Posted on 04/04/2005 3:25:36 PM PDT by SmithL
SAN DIEGO - Police shot and killed a 24-year-old minivan driver who pointed what turned out to be a fake handgun at them early Monday, a senior officer said.
An officer stopped Jacob Richard Faust in downtown San Diego around 1:45 a.m. for making an illegal turn, police Capt. Jim McGinley said. The San Diego man handed over a license that was suspended last month.
Faust cranked up his stereo, drawing the attention of a second officer who stopped to offer assistance. The second officer spotted the handle of an apparent handgun in a pouch behind the passenger seat, McGinley said.
Faust refused orders to get out of the minivan and one of the officers fired a blast of pepper spray to subdue him. At that point, Faust "reached into that pouch and pulled that handgun out and began to point it at one of the officers," McGinley said.
One officer fired three shots, hitting Faust, who died later at a hospital.
The item thought to be a weapon turned out to be a realistic replica of a semiautomatic handgun, McGinley said.
There was no explanation for why Faust reached for the replica, McGinley said. Nothing else of significance was found in the van; his license was suspended last month for an arrest for driving under the influence.
"He's the only one who is going to know the answer to that," McGinley said. "He clearly did not follow officers' orders to get out of the car, and purposefully went for that gun."
The officer who fired his gun, an 11-year department veteran, was placed on administrative leave pending an investigation. Findings from the probe will be forwarded to the San Diego County District Attorney's Office, McGinley said.
We don't have to wait two weeks to see how this turns out.
thats when they planted the gun on him. Happens all the time.
Ridiculous. It has not been forensically possible to do this sort of thing for years. It is too easily proven in a laboratory setting that a planted weapon came from an officer's hand,jacket,cruiser bag (which virtually all officers carry), or vehicle. What do you base your intimate knowledge of police procedure upon? "Dropsies" have no place in modern law enforcement. This is the stuff of street legend, and the ridiculous assertion of those who reflexively mistrust any legitimate governmental authority.
Sadly, this is probably another instance of "suicide by cop" which is statistically on the increase in America. No officer who has been the recipient of any kind of formal handgun training is going to hesitate when a replica handgun (NOT a toy handgun with an orange barrel) is pointed in his direction. Nor should they. The only correct action is to shoot; not to either intentionally kill or wound, but to "end the threat". These officers deserve credit for attempting to use nonlethal force to defuse the situation, via pepper spray, also. This shows an unwillingness to resort to dealdly force except as a last option.
It's unfortunate that these officers are going to have to live with the consequences of this troubled individual's irrational act. They deserve better than to have an uninformed axe-grinder make ludicrous and baseless assertions.
I happen to be in SD on business this week and caught some of this on the evening news.
Apparently the fake gun is a prop this guy had for some street theatre act he was part of. Also according to his father, who was interviewed on TV, he disliked the cops because of how they treated the homeless and minorities. Dad readily admited that his kid had a chip on his shoulder and was probably arguing with the cops "but that doesn't justify shooting him..."
Also based on the stuff spouted by folks at the impromptu "shrine" at the spot of the shooting as they held the obligatory "vigil", the guy was a basic lefty artiste type.
My guess is that it was a combination of booze, stupidity, and lefty hubris on a scale with the late Nick Berg, ending up with someone who believes that nothing bad can happen to them because their heart and ideology is pure.
Oh, please. Yeah, cops carry toy guns around with them for just such an occasion. I know when I'm on patrol, I like to keep a water pistol just in case I decide to shoot someone. Usually the simplest answer is the right answer. This guy wanted to die, but was too much of a wuss to kill himself.
ping for what we talked about earlier...
So realistic toy guns should be illegal?
In New Hampshire, where there is some vestige of individual responsibilty, you can walk into Wal Mart and buy, for $70, a pretty good quality pellet gun that looks like a modern semi-auto handgun. No orange cap. No da-glo green on the body. Just a handsome black pellet gun suitable for a younger shooter to get into target shooting.
There are 100 ways to do suicide-by-cop. Don't blame the "not quite a gun."
You are correct that the betting man would bet on suicide by cop. But you are too optimistic about the quality of evidence processing in the real world. The tools are there to do what you suggest, but how often do evidence labs actually look for a "throw down" against the word of the cop at the scene?
I remember around 1971 two cops in Harlem (who had personal sidearms in ankle hostlers) telling me that they always carried a "flake piece". The idea was that if you shot an unarmed suspect for whatever reason, it was essential to find a firearm. Since they confiscated lots of cheap weapons there was always a steady supply. There was real hostility between the police and "da community" in those days; cops getting shot at was not an uncommon occurence. (The actor who played Eddy Haskell on Leave It To Beaver was shot in the chest while working for the LAPD as a motorcycle cop. Fortunately he had a bullet proof vest on.)
There were a lot of ambituous prosecutors who wanted to score points by prosecuting cops and a lot of psychopaths who wanted to "off a pig". Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.
Depends entirely upon the circumstances. By this I mean distance from the shooter to the target, presence or absence of cover or obstructions, lighting (very important), geometry and ballistics, and so on. No two shootings are exactly alike. The number of officers present, the existence of video evidence (on the increase with vehicle stops due to cameras in cruisers), whether or not the dispatcher was aware of the vehicle stop and played a role in its conduct, and the time it took a supervisor, medical personnel, and other investigators to arrive at the scene. If any evidence suggests such conduct, the cruiser, the bags, even the pants of the officers are subject to examination for fiber evidence, etc. Not to mention the statements of witnesses, (and you never know who is watching) or the existence of other video evidence like security cameras, which lately seem to be everywhere.
