragedy:

What degree of culpability goes to BART for inadequate training and equipment? How much of the same issue is present in the rest of the agency, or in other agencies following the same practices?

For the professionals here: when do we as cops assume the liability for our agency's failures? Do we each need to be experts independently of what the Dept. teaches us, or can we rely on what comes from them? In what areas does this matter---firearms, less-lethal, driving, use of force, emergency medicine, ConLaw?

<sigh> I'm going to get flamed for this, but you are blatantly asking for opinions, so here goes.

I find this situation somewhat similar to the McDonalds hot coffee lawsuit. It is absolutely absurd to think that people shouldn't be expected to realize their coffee is hot. Somehow, someone managed to say "I didn't realize it was THAT hot, McDonalds should have told me, it's their fault".

Similarly, you have an officer who reportedly thought he had his taser when he pulled the trigger on his gun. I personally find it absurd to hold the department totally responsible for this incident. Can you just picture the future training sessions during the academy, spending hours holding a taser, then holding a gun, drawing a taser, drawing a gun, with the simple objective of gaining muscle memory of the tactile difference between the two?

I mean ffs, we've all been in high stress situations, and everything about a gun is different from a taser, with the exception of the fact that both have a trigger. The holsters are different (granted, there are some exceptions, blackhawk comes to mind) the operation is different, the trigger feels different (both in trigger pull as well as tactile differences), the draw angle is different, it's just totally different.

It was said above, and IMHO it should have been /thread. If you are an officer that goes so far into vapor lock over a resisting that you miss every single difference in the draw/fire sequence of a gun vs a taser, then you likely had little business in this job to begin with. There is a certain amount of critical thinking skill that must come from the officer and that the department must be able to assume their employees have.

Sure, the suspect is culpable in this case as well for starting his drama, but the officer is equally culpable for irresponsible behavior during this incident.

Sam Spade
06-15-2011, 08:59
Don't get me wrong: I think the manslaughter conviction was appropriate.

But as a trainer, I look beyond what he did (2-year rookie with a brand new taser, IIRC) and into why he did it. I see agency and training issues, especially since this isn't the first time that someone got shot instead of being tased.

And then as a professional, not a tradesman, I look to see where we might have personal responsibilities beyond what the company does with us.

Mayhem like Me
06-15-2011, 09:16
He was probably trained to minimum standards,,,in his case it was not enough OR he is incapable of applying Hicks law when stressed, and that was not a really bad situation as far as they go, there is a huge difference in how a Taser Feels and is activated than any handgun...

He did not flip a switch and see a laser that is one thing for sure...was it lack of training, or lack of common sense?

JASV.17
06-15-2011, 10:00
I'm sorry that the John Q Public doesn't understand the brotherhood behind Law Enforcement. Or maybe your just jealous I'm not really sure.

Not really sure what this has to do with the situation.

Anyways....

It was an accident. Someone lost their life to it, and it is very tragic.

Grant was not a saint, but he in no way deserved to die. Comments along the lines of, "he brought it on himself" are very unsettling. This should have never happened.

FiremanMike's post echos what I was feel. As do swatbana's.

I think lack of training was the least to do with any of this. If you can't tell the difference between a tazer and a pistol, you're just lacking mentally. Some might not consider it a high-stress situation. I'm not a LEO, but I'd have been very highly stressed. If not from the suspects, from the rowdy group on the train. Even so, it's no excuse. If you can't operate under those conditions, you're wrong for the job. It's a terrible shame it took this incident to weed Meherle out.

Back to Mehserle. He served his time, I'm satisfied with that. I also believe that even though he acted an idiot, that it was indeed a horrible mistake and I think it will haunt him the rest of the life. To some degree, I think deservingly so. I hope he is able to come to terms with his actions, that he never forgets that he ended a life, but that he also allows for self-forgiveness. I also hope for him and his family, that they can pick-up their lives and move on. I hold no ill thoughts towards him.

DaBigBR
06-15-2011, 10:46
For the professionals here: when do we as cops assume the liability for our agency's failures? Do we each need to be experts independently of what the Dept. teaches us, or can we rely on what comes from them? In what areas does this matter---firearms, less-lethal, driving, use of force, emergency medicine, ConLaw?

I think, as I suspect you do as well, Sam, that while the department has a responsibility to train, the officer has a responsiblity to learn. I recognize that the police academy, field training, and mandatory inservice training do not meet the standards that the public expects of us. It ultimately falls back on to the individual officer to learn what they need to know. Be that reading as much case law on their own time, going to optional trainings (potentially at their own expense), or practicing with their weapons on their own time and own dime.

