Search found 2 matches

by K.Mooneyham
Sun May 17, 2020 1:18 am
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: Oklahoma lieutenant indicted for stopping active shooter
Replies: 33
Views: 2942

Re: Oklahoma lieutenant indicted for stopping active shooter

baseballguy2001 wrote:
Sat May 16, 2020 11:33 pm
Watch the video. After firing multiple rounds at a fleeing suspect, quite possibly endangering others, that LT. and his men catch up to the wounded, if not already expired, suspect in her small truck. He tells his men, at the side of the road, not to talk about this shooting, even amongst themselves for several "sleep cycles". That. to me, sounds dangerously like a conspiracy charge is warranted, as well as maybe obstruction. The LT. specifically cites the Oklahoma investigative authority, not to talk to them. If it were me, I would indict him and have a jury decide if his actions, including the shooting, were illegal.
Multiple times I have read that talking to the police immediately after a self-defense shooting is a VERY bad idea; in fact, I have been told that in a seminar on the use of force/deadly force. A person's adrenaline is up, then way down, their thoughts are incoherent, and they may have other short-term psychological effects from the event. So, you tell me, why would it be any different for those officers not to talk to OSBI without getting some sleep first, and collecting themselves a bit? I think he gave his officers good advice.
by K.Mooneyham
Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:32 pm
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: Oklahoma lieutenant indicted for stopping active shooter
Replies: 33
Views: 2942

Re: Oklahoma lieutenant indicted for stopping active shooter

LDP wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:10 pm
baseballguy2001 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:06 pm
If you took the time to read the story, "a state grand jury determined that Lt. Mitchell engaged in “imminently dangerous conduct” without excusable or justifiable cause by firing approximately 60 rounds during the gun battle". Even if the officer fired only 30 rounds at the suspect when (she?) was cornered, that's a ton of lead flying around. He's not being indicted for stopping an active shooter, he's being indicted, correctly if you ask me, for basically continuing to shoot after the threat had been stopped and endangering fellow officers and the community.
Understood.
But I don't get why they slapped him with "2nd degree murder" then instead of something like "reckless endangerment". That's what puzzles me.
Is this just some silly vindication to begin with?

From reading the (limited) story, it seems like they kept shooting until they stopped the truck/threat. It took 60 rounds. Okay. It could have taken 59 or 61, it is hard to tell. But they stopped the threat and ceased fire. Unless there is more evidence that is not published in the story.
Got a link to a more detailed story?
Yes, the charge would seem to indicate that this is about the officer killing the fleeing suspect versus how many rounds he fired to do so. So the charge would seem to indicate that an officer would not be allowed to kill a fleeing suspect despite the fleeing suspect having used deadly force against several other people. I believe that DA has overcharged and I hope the officer will win the case. As you stated, if they had a problem with him shooting too much, then they could have found a charge more appropriate to that.

Return to “Oklahoma lieutenant indicted for stopping active shooter”