TexasCHLforum.com

K.Mooneyham wrote:As I have stated before, I am not and have never been an LEO. However, I do question the wisdom of whoever sent two inexperienced officers of the law into a situation where violence was distinctly possible. And I know that some of you will tell me that any police work can turn violent at any moment and I acknowledge that possibility; however, it seems to me that a burglary, where the suspect could easily be armed, would be a situation where that potential was a bit higher ALREADY. Thus, it would have seemed IMHO, that at least ONE more experienced officer should have been dispatched to that call ALONG WITH a less experienced officer, so the less experienced officer could be backup and GAIN experience. As johncanfield alluded to, there is such a concept as the "accident chain"; break any link and the chain is gone, the accident will not occur. I know LEOs get a LOT of training to deal with all sorts of situations, but nothing beats good, old-fashioned experience to temper that training, and perhaps recognize some of those links in an accident chain BEFORE the accident takes place.

One reason might be that both of them have relatives higher up the food chain in the same department --one a father in charge of training, recently retired as a Captain, and the other, an Uncle that is a Lieutenant.

jayinsat wrote:My take away from this story so far: I am not a LEO. I will not go investigating my neighbors burglar alarm. I will report and observe as a good citizen.

Just to clarify my stance. First, I was not suggesting that the victim was in any way doing anything stupid.

I live in San Antonio in a relatively quiet, northeast side community. We have low-crime and most of the residents are probably low-to middle income with a pretty good racial mix. I know about 1/4th of the residents on my street. Probably 1/3 the houses are rentals now with tenants changing frequently. All that said, If I heard an alarm late at night, I tend to look out the window to see what's going on. Most of the time it is accidental. If I see a ruckus, I will call 911. If I walked outside to investigate and did happen to see an individual walking out of a house, armed or unarmed, chances are I won't be able to differentiate between homeowner/tenant or intruder. God forbid I engage a legal homeowner/tenant who is checking out his own property with a gun in his hand. If a LEO walked up on that situation, which one of us is the aggressor?

If I looked out the window and saw a neighbor I know being assaulted, that is a different story. Yet I would still proceed with caution because I still don't know all the facts.

Just wanted to clarify my thinking. This is a tragedy no matter how you slice it and now one has enough info to start blaming anyone.

K.Mooneyham wrote:As I have stated before, I am not and have never been an LEO. However, I do question the wisdom of whoever sent two inexperienced officers of the law into a situation where violence was distinctly possible. And I know that some of you will tell me that any police work can turn violent at any moment and I acknowledge that possibility; however, it seems to me that a burglary, where the suspect could easily be armed, would be a situation where that potential was a bit higher ALREADY. Thus, it would have seemed IMHO, that at least ONE more experienced officer should have been dispatched to that call ALONG WITH a less experienced officer, so the less experienced officer could be backup and GAIN experience. As johncanfield alluded to, there is such a concept as the "accident chain"; break any link and the chain is gone, the accident will not occur. I know LEOs get a LOT of training to deal with all sorts of situations, but nothing beats good, old-fashioned experience to temper that training, and perhaps recognize some of those links in an accident chain BEFORE the accident takes place.

A burglary alarm call is way to common, and in my experience of going to hundreds of false residential alarms, a true waste of tax payer resources. Many larger cities are stopping the response all together unless there is something more. It is always the home owner setting it off accidentally. I cannot even recall ever responding to a valid residential alarm. I went to a lot working a k9 because there is always an open or unlocked door. I would not let my dog loose because if I did, he would have bitten all the homeowners that were in their homes that had set off their alarms.

Regarding experience, you are going to get whatever two units are available. If they were on their own, they are out of the training car and respond to calls accordingly. That is how it works everywhere. If something comes up, then a supervisor or senior officer will respond to assist if warranted.

I read some postings in here about the wrong address. It is easy to not find the correct address in the dark. Many people have poor if no lighting, and do not have their address displayed in a visible manner. When responding to calls like this, you want the element of surprise and are not going to spot light each house to find an address because you have to treat each alarm as a potential valid alarm. Everybody should take the time and make sure they have it on their house. One day you may need EMS and the extra time they take trying to find the house could be deadly.