In most departments I think that it is incredibly foolish to believe that you are getting all of the training time you need and even more foolish to recognize the fact and stick your head in the sand and deal with it because you're not getting paid to train on your own. Does the department maintain some level of culpability? Absolutely, but as a professional law enforcement officer it is ultimately my responsibility to be competent.

In my humble opinion, the biggest mistake Taser made was designing the Taser to look or feel like a handgun. If should be a radically different shape and, actuated by the thumb or middle finger. Something. You can't "feel" the color difference between a black Glock and a yellow Taser.

The Taser should feel like brick or a loaf of bread in your hand rather than a handgun. Its a different tool for a different job.

I think the sword cuts both ways, I think in deadly force situations, holding a Taser makes an Officer feels like he's holding a deadly force weapon that will actually "stop" a deadly force threat, hence, Officers chasing potentially armed suspects with a Taser in hand rather than a handgun.

That's a tough one that's been brought up before. Some of the old Air Tasers and other electric shock devices were not shaped like a gun, and some of the Taser branded civilian models are no longer gun shaped. The issue that I think presents itself is that, to a certain point, there is a training benefit in having a similar manual of arms between a handgun and the Taser. It cuts down on a lot of the time involved in learning to aim and shoot the thing.

I'm not saying that the idea of a non-gun shaped device is without merit, but the design is conducive to quick, precise deployment and better weapon retention than something designed like a television remote or a flashlight.

Some interesting things brought up during Mehserle's trial and in some subsequent research:

Mehserle was religious about practicing drawing his pistol from its holster. He did it quite a bit and was good at it. It was presented that he had created a mental "program" to draw the pistol. This is all well and good, but he did not practice drawing the Taser regularly. When the stress level picked up, he accessed the "program" and executed it (by the numbers). This testimony was likely important in proving that he did not possess mens rea, since the video evidence, taken alone, shows him rapidly and decisively drawing and firing. It looks intentional with no background information.

FSRC played at least some role in the defense and has since put out information suggesting a couple of things:

1) Eliminate strong hand draw. Make your guys carry the Taser in a way that they have to draw with the support hand.

2) PRACTICE the draw with the Taser. Practice it a lot. Make drawing it part of ongoing training and encourage officers to train in drawing it on their own time.

They have also previously encouraged agencies to buy devices that are not colored like firearms to both help identify to others that the device being held is not a firearm but also to provide a visual cue to the operator of the device.

One last thought:

If I remember my training materials (I'm a Taser Instructor) correctly, there are three or four other instances of device confusion listed - one where a guy was shot out of a tree (why were they tasing a guy in a tree???), one where somebody was shot while handcuffed in the back of a car, and a couple others. Let's say that there have been ten cases where somebody was unintentionally shot when the officer intended to tase them. There have been tens of thousands of field deployments since the M26 (the first "gun" form factor device from Taser International) was released in 1999. To the best of my knowledge, most of the ones in the Taser material were actually M26 incidents (when the devices were relatively new).

In that same time, how many officers have Tasered a suspect who they should have shot? Certainly more than ten.

Morris
06-15-2011, 11:37
^^^ Excellent post.

Sharky7
06-15-2011, 11:47
They have also previously encouraged agencies to buy devices that are not colored like firearms to both help identify to others that the device being held is not a firearm but also to provide a visual cue to the operator of the device.



On the same line of thought, I've always thought Taser should use a different color laser - Use a green/blue/etc laser. Some officers use a red laser already for their firearms. A blue/green laser would be more obvious for officers on scene to identify the Taser is in use.

Dukeboy01
06-15-2011, 12:38
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the TASER in this incident being worn on the same side of the belt as the sidearm, right in front of it, instead of in a cross- draw position which is what TASER recommends?

ray9898
06-15-2011, 12:48
Lots of people question 'he didn't see a laser' or 'he didn't flip the safety'. In my training and experience I would say that is not really a factor and should be expected. In a stressful incident you react on muscle memory as you mind is concentrating on the situation at hand.

Ask anyone involved in a sudden gunfight if they remember the small things. Most will not recall sound of gunfire, the number of rounds fired, or the small details of drawing, aiming or firing. It was all instict as they were focused on the threat in front of them.