Also, the stories of the officers would have to match. Some departments give polygraphs, and all demand independent written accounts of the incident from the involved officers, their supervisors, the dispatcher, and any other involved personnel, even peripherally. The untruthful story unravels under interrogation and scrutiny. In the end, the civil rights lawsuits and wrongful death verdicts (in addition to the prison sentences handed out to convicted officers in the modern era) prevent the kind of impenetrable and far-reaching police conspiracy that some on FR would like to believe exists. The bad old days are gone. The assertion that this kind of misconduct can withstand a modern, professionally conducted investigation is without merit.
I never said they should be illegal. If you remember, I blame the parents who cannot raise their kids. But this guy was an adult so the argument does not apply. He could have gotten a real gun. I assume you have to be at least 18 to buy that pellet gun you describe. Maybe 21? I just thought the 2 stories to be a coincidence. But there really aren't many ways to do suicide by cop unless you have a gun.
True. Trouble is, that is a tautology. As you well know, and as evidenced by solution rates, some big-city PDs are run on third-world standards. They may have the tools. They may have the procedures written down. But what happens in real life when the solution rate for serious crimes like murder and rape stay stubbornly low?
The Rampart scandal happened at one of the best-equipped PDs on Earth.
I don't think so. It's not a powder weapon. At Wal Mart in New Hampshire, pellet guns are not behind the counter, so anyone could take it to the register. The one I'm talking about was literally in a blister pac hanging on a peg-board. There was a stack of very nice 1000fps Gamo pellet rifles for under $150 on the shelf. So if there are age restrictions for those products, the front check out would be enforcing them, which seems unlikely.
New Hampshire is an open carry state, so people there are a lot less puckered by seeing a gun. Catches the massholes by surprise sometimes.
After having personally read and reviewed the official report on the Rampart scandal, it is my opinion that this sad situation resulted primarily from improper recruitment of underqualified personnel, many of whom were predisposed to corrupt behavior. When placed in a situation where supervision was lax, occurring in a major high-crime area, the results were unfortunately predictable. A major fault of police agencies today occurs when standards for recruitment are lowered in misguided attempts to appease ethnic groups desiring "diversity" and "representation". In the law enforcement environment, whenever standards are lowered, catastrophe is the result.
If you are of the belief that crime solution rates are the only measure by which a police department should be judged, you are mistaken. Solution rates are but one indicator. In most urban centers in America, murders occur most often when the assailant knows the victim. Murders are not preventable in such cases. Convictions are difficult to obtain without direct witnesses. Rapes remain underreported. Part One and Part Two crimes nationally reported to the FBI are innacurate, due to the various criminal codes in each of the states. What is robbery in one state is larceny in another. It is easy, and simplistic, for politicians or members of the media to claim that "violent" crime is up, and that the police are incompetent. I will admit that there remain police departments in our country that are less able to cope due to mismanagement, lack of resources, or other innate problems. But they are improving. My opinion remains, heowever, that a knee-jerk statement that accuses a patrol officer of premeditated murder, such as we saw earlier, is both irresponsible and unfair.
TO SFREPUBLICAN: YOU HAVE BEEN LIVING AMONG THE FREAKS IN SF AND BERKELEY WAY TOO LONG. THEY ARE AFFECTING YOUR COMMON SENSE AND THINKING ABILITIES.
Why are we asked to believe the police account?
If solution rates were within hailing distance of being acceptable, you might be able to claim they are an unfair measure. But the fact is they are far below historic norms for serious crimes, and have been since the '70s. Solution rates for anything other than rape and murder are sometimes ridiculously low - so low that the only burglaries solved are solved accidentally at traffic stops. Some are edging up, but not nearly in line with police budgets, which are second only to public schools.
When you add phrases like "lack of resources" to a justification for the #2 tax-eater in town that is already widely resented for spending all their time enhancing revenue, you discredit yourself. That whine goes good with cheese. Cops are hideously expensive, retire way too young, and grab with both hands on the way out the door (c.f. the CHP disability fraud scandal).
Yes, lowering standards IS a big big problem, especially in big expensive city PDs. Recruitment should be far more selective. 'Roid cases that like dominating people should be screened out up front, and should be screened out of the PDs now. The union should be broken. And the city should go after cops assets and pensions that create huge liabilities on the basis their behavior was outside any reasonable liability shield.
Taxpayers get near-zero value from cops, and pay through the nose to get it. Cops need to fix that if they want any respect. As it is, it looks like they would rather take the phat pension and spoils of siezures.
You have revealed yourself to be nothing more than an anti-police axe grinder, with zero personal experience upon which to base any of your opinions. Broad brush statements such as "burglaries are only solved accidentally at traffic stops" reveal your opinions to be uninformed at a charitable best. Your viewpoint smacks of anarchist rubbish. America's police deserve better than to be bashed by an obvious extremist. Your allegation that police take the "spoils of seizures" (Phat? What is that?)is beneath contempt.
OK, What is the solution rate and reporting rate for burglary in your town? Print it, and hang you head in shame that you take home a paycheck for that level of "performance."
Also, what percentage of CHP retire on "disability?"
Massive fraud. Felony fraud. Each one in amounts that put Martha Stewart in the shade.
You would have to build two new prisons just for these fraudsters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.