VMI77 wrote:

K.Mooneyham wrote:As I have stated before, I am not and have never been an LEO. However, I do question the wisdom of whoever sent two inexperienced officers of the law into a situation where violence was distinctly possible. And I know that some of you will tell me that any police work can turn violent at any moment and I acknowledge that possibility; however, it seems to me that a burglary, where the suspect could easily be armed, would be a situation where that potential was a bit higher ALREADY. Thus, it would have seemed IMHO, that at least ONE more experienced officer should have been dispatched to that call ALONG WITH a less experienced officer, so the less experienced officer could be backup and GAIN experience. As johncanfield alluded to, there is such a concept as the "accident chain"; break any link and the chain is gone, the accident will not occur. I know LEOs get a LOT of training to deal with all sorts of situations, but nothing beats good, old-fashioned experience to temper that training, and perhaps recognize some of those links in an accident chain BEFORE the accident takes place.

One reason might be that both of them have relatives higher up the food chain in the same department --one a father in charge of training, recently retired as a Captain, and the other, an Uncle that is a Lieutenant.

What does their having family in the dept. have to do with this incident, absolutely nothing.

jayinsat wrote:

jayinsat wrote:My take away from this story so far: I am not a LEO. I will not go investigating my neighbors burglar alarm. I will report and observe as a good citizen.

Just to clarify my stance. First, I was not suggesting that the victim was in any way doing anything stupid.

I live in San Antonio in a relatively quiet, northeast side community. We have low-crime and most of the residents are probably low-to middle income with a pretty good racial mix. I know about 1/4th of the residents on my street. Probably 1/3 the houses are rentals now with tenants changing frequently. All that said, If I heard an alarm late at night, I tend to look out the window to see what's going on. Most of the time it is accidental. If I see a ruckus, I will call 911. If I walked outside to investigate and did happen to see an individual walking out of a house, armed or unarmed, chances are I won't be able to differentiate between homeowner/tenant or intruder. God forbid I engage a legal homeowner/tenant who is checking out his own property with a gun in his hand. If a LEO walked up on that situation, which one of us is the aggressor?

If I looked out the window and saw a neighbor I know being assaulted, that is a different story. Yet I would still proceed with caution because I still don't know all the facts.

Just wanted to clarify my thinking. This is a tragedy no matter how you slice it and now one has enough info to start blaming anyone.

Several comments:
1. Helping neighbors that I know is one thing. Going into a situation where I don't know the people involved is another. Hearing noises outside, I've gone out of my house with my pistol many times and met up with my neighbors who were doing the same thing. We all recognize one another.
2. While it is legal for me to have my gun in my hand on my property, I'm seriously rethinking that strategy. I do realize that a draw stroke has an associated delay but on the other hand, I don't have confirmation of the need to use deadly force. Why add an element of risk to the situation? If the police had happened on the Ft. Worth man with his gun holstered and concealed, the outcome might have been different. It is rare that I don't at least have my holster on around the house, even when the pistol is lying nearby. It is easy enough to simply holster it when I grab my flashlight to go outside.
3. I wonder if a flashlight would have made a different. I've read the accounts that "lights draw bullets" but I won't think of going outside without my 480 lumen light after dark. One could hope that the police would expect that someone using a powerful light at night is unlikely to be a BG. I want to be able to see whoever is out there clearly enough to know what is in their hands or if their hands aren't visible. We are not in a dense city area so lighting beyond my own security lights isn't helpful except during full moon.

It sure is easy to jump to conclusions in this case. I"m very interested in seeing how the facts come out. I hope it is not another like the Costco shooting in Las Vegas where the facts are not available.

In light of this incident, along with other recent incidents, I have to think about how I would respond to something outside my home. Presuming my neighbors may also have heard something and called 911 I have to realize when I go outside I may encounter (1) bad guy (2) my neighbor or (3) law enforcement. My first thought is to protect myself and family inside the house, and then examine what is to be gained/lost by going outside. While I have a right to protect my property, I am leaning towards staying inside until LEO arrives and knocks on my door. My rights are not worth my life or the the life of an LEO.

