AZ: Police release graphic video of officer involved shooting of Texas man

[Deitz83]

This is sad, but when the guy reached for his waist, the scales for justice was in the officers favor. As a former juror on a murder trial, optics of a video has no chance against the law and a good attorney. I teach my kids and grandkids to keep their hands between the steering wheel, on the front windshield, kneel down and place hands interlock behind your head.

[rotor]

Looks like an execution to me. The fact that there was an aquital makes me sick to my stomach.

[bblhd672]

The commands being issue in the video were not by the shooter, but by a police sergeant who was there. The shooter is the only one who fired on the victim, none of the other three officers present felt sufficiently in danger to pull the trigger.

As I said originally, hopefully this man never puts on a badge and gun anywhere again.

[E.Marquez]

Looks like an execution to me. The fact that there was an aquital makes me sick to my stomach.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/execution

Please, do tell how you come to that conclusion.

Was it the dispatchers fault for sending the LEOs to that hallway on a MWAG call?
Was it the confusing orders given to a suspect later found to be under the influence (thus likely unable to understand and immediately, correctly comply with confusing orders shouted at him)?
Was it the drunk guy reaching behind his back, when clearly the commands being given were clearly of a type, severalty and indicative of doing just about anything BUT putting your hands in your pocket, under your shirt or reaching behind you?
Was it the one of 2 ( or 3) officers on scene that took that movement as act possibly hostile?
Or was it that the other officers viewed that same furtive movement, yet choose not to engage?

Do I think he needed to get shot? No...Do I think the officer in question was justified in this shooting? From what I have seen and read, no, but then I have not seen and heard all the testimony so it would be ignorant of me to make a definitive statement in support or otherwise.

Do I think that former officer Brailsford needs to be an officer in anyones department? NO I do not.....
Long guns in hand, room for some standoff and cover, wearing body armor, having the advantage of weapon at the ready, sights on target I think the officer could have held fire till identifying at least something in his hand..I wont go as far as saying he needed to be able to ID an actual weapon, but something that could be a firearm, not a knife, not a club.. but a gun, or perhaps a grenade .. but something.

Words thrown around like "Execution" or "Murder" are simple hyperbole ... Unjustified death? Yes I think so..... but without all the info the jury got I would not say that with any certainty.

[OlBill]

Seems like the propper procedure would have been to have the guy lay still face down and cover him while another officer or two approached and cuffed him. But what do I know. I'm just a mere citizen with no special training.

They were trying to get him away from the room so they could stack on it. Hotels are hard.

Las Vegas got that guy killed.

How did the Vegas incident have an effect on this situation that happened in January of 2016 which was long before Vegas?

My mistake. I thought it was more recent.

[OlBill]

I have a question.

Can I shoot someone for reaching into their waistband or do I have to wait to see a gun?

[The Annoyed Man]

The cop was screaming, conflicting and confusing orders. The young man was scared and seemed to be doing his best to comply. The Officer kept saying he was gonna kill the boy for the slightest infraction.

Back in the day our drill sergeants would get in our faces and scream at us. We all figured out that it required a lot more concentration when the emotions ran high. I am not an LEO but I was left wondering right at the beginning why they didn't secure and cuff the guy as soon as he was face down. Instead the guy was hollering telling him to do all kinds of silly things. I know if it were me I would have had a hard time following his instructions and I wouldn't have had anything to drink. This guy was sounding like he was real anxious to kill himself a badguy.

Part of the case apparently hinged on the fact that the cop had “[expletive] You!” printed on his ejection port cover. The prosecutor used that fact as part of his indictment of the cop’s frame of mind. Just a bad deal all the way around. I don’t care what a LTC chooses to carry, or what kind of long gun one chooses to have in one’s vehicle - but as private citizens, we are allowed that luxury. Police are not. NO cop should be using anything except either an issued weapon, or a individually department-approved weapon.......not because I think it is morally wrong, but because it opens up the officer to a liability that was actually used against him in court. In this case, it was obviously not a righteous shooting; but even if it was righteous, it would not look good in court, before a jury, if the cop was using some kind of tarted up privately owned weapon, with “inflammatory” sayings printed or engraved on it. It’s why I won’t even use something like a receiver that’s engraved with “live free or die” on it, or one of those Warthog lowers or the one with the magwell in the shape of a skull. They might be interesting “art”, but an overzealous prosecutor might use them to call question to your mental or emotional state when you use that gun on a real human.

[talltex]

The cop was screaming, conflicting and confusing orders. The young man was scared and seemed to be doing his best to comply. The Officer kept saying he was gonna kill the boy for the slightest infraction.

Absolutely ! Whoever was doing the yelling at him was making the situation much worse with each command he SCREAMED at the poor guy. A stone cold sober person would have had a hard time obeying all the commands being shouted at him rapid fire under any circumstances, much less when you don't even understand why it's happening. The man KNEW he was in a precarious situation and was pleading and begging them not to shoot him repeatedly. He may have been drinking, but he understood that he was in imminent danger and was trying his best to comply. I think it's a disgrace that the shooter was found not guilty, but the civil trial will probably have a much different result, but that still won't bring him back to his family.

[olafpfj]

Lost at a life or death game of Simon Says...

There was no way to win when you're presented with a list of things that will get you shot and then ordered to perform actions that almost guarantee you will do one of those actions.

Unbelievable!

[Texas_Blaze]

If yer comfortable with police doin’ this, think of yer college aged boy bein drunk & in this position.

[talltex]

Lost at a life or death game of Simon Says...

There was no way to win when you're presented with a list of things that will get you shot and then ordered to perform actions that almost guarantee you will do one of those actions.

