Posted on 10/09/2014 4:59:17 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian
Have they ever moved into an area and made it better? Any where in the world?
They might should take a closer look in the mirror to see if they can find the real problem. It ain’t whitey.
I’ve lived in a few cities around the country, and find it disturbing to go back and visit, and find formerly nice neighborhoods have gone downhill. And they have gone downhill because certain populations come to dominate these formerly safe middle class areas.
Sad to say, too many blacks in an area cause neighborhoods to change for the worse.
If you are ever in a city and find yourself on Martin Luther King Blvd., you may want to get the hell out of there.
In this case, the cop is in the wrong, legally and rationally.
1) The cop was off-duty, acting as a security guard. This means he was *not* acting as a cop, and his authority as a security guard was *limited* to that area where he was working. Outside of that area, *unless* he observed a felony crime in progress, that he could respond to as a cop, he was under “civilian” rules.
2) He observed a group of men standing around, *not* committing any obvious felony. When he approached them, one of them took off running.
His *critical* mistake was in pursuing him out of his authorized area. At that point, legally he was on the same ground as a civilian with a gun chasing another civilian. As such, his “predator” police training failed him.
He should have called a cop.
3) A civilian with a gun chasing another civilian can *legitimately* be considered, by the chased man, as a threat to his life. “...the suspect (NOT A SUSPECT, BUT A CHASED MAN) approached the officer (THAT HE COULD NOT HAVE KNOWN WAS AN OFFICER) in an “aggressive” (DEFENSIVE) manner, with a physical altercation occurring. The (CHASED) man then turned and fired three rounds at the officer before his gun jammed...”
At that point, what the chased man did was *indistinguishable* from a “stand your ground” defense.
“The Missouri Stand Your Ground law justifies the use of deadly force when victims reasonably believe their lives to be in danger, and provides them immunity from civil and criminal action.”
4) Thus, being the aggressor, even though the off-duty cop was shot at, his response of shooting back resulted in some form of criminal homicide.
You wrote:
“The cop was off-duty, acting as a security guard. This means he was *not* acting as a cop, and his authority as a security guard was *limited* to that area where he was working.”
Your statement is not true in Texas (and I suspect that Missouri is very similar because this is a common state law pattern). In Texas: A peace officer has the same authority 24/7, regardless of whether he is on duty, providing private security or just going to eat at a restaurant with his family or whatever.
Sounds like the Rules of Engagement our troops are under.
Oooh that was good!!
In Missouri, cops are cops. 24/7. Also, Missouri has “Castle Doctrine.”
This particular area (east of Kingshighway and immediately south of I-44) is ghetto land. There’s a sizeable colony of gentle giants present there at all times. No need for the Ferguson brigade to re-deploy. Plenty to go around!
Thanks. I’ll be in town all week.
Maybe the deceased was holding his “niner” sideways? Like in the movies? Why else would a Ruger jam?
Or he was doing the whole gangsta pushing the gun forward while shooting and basically limpwristed it causing a stovepipe.
Gangstas aren’t really know for their dedicated PMCS. In all likelyhood it was rusty “neighborhood” gun.
A guy I work with took a gun off a kid recently, 38 special revolver, loaded with .380 ammo. Mensa candidates.
Now StL Today reporting perp was wearing an ankle bracelet from a former gun charge. Family still denying he was carrying...
Of course, little Dindunuffins was a good boy, headed to college, working on a rap album, raised kittens and awareness about breast cancer...
I sometimes wonder if I will up and have a heart attack if mama comes on and says, “Yep, he was an Alpha Hotel that deserved everything he got.”
This gets very complicated in a hurry, and cannot be easily determined because information is missing.
1) Did the off duty cop/security man identify himself as a police officer?
2) Did he have probable cause to chase after the running man?
3) And, as an oddity in Missouri law, did the shooting happen within a two block radius of his duty area?
All of this will have to come out at trial. Unlike an on duty cop, he cannot just be cleared by an internal investigation by his department. Likely the investigation will have to be turned over to another police department, Sheriff’s office, or even the state police.
Whatever....This off duty cop did society a favor.
The Cop was working off duty as hired security. He is still a police officer on and off duty. A switch is not flipped because he is not at his primary job. He still has police powers off duty. All off duty security jobs are done in police uniform in this area so I am making an educated guess that this guy was also in his police uniform.
2. Approaching a group of men is allowed. See consensual contacts. Once someone takes off running, that does give rise to suspicion that an offense is or has occurred and a detention is justified.
“His *critical* mistake was in pursuing him out of his authorized area. At that point, legally he was on the same ground as a civilian with a gun chasing another civilian. As such, his “predator” police training failed him.”
This is totally incorrect. His authorized area is the city that his commission is held in. Here in Texas a Department of public Safety Officer has state wide arrest powers. City officers have arrest powers in the city they work in. ON and off duty.
“As such, his “predator” police training failed him” Not too sure what “predator” training you are referring to. Maybe this was just a “barb” or passive aggressive statement on your part.
Again, I am working here on the presumption that the Officer was in police uniform since most off duty jobs are for uniformed presence with someone that can enforce the laws. The “stand your ground” stuff will not work in this case. Did you jump the gun on the Ferguson incident also?
You’re making an awful lot of assumptions. For example, I would be shocked that an off duty police officer would be wearing his duty uniform when working a private security job. I don’t know about Texas, but in AZ that would be unheard of. Elsewhere, it does seem okay in Missouri.
Far more of the story is emerging, very different:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/st-louis-police-shooting-no-stranger-to-law-enforcement
I don’t know how authoritative this site is, but it seems to agree with me:
http://www.wisegeek.com/does-an-off-duty-police-officer-have-authority.htm
I do have a lot of real world experience (28 yrs) that I am drawing from that does lead me to those assumptions. What part of that site agrees with you? Help me out because I am not seeing it.
Quoted from the news article:
“The police said in a Thursday statement that the officer involved was a 32-year-old white male with six years of service. They noted that, while the officer wasn’t on duty, he still had the same authority “to affect arrest and the officer operates in the capacity as a St. Louis Police Officer.”
An investigation is ongoing, the statement said.
The agencies in my are area are prohibited by policy from working off duty security except in duty uniform. Plain clothes security is really a thing of the past these days. Like I said, the business owner wants armed security that can take enforcement action. There are two type of security guard. Some are unarmed and then some are armed. Then there are off-duty police. These guys were bad news, the guy was armed and ran, fired on the officer, Officer dispatched the threat and went home. Glad Officer is ok.
I’m glad the officer is okay as well. But working off duty in police uniform seems bizarre to me, since they represent their law enforcement organization and government in uniform, but their mission is reduced to just a given area or activity.
About the only time I have seen LEOs working off duty in uniform were special duties, like funerals and sports events, where they were carrying out “semi-police” functions, like controlling traffic.
And while some nightclubs hire off duty cops, they are always in civilian clothes, even if their jackets say Security.
I think this explains my confusion in this case. I imagined an off duty cop guarding some area while wearing a security guard uniform, seeing a group of men and going chasing after them without probable cause, or identifying himself as a police officer.
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.