texanjoker wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

K.Mooneyham wrote:As I have stated before, I am not and have never been an LEO. However, I do question the wisdom of whoever sent two inexperienced officers of the law into a situation where violence was distinctly possible. And I know that some of you will tell me that any police work can turn violent at any moment and I acknowledge that possibility; however, it seems to me that a burglary, where the suspect could easily be armed, would be a situation where that potential was a bit higher ALREADY. Thus, it would have seemed IMHO, that at least ONE more experienced officer should have been dispatched to that call ALONG WITH a less experienced officer, so the less experienced officer could be backup and GAIN experience. As johncanfield alluded to, there is such a concept as the "accident chain"; break any link and the chain is gone, the accident will not occur. I know LEOs get a LOT of training to deal with all sorts of situations, but nothing beats good, old-fashioned experience to temper that training, and perhaps recognize some of those links in an accident chain BEFORE the accident takes place.

One reason might be that both of them have relatives higher up the food chain in the same department --one a father in charge of training, recently retired as a Captain, and the other, an Uncle that is a Lieutenant.

What does their having family in the dept. have to do with this incident, absolutely nothing.

I don't know. The question was why two rookies were teamed together. It's not an unreasonable supposition that department politics had something to do with it.

jayinsat wrote:

jayinsat wrote: If I walked outside to investigate and did happen to see an individual walking out of a house, armed or unarmed, chances are I won't be able to differentiate between homeowner/tenant or intruder. God forbid I engage a legal homeowner/tenant who is checking out his own property with a gun in his hand.

The difference is, you do it, you feel bad and you go to prison, the police do it, they just feel bad.

texanjoker wrote:

A burglary alarm call is way to common, and in my experience of going to hundreds of false residential alarms, a true waste of tax payer resources. Many larger cities are stopping the response all together unless there is something more. It is always the home owner setting it off accidentally. I cannot even recall ever responding to a valid residential alarm. Regarding experience, you are going to get whatever two units are available. If they were on their own, they are out of the training car and respond to calls accordingly. That is how it works everywhere. If something comes up, then a supervisor or senior officer will respond to assist if warranted.

I read some postings in here about the wrong address. It is easy to not find the correct address in the dark. Many people have poor if no lighting, and do not have their address displayed in a visible manner. When responding to calls like this, you want the element of surprise and are not going to spot light each house to find an address because you have to treat each alarm as a potential valid alarm. Everybody should take the time and make sure they have it on their house. One day you may need EMS and the extra time they take trying to find the house could be deadly.

I agree that having PD responding to alarm calls is a huge waste of taxpayer money...all that does is support the companies that sell the alarm systems, and provide the purchasers with a false sense of security. I also agree with your comments on experience...in an ideal world it'd be nice to always have an older more experienced officer on the scene, but that's not realistic, and at some point the rookies have to be cut loose on their own. Anytime something like this happens, you can always wonder if more experience might have made a difference, but we will never know. As to the wrong address...there I will take issue...the officers have the duty and responsibility to make SURE they are at the right location BEFORE they take any aggressive action, period. The risks to both the homeowner and the officers are just too high to do otherwise. If they have ANY doubt, then they don't need to be walking around to the backside of the property unannounced...better to let a "possible" burglar get away, than get in this situation. In this case, if you look at the video, you can plainly see the address stenciled on the curb at the end of the driveway...right where they approached. They just screwed up and went to the wrong house, and killed an innocent man because of their mistakes.

Security cameras are fairly inexpensive now. For just a little more than $400 I can see three sides of my house and the foyer from my mobile phone. (Third side of the house is a two story high wall with no doors or windows.) The foyer cam also gives me a view of the staircase. When there's a "bump" in the night, that $400 seems like a real bargin.
My son-in-law just bought an 8 camera system a few months ago for about what I paid from my 4 channel system.

What I learned from this story is that it would be a good idea for me now to invest in and wear some body armor since I am in Fort Worth quite a bit, and they have made it clear that it doesn't take much for the police there to "feel threatened"!

In my opinion the police are no different than myself, they are bound by the same laws that I am, and under Texas law they are responsible for "every bullet" that leaves their weapon. Just as I would be charged with taking a life no matter how unintentional it may have been, the officer or officers who shot and killed this man should be charged and punished just like any citizen would be.

texanjoker wrote: A burglary alarm call is way to common, and in my experience of going to hundreds of false residential alarms, a true waste of tax payer resources.