Mayhem like Me
06-15-2011, 12:51
It was not that stressfull, really this guy messed up.

ray9898
06-15-2011, 13:05
It was not that stressfull, really this guy messed up.



Oh....I agree with that however even in that situation I do not think he would be methodically thinking over his actions step by step. He simply used a gun instead of a Taser. As I said earlier, it could be attributed to personal failure, training failure or a combo of each.

tslex
06-15-2011, 13:07
In my humble opinion, the biggest mistake Taser made was designing the Taser to look or feel like a handgun. If should be a radically different shape and, actuated by the thumb or middle finger. Something. You can't "feel" the color difference between a black Glock and a yellow Taser.

The Taser should feel like brick or a loaf of bread in your hand rather than a handgun. Its a different tool for a different job.

I think the sword cuts both ways, I think in deadly force situations, holding a Taser makes an Officer feels like he's holding a deadly force weapon that will actually "stop" a deadly force threat, hence, Officers chasing potentially armed suspects with a Taser in hand rather than a handgun.

This.

I have said this over and over, including when similar issues have arisen hereabouts.

How about something shaped like this: http://www.kimberamerica.com/pepperblaster

Agree this was partly a training issue -- but a different design approach would make a difference in both of the ways Sgt127 suggests.

, there is a huge difference in how a Taser Feels and is activated than any handgun...


True Swatbwana. But these incidents are common enough that a change in design wold be useful it seems. Think of those incidents where you have seen a LEO "drawing down" with a taser without backup from someone with lethal force in hand. The idea of a different design that doesn't signal "gun" on any level to the user seems worthwhile to me.

A substitute for training, or for the necessary character to perform? Nope. But useful.

redneck1861
06-15-2011, 13:10
In my humble opinion, the biggest mistake Taser made was designing the Taser to look or feel like a handgun. If should be a radically different shape and, actuated by the thumb or middle finger. Something. You can't "feel" the color difference between a black Glock and a yellow Taser.

The Taser should feel like brick or a loaf of bread in your hand rather than a handgun. Its a different tool for a different job.

I think the sword cuts both ways, I think in deadly force situations, holding a Taser makes an Officer feels like he's holding a deadly force weapon that will actually "stop" a deadly force threat, hence, Officers chasing potentially armed suspects with a Taser in hand rather than a handgun.


This is what I was thinking about, do we know what kind of taser the officer was issued? A few years ago I was training some security guards at a small town casino, they carried tasers, well I dont know if it actually a taser brand. These look very similar to a pistol, they carried them on the hip, oposite of their gun. I asked why they carried 2 firearms because it honestly looked like a gun, so much as if one was pointed in my direction I would shoot.

I am not saying that it is an excuse for this, but if he had one of these, I can see it as being an honest mistake. But none of us were there, so we dont know exactly what the officer was going through.

wjv
06-15-2011, 14:05
Has anybody addressed the issue that perhaps a Tazer should NOT have the same physical shape / design as a handgun? Most of the civilian Tazers I've seen look more like the Phasers from the TV show StarTrek Next Gen. .

on edit: reading the rest of the thread, I see many other have the same thought. .

My second question is how do you guys manage to even get out of the car carrying all that stuff: Gun, spare mags, radio, flashlight, backup gun, tazer, cellphone, wireless mike to the dash can, pepper spray, cuffs, baton, notebook, heavy leather belt. . . .

DaBigBR
06-15-2011, 14:11
My second question is how do you guys manage to even get out of the car carrying all that stuff: Gun, spare mags, radio, flashlight, backup gun, tazer, cellphone, wireless mike to the dash can, pepper spray, cuffs, baton, notebook, heavy leather belt. . . .

It's heavy and awkward, but you get used to it. It's no wonder we have a high instance of back and knee issues related to twisting...the motion it takes to extricate yourself from the car. I would LOVE a truck or SUV that I had to step DOWN to get out of.

wjv
06-15-2011, 14:13
On the same line of thought, I've always thought Taser should use a different color laser - Use a green/blue/etc laser. Some officers use a red laser already for their firearms. A blue/green laser would be more obvious for officers on scene to identify the Taser is in use.

