Another instance of wrong house.

[Taypo]

Yeah, I gotcha. It's all good, man.

I have what someone (with a lot of letters after their name) once called "situation specific morals" during a psych eval for a security clearance renewal.

It's all about the gray area.

[JALLEN]

The officers



"The homeowner, Chris McKinley, was shot in the thigh. His pet boxer was shot dead after DeKalb County police officers responded to his brick and tan one story home."

The homeowner

[Taypo]

The officers



"The homeowner, Chris McKinley, was shot in the thigh. His pet boxer was shot dead after DeKalb County police officers responded to his brick and tan one story home."

The homeowner

I'll admit..I did NOT see that coming.

[SewTexas]

yeh, even in ATL I did not expect that one.

[Texsquatch]

So this means no riots? No protests? Shame.

[Javier730]

So this means no riots? No protests? Shame.

No riots this time. Change certain things about this story and the national guard would be needed.

They should all be fired and should pay the man a large sum of money and it should come out of their pockets.

[Taypo]

So this means no riots? No protests? Shame.

No riots this time. Change certain things about this story and the national guard would be needed.

They should all be fired and should pay the man a large sum of money and it should come out of their pockets.

In the alternate world, there's a screaming mob of #whitelivesmatter toolbags outside the station, screaming for charges to be filed and the officer's heads on a pike. DoJ lawyers are digging through their lives with a microscope, TV talking heads are condemning them to death and the wounded civilian is put in front of cameras to plead for change.

In this world, we get...crickets.

[cb1000rider]

The article I read said the door was unlocked, not open. If that is justification for shooting a homeowner, I'm past due to be shot. Our back door is always unlocked until we go to bed. .

I could have sworn I read open, which would be suspicious... If it was just unlocked, then it gets a bit more sketchy...

I wouldn't want to be those officers investigating an active burglary with a vague home description at night and opening people's back doors... Why can't you just wait the burglars out in a case like that?

[mojo84]

From the article I linked in the first post.

The G.B.I. said police went through a "reportedly unlocked door".

[C-dub]

Locked or not, since it was closed, doesn't that mean that they were breaking and entering? I do not think these officers were malicious in their actions, but do think that they might have been negligent or reckless at the worst. Not all people, LEOs included, think about the behavior of a dog under these types of conditions. This entire situation will, hopefully, lead to a policy review and some major changes for situations like this. We can also be fairly sure there will be quite a payday for the homeowner.

Tan, not gray. Okay, maybe a little difficult to discern at night, but still. Terribly bad information or lack of from the call they got.

[EEllis]

The article I read said the door was unlocked, not open. If that is justification for shooting a homeowner, I'm past due to be shot. Our back door is always unlocked until we go to bed. .

I could have sworn I read open, which would be suspicious... If it was just unlocked, then it gets a bit more sketchy...

I wouldn't want to be those officers investigating an active burglary with a vague home description at night and opening people's back doors... Why can't you just wait the burglars out in a case like that?

I see that as training. Is it or is it not how they were trained. Looking at a single event it's easy to play the 20/20 hindsight game but what if someone just broke in? I know others have said just wait for the guy to come out. But how were they trained, what if there were homeowners and the guy breaking in was armed or broke in for reasons other then theft? How long do cops wait? When would the cops start being so concerned about making a possible mistake that everything takes so long and they must comply with some insane standard which leaves their job impossible to do? Do you really hold cops responsible if they act 100% according to training? The training that the State, who would be the one to hold them responsible, gave them? It isn't a simple issue and legally police actions are, and should be, based of of what was reasonable for a police officer in that situation. Not what we think a police officer should do but what a normal cop with the same training would do. And we really don't have enough info to make any real accurate determinations.

[EEllis]

Locked or not, since it was closed, doesn't that mean that they were breaking and entering? I do not think these officers were malicious in their actions, but do think that they might have been negligent or reckless at the worst. Not all people, LEOs included, think about the behavior of a dog under these types of conditions. This entire situation will, hopefully, lead to a policy review and some major changes for situations like this. We can also be fairly sure there will be quite a payday for the homeowner.

Tan, not gray. Okay, maybe a little difficult to discern at night, but still. Terribly bad information or lack of from the call they got.

Nope. There normally isn't a real Breaking and Entering charge in most jurisdictions but an equivalent charge would be burglary. A key component of either charge is intent. If you can't show intention to commit a crime you wouldn't be able to meet the requirements for that crime. It's horrible about the whole situation and the dog may be worst part.