I couldn't agree more. It's the same waste of tax payer money to have those red light cameras and traffic cops that are waiting and watching in a hidden spot for someone to break the law.

talltex wrote:

texanjoker wrote:

A burglary alarm call is way to common, and in my experience of going to hundreds of false residential alarms, a true waste of tax payer resources. Many larger cities are stopping the response all together unless there is something more. It is always the home owner setting it off accidentally. I cannot even recall ever responding to a valid residential alarm. Regarding experience, you are going to get whatever two units are available. If they were on their own, they are out of the training car and respond to calls accordingly. That is how it works everywhere. If something comes up, then a supervisor or senior officer will respond to assist if warranted.

I read some postings in here about the wrong address. It is easy to not find the correct address in the dark. Many people have poor if no lighting, and do not have their address displayed in a visible manner. When responding to calls like this, you want the element of surprise and are not going to spot light each house to find an address because you have to treat each alarm as a potential valid alarm. Everybody should take the time and make sure they have it on their house. One day you may need EMS and the extra time they take trying to find the house could be deadly.

I agree that having PD responding to alarm calls is a huge waste of taxpayer money...all that does is support the companies that sell the alarm systems, and provide the purchasers with a false sense of security. I also agree with your comments on experience...in an ideal world it'd be nice to always have an older more experienced officer on the scene, but that's not realistic, and at some point the rookies have to be cut loose on their own. Anytime something like this happens, you can always wonder if more experience might have made a difference, but we will never know. As to the wrong address...there I will take issue...the officers have the duty and responsibility to make SURE they are at the right location BEFORE they take any aggressive action, period. The risks to both the homeowner and the officers are just too high to do otherwise. If they have ANY doubt, then they don't need to be walking around to the backside of the property unannounced...better to let a "possible" burglar get away, than get in this situation. In this case, if you look at the video, you can plainly see the address stenciled on the curb at the end of the driveway...right where they approached. They just screwed up and went to the wrong house, and killed an innocent man because of their mistakes.

That's the "old way," as incident after incident continues to demonstrate. Now we have SWAT raids on innocent people because someone at another address was SUSPECTED of selling marijuana and the police got the wrong address. Lethal force is used so people won't consume a drug that is probably less destructive than alcohol. You see the NYPD expending over 40 rounds on a guy armed with a wallet and the LAPD emptying their guns in a vehicle without even knowing who is in it. The police now launch SWAT raids on people for selling raw milk and not paying their student loans. The police go to the wrong address and shoot dogs first and ask questions later. "Officer safety" now seems to have priority over every other consideration. Remember how the police sat out side Columbine HS while two teenage boys continued their killing spree? How often do you hear the mantra "a LEO just wants to come home to his family at the end of the day?" Have you ever heard it said about an innocent victim of a police shooting that "he just wanted to come home to his family at the end of the day?" I've heard from a number of recent combat vets that the military has more restrictive ROEs in WAR ZONES than LEO's in the US. But apparently, the military is concerned with not alienating the locals, something which our government here at home doesn't care about so much.

Read the comments following articles like this one: they are overwhelmingly critical of police behavior and express the belief that the police are above the law. Incidents like this, which as you point out, seem to show that LE too often lacks any sense of proportion. So we have a LEO saying that he's never responded to a legitimate residential alarm and at the same time using the alarm call as the justification for shooting an old man in his garage. The police just didn't act like this 30 years ago. You can even see it in the movies. For instance, compare "Dog Day Afternoon" made in 1975 to "Inside Man," made in 2006. Both movies depict the NYPD response to a bank robbery involving hostages. Among other things, In one, the police treat the hostages with concern and respect, and in the other they treat the hostages as criminals. Guess which is which? "Mistakes" like this are all too common and the end result will be increased distrust of the police which will breed reciprocal mistrust of citizens (what we used to be called, now we're "civilians"), and that in turn will lead to more incidents like this one.

im surprised the PD had two rookies rolling together.. you would think they would do a better job of pairing rookies with experienced vets.

Its now made Drudge Reports. Family has asked for an independent investigation and asked police to stop making statements to the media until a thorough investigation has been made. http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/05/29/rook ... six-times/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RIP