Posted on 05/16/2010 10:47:23 AM PDT by Dallas59
Updated: Sunday, 16 May 2010, 11:09 AM EDT Published : Sunday, 16 May 2010, 8:44 AM EDT
DETROIT - A spokesperson for the Detroit Police Department says a 7-year-old girl named Ayana Jones was accidently shot and killed by a DPD officer.
Watch the latest video report by Fox 2's Roop Raj.
It happened in the 4000 block of Lillibridge at 12:40 Sunday morning. According to Detroit Police , officers went to the house to arrest a murder suspect, with a valid search warrant.
The suspect was wanted in another crime that happened on Friday in Detroit. A 17-year-old high school student was shot and killed in front of a party store. They had reason to believe the man inside the home on Lillibridge was the gunman in that murder.
(Excerpt) Read more at myfoxdetroit.com ...
Reminds me of the Breakfast Scene in Pulp Fiction, when Brad talks too much and annoys Samuel L. Jackson. The guy on the couch suddenly "gets shot" as Jackson says "Allow me to retort".
Technically yeah how she reacted would have been like anyone else would have reacted dealing with any intruders.
There is absolutely no trust between police officers and civilians.
Hmmm I would point out that it still sounds like it wasn’t just the cops to blame.
Don’t disagree, just think there’s more information needed before reaching a conclusion.
Seems to me late night surprise raids like this are more likely to generate such tragedies.
But daytime approaches are probably more likely to cause hostage-taking and shootouts.
BTW, they never said whether the guy they were looking for was there.
Technically correct. An occasional person is beaten to death with an actual gun, but generally speaking it is passage through a person of high velocity metal that does the damage.
If the mom was physically struggling with an armed cop and the gun "went off," I think you'd be absolutely right. In fact, in some states I think mom could be charged with first degree murder.
If she and the cop were involved in a verbal altercation and the gun "went off," the cop should at minimum be charged with manslaughter.
***********************
Your post makes sense. It appears that the use of "went off" rather than "fired" is intended to avoid premature allocation of responsibility.
Liking cops, not liking cops, what makes anyone think that, in all probability stupid, ignorant, dumb, maybe drunk, hung over, possibly borderline retarded person, never having experienced a ‘dynamic entry’, a flash bang, large guys with guns, screaming and yelling, after midnight....would be irrational?
So, now Mr. SWAT team expert( not you DR ) what is the plan for expected irrational behavior by innocent citizens?
(Answer? There isn’t one.)
You are assuming that the people who lived in the house know the perp and the crime he may have committed.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures
The guy they were looking for was a murder "suspect" as in still innocent.
A stun grenade, dynamic entry IMHO falls under unreasonable searches
There are many other ways to achieve the same outcome without the SWAT team pretending they are raiding an AL Queda hideout
no matter how you cut this, poor planning, tactics and/or execution killed a 7 year old. If you are going after a dirt bag and a 7 year old is in the house or vicinity, have a plan that won’t risk killing the kid. If you can’t come up with one, get another line of work.
Not if the mother tackled the police officer, and was responsible for the gun going off. For all we know, she was trying to take his gun and grabbed it by the trigger.
I’ll wait for the facts before judging the officer. But a mother who is keeping her 7 year old daughter in a home with a murderer certainly has to bear some of the responsibility for a tragedy like this.
Something like. "We have a warrant for Mr. Murder Scum, the house is surrounded and if he doesn't present himself in 15 seconds we are breaking the door down. Please don't make us do this the hard way"
Why not start at a low level tactic and then escalate to flash bangs, dynamic entry ramparts, shoot the dog and then toss the place........Oh' and accidentally kill a grandmother, toddler or an innocent bystander.
Correct answer: expect it and have a plan to deal with it.
The thing is the police said, and say, that they use dynamic entry and flash bangs to disorientate people.
So, which is the enviorment you want? A room full of disoreinted people running around like chickens, and hence possible ‘disobediant’, or not?
Anyways, getting back to the discharge of the SWAT teams members weapon. Who is responsible for that weapon at all times?
It seems like the officer was the first one in the door, so he’d be ready for bear, and just to mix it up, if the officer encountered say a 350 lb bull woman...well..
??? Next to last sentence of the article:
“The murder suspect was taken into custody.”
It was a mechanical conspiracy, the bullet, the powder,
the primer, the case, they were all in it together.
The assumption is that where there is a bit of chaos, it does not spill over? It is tidy and orderly right outside that chaos? It is not. The situation was bad enough that the SWAT team was called? There was perhaps a murderer in the house? Someone else was shot, by mistake? It all fits together, to me.
You expected me to read the article before criticizing it?
ping
There is no such plan. There are only varying degrees of risk for her.
Had they politely knocked on the door and the perp took the little girl hostage and she gets killed, the cops would be criticized for not doing a dynamic entry.It's real easy to criticize after the fact. The cops at Columbine were criticized for not charging in guns blazing, which in hindsight is exactly what they should have done.
But if they had, they would have been criticized for escalating the situation and causing more deaths by doing so.
We also shouldn't just assume the cops knew there was a little girl present. The people in this neighborhood are probably not all that helpful to the cops. From their perspective, for good reason, based on incidents such as this.
I'm old enough to remember when LEO didn't have to use such tactics in doing their jobs, at least almost never.
I also understand criminals and times have changed to a degree, but I still believe most perps when faced with a no-win situation like the police have you surrounded will give up in hopes of living another day or die by police suicide.
This escalation of police tactics across the board only happened when the Clinton administration started funding such SWAT teams.
Heck even small cities have full blown para military units with in the police depts.
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.