[talltex]

I see that as training. Is it or is it not how they were trained. Looking at a single event it's easy to play the 20/20 hindsight game but what if someone just broke in? I know others have said just wait for the guy to come out. But how were they trained, what if there were homeowners and the guy breaking in was armed or broke in for reasons other then theft? How long do cops wait? When would the cops start being so concerned about making a possible mistake that everything takes so long and they must comply with some insane standard which leaves their job impossible to do? Do you really hold cops responsible if they act 100% according to training? The training that the State, who would be the one to hold them responsible, gave them? It isn't a simple issue and legally police actions are, and should be, based of of what was reasonable for a police officer in that situation. Not what we think a police officer should do but what a normal cop with the same training would do. And we really don't have enough info to make any real accurate determinations.

addressing your points in order: 1. there were homeowners. 2.the guys breaking in were armed. 3.they did break in for reasons other than theft. 4.making sure you are at the correct address before you enter with guns drawn is NOT an insane standard, it's a bare minimum. 5.Yes they ARE responsible regardless of training if they if they go into someones home and shoot them...by mistake.

HOW they were trained isn't the issue. They screwed up..BADLY. Training didn't make them go to the wrong house to begin with...sloppy, careless procedures did. Just like it did in the Jerry Waller case last year in Ft. Worth, where two officers responded to a burglar alarm call and went to the house across the street from the correct address and and shot and killed Mr. Waller in his own garage. That is a monumental screw up. If anyone else shot or killed someone because they made a stupid mistake they would be charged and locked up. We've got to stop trying to defend these types of screw ups. When these three officers showed up at the wrong address, everything that happened from that point was their fault. They entered the wrong house. They shot and killed a dog that had every right to be in that house. They tried to kill an innocent homeowner (and luckily only wounded him). One officer shot another officer and seriously wounded him. That is just about as wrong as it can get, regardless of their training.

[mojo84]

Also, shooting and killing the dog is not worse than shooting an innocent homeowner and fellow cop. Humans>animals

Just because something can be explained doesn't mean it's justifiable and acceptable. This situation can't be explained into being acceptable.

[EEllis]

I see that as training. Is it or is it not how they were trained. Looking at a single event it's easy to play the 20/20 hindsight game but what if someone just broke in? I know others have said just wait for the guy to come out. But how were they trained, what if there were homeowners and the guy breaking in was armed or broke in for reasons other then theft? How long do cops wait? When would the cops start being so concerned about making a possible mistake that everything takes so long and they must comply with some insane standard which leaves their job impossible to do? Do you really hold cops responsible if they act 100% according to training? The training that the State, who would be the one to hold them responsible, gave them? It isn't a simple issue and legally police actions are, and should be, based of of what was reasonable for a police officer in that situation. Not what we think a police officer should do but what a normal cop with the same training would do. And we really don't have enough info to make any real accurate determinations.

addressing your points in order: 1. there were homeowners. 2.the guys breaking in were armed. 3.they did break in for reasons other than theft. 4.making sure you are at the correct address before you enter with guns drawn is NOT an insane standard, it's a bare minimum. 5.Yes they ARE responsible regardless of training if they if they go into someones home and shoot them...by mistake.

HOW they were trained isn't the issue. They screwed up..BADLY. Training didn't make them go to the wrong house to begin with...sloppy, careless procedures did. Just like it did in the Jerry Waller case last year in Ft. Worth, where two officers responded to a burglar alarm call and went to the house across the street from the correct address and and shot and killed Mr. Waller in his own garage. That is a monumental screw up. If anyone else shot or killed someone because they made a stupid mistake they would be charged and locked up. We've got to stop trying to defend these types of screw ups. When these three officers showed up at the wrong address, everything that happened from that point was their fault. They entered the wrong house. They shot and killed a dog that had every right to be in that house. They tried to kill an innocent homeowner (and luckily only wounded him). One officer shot another officer and seriously wounded him. That is just about as wrong as it can get, regardless of their training.

This was not a wrong address call. These were officers responding to a call that were given limited info and seemingly were trying to do their job. They did not show up at the wrong address, they came to the area given and investigated a house that met the description they were given. There doesn't seem to be an issue with them checking out the house but rather if they should have entered on finding an open door. Now we don't have all the info but training is exactly the issue. Are they trained to enter a home under those circumstances? If no then they screwed up by the numbers but I don't know what their training is or the Dept policy. Saying "if anyone else" is meaningless in this situation because no one else has a job that would put them there.