Unbelievable!

Especially when he's been told to get flat on the floor with his arms stretched straight out in front of him and he does--at that point he is not a threat and one of the officers could quickly step over and restrain him but instead he is ordered to get back up on his knees and put his hands behind his head--and he does while begging them not to shoot him. Again instead of being cuffed he is then ordered to crawl toward them on his hands and knees--that just makes no sense whatsoever.

[Beiruty]

The shooter was acquitted, that is simply illogical no matter what. Crazy jury.

[LDB415]

Was it an execution? No. Cops don't get up in the morning and over their bowl of Wheaties decide they'll go execute someone that day. Was it poorly handled? Very much so. Was the guy reaching for a gun? Yes, for a split second when he reaches way back behind his back just before being shot it looked like he was. That's what I thought in that split second.

They should have gone over and cuffed him when he was prone with his fingers interlaced behind his head and his legs crossed. Very poorly handled. But calling it an execution is playing into the hands of the left. That's the type of unfair characterizations they use.

Our side needs to wake up and smell the cabbage. Stop using terms like assault weapon and high capacity magazine. We don't have assault weapons. Those are standard capacity magazines not reduced or restricted capacity ones. Discrimination is discrimination period whether you call it that or affirmative action. STOP GIVING THE LEFT WHAT THEY WANT BY ACCEPTING AND USING THEIR FALSE TERMINOLOGY.

[WTR]

Was it an execution? No. Cops don't get up in the morning and over their bowl of Wheaties decide they'll go execute someone that day. Was it poorly handled? Very much so. Was the guy reaching for a gun? Yes, for a split second when he reaches way back behind his back just before being shot it looked like he was. That's what I thought in that split second.

They should have gone over and cuffed him when he was prone with his fingers interlaced behind his head and his legs crossed. Very poorly handled. But calling it an execution is playing into the hands of the left. That's they type of unfair characterizations they use.

Our side needs to wake up and smell the cabbage. Stop using terms like assault weapon and high capacity magazine. We don't have assault weapons. Those are standard capacity magazines not reduced or restricted capacity ones. Discrimination is discrimination period whether you call it that or affirmative action. STOP GIVING THE LEFT WHAT THEY WANT BY ACCEPTING AND USING THEIR FALSE TERMINOLOGY.

[Mike S]

I would encourage everyone who has commented to re-visit the link provided by the OP. The original video on the (activist) reporter's Twitter feed that was embedded into the Newsweek article is now showing almost 6 minutes of body cam footage. The original video (at least when I watched it on my phone yesterday morning) was only a fraction of the actual encounter (lots of yelling; pleading by the young man to not shoot him; and a seemingly compliant subject getting shot five times for adjusting his sweat pants).

This extended version demonstrates that the young man was very drunk (not belligerent; he seemed willing to comply, but unable to do so based on his state of mind), and had already been warned several times to not put his hands down/reach into his waistband/behind his back.

This extended version also shows that the police sergeant in control of the scene wasn't yelling commands the entire time; he was doing what first responders aught to do; Get Control. He yelled commands, & they both complied and got down on the floor. When they were compliant, he stopped barking commands & used a clear & even tone. He explained the gravity of following commands; he had the female subject crawl towards the officers, and in an even tone directed an officer (off camera) to secure & search her (even correcting the officer when he announced "Clear" prior to her being frisked [yes, this could be a training deficiency; I don't know how much training a non-SWAT officer receives in their basic academy for working in a dynamic team environment. It could also indicate the high stress level of the responding officers based on the call of someone having a rifle on the 5th floor window/balcony...).

When the subjects were not compliant, his tone raised & he re-asserted control. Again, this may be rude in the context of day to day life, but not in the context of exerting control over a subject who may be a threat (or, for the greater crowd on this great forum: if you ever have to exert control over an attacker who is no longer a threat of death/serious bodily injury, but needs to be controlled until first responders arrive. Use your command voice!).

Why did he command them to crawl towards the officers, rather than officers approaching to handcuff/search them? As OlBill indicated, this was in a hotel; they had just exited the door where someone had reported someone with rifle. In the extended version you see how close the room door is to where the subjects were proned out on the floor. Rifle rounds (as well as pistol rounds) will go thru most doors & walls.

Was it a justifiable use of deadly force? According to the jury who declined to convict, I'm guessing it wasn't 2nd Degree Murder. It's called the Subject's Actions + the Totality of the Circumstances. Someone called the police to report a person/people with a rifle on a 5th floor window/balcony/whatever. Officers stacked in the hallway, & subjects came out of the room. The male subject wasn't able to comply with commands, put his hands behind his back on at least one occasion prior to being shot, and made jerky erratic movement at other times. When he crawled (on command) towards the officers, he made a movement towards his waist, behind his back (I'm thinking he was pulling up his sweat pants, but I wasn't the one there).

Why didn't the other officers shoot? I assume they didn't process the young man's actions as a threat, whereas one officer did process the movement as a threat. It could be that the other officers are more seasoned, better able to handle the stressors of the job, or had a better overall assessment of the situation. It could also be that the officer that did shoot had a bad attitude or lack of professionalism [solely going there based on what TAM reported of the obscenity engraved on the dust cover of the AR-15].

Would I have taken the shot? Not likely, unless I actually saw a weapon. But I've likely trained more, been shot at a couple times more, and [generally] was able to keep my cool under stress while deployed. Not that I'm perfect; I assure you I'm not.

In the end, I'd be very cautious in making judgments based on a short video excerpt posted by someone with an agenda. Even the almost 6-minute version omits the overall background situation (or Totality of the Circumstances).