Do some department not allow laser sighting devices at all? I ask this because of the following: (Note: No copyright issue: Public agency news release)

From the Los Angeles Police Department

In order to encourage officers to carry back-up and off-duty firearms, as well as to take advantage of the technological advances in firearm and ammunition construction, the Department has authorized the following .380 caliber pistols and ammunition:

Ruger LCP, caliber .380
Smith and Wesson Bodyguard, caliber .380

The Smith and Wesson pistols are equipped at the factory with a laser aiming module. This laser module must be disabled by the Department Armorer, prior to the pistol’s deployment. The Armorer will disable the laser module by removing the batteries; there will be no permanent modification to the pistol. Once these procedures are met, officers will be certified to carry the .380 pistol for back-up and off-duty use.

Sharky7
06-15-2011, 15:08
Do some department not allow laser sighting devices at all? I ask this because of the following: (Note: No copyright issue: Public agency news release)



My agency does not allow lasers on firearms, but some surrounding suburbs around us do. I remember one fight call with a knife inside of a smokey ghetto-ass bar with the red lasers of a few guys guns beaming around the room through the smoke.

Morris
06-15-2011, 17:02
My second question is how do you guys manage to even get out of the car carrying all that stuff: Gun, spare mags, radio, flashlight, backup gun, tazer, cellphone, wireless mike to the dash can, pepper spray, cuffs, baton, notebook, heavy leather belt. . . .

Belt with equipment, vest, TASER, VPOK - added together means about 20 pounds of extra gear when all together on the jumpsuit. I've dropped an inch in height and the doc attributes it to simply wearing the gear. He sees lots of cops with shortened statures over the years of work, even with exercise programs and the like.

I find I have to pivot a bit to swing out from the Vic's doors. Especially if I don't want to knock my knee on the underside of the laptop mount.

DFinch
06-15-2011, 21:39
Do some department not allow laser sighting devices at all? I ask this because of the following: (Note: No copyright issue: Public agency news release)

From the Los Angeles Police Department

In order to encourage officers to carry back-up and off-duty firearms, as well as to take advantage of the technological advances in firearm and ammunition construction, the Department has authorized the following .380 caliber pistols and ammunition:

Ruger LCP, caliber .380
Smith and Wesson Bodyguard, caliber .380

The Smith and Wesson pistols are equipped at the factory with a laser aiming module. This laser module must be disabled by the Department Armorer, prior to the pistolís deployment. The Armorer will disable the laser module by removing the batteries; there will be no permanent modification to the pistol. Once these procedures are met, officers will be certified to carry the .380 pistol for back-up and off-duty use.

My agency does not allow laser sights. I'm not aware of any local agency that does.

Morris
06-16-2011, 00:00
We do. Actually issued the Lasermax for awhile.

lawman800
06-16-2011, 00:58
We are allowed the M6 light/laser or just the M3 light for those who don't want the laser.

Dukeboy01
06-16-2011, 06:39
We can't have lasers or lights on our sidearms. I think the admin types worry that it encourages laziness or something...

lawman800
06-16-2011, 11:13
Nothing stops people like a red dot on their forehead. A gun pointed in their direction doesn't have the same effect.

MeefZah
06-16-2011, 13:47
Nothing stops people like a red dot on their forehead. A gun pointed in their direction doesn't have the same effect.

Technically a red splash from their forehead stops 'em faster.

redneck1861
06-16-2011, 14:24
Technically a red splash from their forehead stops 'em faster.

I have to agree with you.

eracer
06-16-2011, 15:04
I think that if the X26 had been painted bright yellow all over, the officer would have had a better chance of recognizing that he had his gun in his hand in the moment of stress that contributed to this incident.

"I don't remember how many shots I fired,"

Seems to me that if this is a common stress-reaction outcome, then it might be difficult to distinguish subtle cues that differentiate a black taser from a black firearm.

Or is there some tactical need for the taser to be painted black?

Mayhem like Me
06-16-2011, 17:47
Nope and they don't need to be shaped like a gun either...

lawman800
06-16-2011, 19:58
Technically a red splash from their forehead stops 'em faster.

Okay, short of firing a shot, the red dot on the foreheads work great. Better? You picky Ohioan bastage!!!

Dubble-Tapper
06-18-2011, 13:53
Technically a red splash from their forehead stops 'em faster.

very funny joke there, officer.... really appropriate in a thread where you are defending a LEO for a very very negligent shooting...

im surprised that LEO's are saying "if it were a black cop shooting a white kid he wouldnt have gotten prosecuted" thats stupid. regardless what race any of the parties involved were, the outcome would have been the same. the family of the victim would be outraged, even if they were white, believe it or not. :upeyes:

the cop had his taser drawn at one point, (remember, the victim took a picture of the officer pointing it at him?) reholstered it, and later drew his firearm. you mean to tell me he was so poorly trained, he did not notice the difference in
a.) appearance
b.) weight
c.) grip feel
d.) trigger feel
e.) sight acquisition

the situation was NOT life threatening and not very stressful. there were several officers at the scene, and the active threats were complying. Grant was resisting, but was not combative. he was no danger to officers. he had a knee to the back of his neck and the officers had control of him. he did not need to be tasered to begin with.

of course im not saying he did it on purpose, but what im saying is that what he did was so very negligent that its scary that there are people like this trusted with protecting and serving with firearms. I can tell you with near 100 percent certainty, i could differentiate a SIG P226 from a Taser, blindfolded, stressed or not.

i guess it just irritated me to hear all of the "poor officer dip****" posts. He screwed up royally. i dont feel bad for that officer at all. to me, a firearm accident resulting in death of an innocent is criminally negligent, no matter what the situation. he simply should have been better trained.

the victim wasnt a saint, and he probably could have avoided the situation with a better attitude, but on that particular night, he didnt deserve what he got.

lawman800
06-18-2011, 14:09
im surprised that LEO's are saying "if it were a black cop shooting a white kid he wouldnt have gotten prosecuted" thats stupid. regardless what race any of the parties involved were, the outcome would have been the same. the family of the victim would be outraged, even if they were white, believe it or not.

So, you are telling me that if a black officer shot a white wangster that the politicians would be calling for an immediate termination and that the outraged masses would be rioting in the neighborhood and Al Sharpton would fly in to stir up the crowd due to institutionalized racism?

Yeah, I hear about that all the time.:upeyes:

Dubble-Tapper
06-18-2011, 14:29
So, you are telling me that if a black officer shot a white wangster that the politicians would be calling for an immediate termination and that the outraged masses would be rioting in the neighborhood and Al Sharpton would fly in to stir up the crowd due to institutionalized racism?

Yeah, I hear about that all the time.:upeyes:


i dont see why race is an issue at all. that doesnt change what the officer did at all. are you saying the situation was blown out of proportion because the victim was black? that the officer received harsher treatment because he killed a black man?

that is a very ignorant statement

JohnnyReb
06-18-2011, 15:16
i dont see why race is an issue at all.

You need to get out more.

lawman800
06-18-2011, 16:32
i dont see why race is an issue at all. that doesnt change what the officer did at all. are you saying the situation was blown out of proportion because the victim was black? that the officer received harsher treatment because he killed a black man?

that is a very ignorant statement

Ignorant? If you say so, but not facing reality is more ignorant because you are doing it willfully in the face of the truth. Eric Holder is right about one thing and that is we are a nation of cowards when it comes to race issues. However, that is a function of us being browbeat by all the race pimps out there into having race guilt over everything. They live on it, they thrive on it, they need it to keep themselves relevant.

Granted, what happened is what happened and it doesn't change anything based on the race of all involved parties, but the aftermath is surely based on race. If anyone says otherwise, they are either willingly oblivious to the truth or they have another secret agenda to promote.

You cannot realistically say by any stretch of the imagination that the press gives the same coverage or community groups express the same outrage when the same crimes happens based on the race of the parties.

Black versus Hispanic crime gets little coverage and race doesn't play into it even though we street cops know a lot of the time, it is an openly declared black versus brown war. Same as black or Hispanic on white crime. The white victims never get to claim hate crime protection. Why? Are hate crime laws only applicable when the victim is not white? What happened to equal protection under the law?

Or, going back to more basic things... forget crime. Why is pride in everything but white a good thing? Why does white pride automatically conjure up outrage? Why can't you have a white scholarship foundation like any other race? In any argument, call somebody a racist and automatically, you get 90% of the people out there cowering in fear and giving up for fear of being labeled a racist.

Morgan Freeman said it best when he was interviewed regarding Black History Month by some prominent news guy, forgot his name, but he is Jewish, I think it's Bill Wallace, not sure. Morgan said why is it a month? There is so much more to Black History. Does the reporter want a Jewish history month? The reporter said no. Morgain then said he would like it if they just refer to each other as Morgan Freeman, a man, and Bill Wallace, a man. Not a black man or a white man or any race man. Just one man to another man.

The reporter then asked how do you get past race as an issue then. Morgan Freeman said stop talking about it. Let it die as a national issue. Don't always color it as such and it will become irrelevant.

So, why, in 2011, are we still harping on race? Because it matters. Because people won't let it go, because people hide behind it, because there is big money in Race Bait Incorporated. Because those in power cave to it and give in to the people who use race as a trump card. That gives these bottom feeders power over others. That's why.

Sharky7
06-18-2011, 19:54
very funny joke there, officer.... really appropriate in a thread where you are defending a LEO for a very very negligent shooting...

im surprised that LEO's are saying "if it were a black cop shooting a white kid he wouldnt have gotten prosecuted" thats stupid. regardless what race any of the parties involved were, the outcome would have been the same. the family of the victim would be outraged, even if they were white, believe it or not. :upeyes:

the cop had his taser drawn at one point, (remember, the victim took a picture of the officer pointing it at him?) reholstered it, and later drew his firearm. you mean to tell me he was so poorly trained, he did not notice the difference in
a.) appearance
b.) weight
c.) grip feel
d.) trigger feel
e.) sight acquisition

the situation was NOT life threatening and not very stressful. there were several officers at the scene, and the active threats were complying. Grant was resisting, but was not combative. he was no danger to officers. he had a knee to the back of his neck and the officers had control of him. he did not need to be tasered to begin with.

of course im not saying he did it on purpose, but what im saying is that what he did was so very negligent that its scary that there are people like this trusted with protecting and serving with firearms. I can tell you with near 100 percent certainty, i could differentiate a SIG P226 from a Taser, blindfolded, stressed or not.

i guess it just irritated me to hear all of the "poor officer dip****" posts. He screwed up royally. i dont feel bad for that officer at all. to me, a firearm accident resulting in death of an innocent is criminally negligent, no matter what the situation. he simply should have been better trained.

the victim wasnt a saint, and he probably could have avoided the situation with a better attitude, but on that particular night, he didnt deserve what he got.

-His joke had nothing to do with the BART shooting, lighten up francis.

-In a perfect non politically motivated world - race would not play a factor. We don't live in that world unfortunately. Most of us here in Coptalk would love to have a fair non politically motivated world filled with integrity...we are working at it one arrest at a time.

-It is very obvious he confused the taser for the handgun. The fact he had his taser out previously adds credibility to that. He simply drew the wrong weapon and discharged it. No, it shouldn't have happened. Refer back to perfect world. Humans make mistakes.

-YOU can not say the situation was not stressful. I've had trainee's who did not cut it and had one who was scared by a 5'2'' 115 lb woman yelling in his face. This officer had a very large crowd in the background that could turn south really quick, had a previous call the same night of shots fired, and someone resisting arrest. I am willing to bet the majority of the glocktalkers who talk a big game would dookie their pants when really confronted with even a small fist fight. We constantly see threads where GTers will encourage deadly force when a push or a single punch is thrown.

-"Grant was resisting, but was not combative. he was no danger to officers" This statement shows a gross lack of experience and knowledge.

It is what it is. A mistake. There's nothing anyone can do to bring him back....there was plenty that a few people could have done to prevent this.

What about car accidents? You hit the gas instead of the brake and take out a pedestrian....should you go to jail? It's the gas, man! It's the thin little pedal on the right! There is no way you can mistake it for the fat pedal on the left. It's a different shape, it's on a different side, they have different functions.

Yet....regular people do it all the time. Mistakes. Humans.

MeefZah
06-18-2011, 20:07
very funny joke there, officer.... really appropriate in a thread where you are defending a LEO for a very very negligent shooting...

:upeyes:

Piss off, mook.

mikegun
06-19-2011, 14:13
I said it in the original thread and I'll say it again: His second mistake was resigning. If he'd made the agency move against him instead of quitting, he'd have had a lot stronger argument during trial that his actions were the result of a training failure. That was the most important lesson I learned and I suggest we all take it to heart. Never resign. Make them fire you and defend their decision. Accidently killing a guy in the line of duty is tragic. Going to prison for it is more so. Glad he's out.

you are so right, i know of 2 other calif cases where coppers shot bgs thinking they were tasing them, they never missed a day of work and are still on the job, but both of these areas were not racially sensetive areas.....this poor guy worked for the wrong dept in the wrong town..simple as that,,,,,,funny how a few miles can make such a differance in the was we police out country.. also very sad....i wish this guy the very best...he simply made a mistake...and got somevery poor advice...if only he had not quit....but sadly , he did..