TexasCHLforum.com

New information released, according to the lawyer the officer did have access to less than lethal measures. This case should be interesting as it unfolds...

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/11/justice/a ... index.html

Took 3 officers to subdue this naked man after he shrugged off a taser.

http://www.kptv.com/story/18960285/nake ... ith-police

tacticool wrote:

TXPPQ wrote:If what you said was truly the case and this turned out to be one of those Universities that prohibited the use of less than lethal measures, then my opinion would absolutely change and I would say that the officer was completely justified in using the only deterrent he had available to him. Though why a university would think that employing less than lethal measures would be any worse than shooting somebody in terms of PR is beyond me.

and especially shooting a student.

It may be completely justified for the officer but it's likely to be a PR black eye for the university.

Also a likely lawsuit against the university.

Ddurkof,

Once again I would like to thank you for your insight into the matter it is truly a great asset for a soon to be CHL holder (like me) to learn from your years of experience. I agree with you fully that it would be ill advised to attempt to form any kind of conclusion based upon the limited availability of information and I can see how my original post could be seen as a condemnation of the officer's actions (which I assure you is not the case at all). In hindsight I think a more carefully worded sentence along the lines of, "At first glance it may seem that drugs may have been a factor in this shooting, given the limited amount of information I am unsure if lethal force was necessary in the handling of this case. What do you guys/gals think?", would have avoided any sense that I was trying to pass judgement or form any conclusion from it.

As far trying to subdue a naked individual I am afraid that I am going to have to take your word for it, I think I would have a hard time explaining to Mrs.TXPPQ that I was wrestling a soaking wet man/woman in the name of science.
I also agree 100% that it would be completely negligent for any clinician to attempt to formulate a treatment plan or diagnosis with such little information, and let me reiterate that it was not my intention to form any kind of conclusion but rather gain the insight of my fellow forum members on how they would have handled the situation. I understand that a CHL holder is not a LEO but in today's world of readily accessible designer drugs, like bath salts, the chances of being accosted by a deranged, naked, face eating BG seems ever more likely.

As for the newly released information stating that he was a "six-year varsity wrestler" (Perhaps he was so good in wrestling they kept him in high school for an additional 2 years ) but joking aside, while the information does paint the picture that Mr. Collar was a very athletic individual and could probably cause a great deal of bodily harm, I doubt the officer knew that at the time and based his decision to shoot on the fact that he was facing an aggressive muscular individual.

If what you said was truly the case and this turned out to be one of those Universities that prohibited the use of less than lethal measures, then my opinion would absolutely change and I would say that the officer was completely justified in using the only deterrent he had available to him. Though why a university would think that employing less than lethal measures would be any worse than shooting somebody in terms of PR is beyond me.

baldeagle wrote:

TXPPQ wrote:to be able to get the complete and unadulterated facts of the incident I would either have to be a participant in the investigation committee or a member of the jury (should it come to that).

You're deluded if you think that jury members get the complete and unadulterated facts of the incident. Jury members are like mushrooms.....

Fair enough, I petition the court to have that part of the sentence stricken from the record.

JJVP wrote:

TXPPQ wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/06/justice/a ... index.html

Authorities in Mobile, Alabama, are investigating why a University of South Alabama police officer shot and killed an 18-year-old freshman who they say was naked and acting erratically outside the campus police station early Saturday.

While I am certain drugs had something to do with this, I don't think deadly force should have been used in this situation. Opinions?

If all I had was what you posted above, I would agree with you. However, after reading the article and presented with the facts below, assuming they are the true facts, my vote would be for the police. JMHO.

If it had been you, what would you have done? Wait for the nude muscular man to punch the daylights out of you before you even thought about pulling you weapon and shooting?

You make a very valid argument, although the reasons that made me hesitate in stating that the use of deadly force was indeed justified were:

When he left the station to investigate, the school said, "he was confronted by a muscular, nude man who was acting erratically."

He was right outside of the police station, was he the only officer there at the time? Could he have not called for backup and subdued the subject (if he was not alone)?

The officer, whose name hasn't been released, drew his weapon and ordered Collar to stop, the school said. The officer retreated several times to try to calm the situation.

He had time to retreat several times but did not attempt to employ any less than lethal measures. Could he have used pepper spray or a taser? (This is a campus police officer so I'm guessing it is a safe bet that he had one if not both on him)

I concede the fact that the news reports are vague on the details and a good deal of assumptions must be made. I formed my opinion on the assumption that there was more than 1 officer on duty at the station (Can't really think of many police stations manned by just 1 person) and that he had the option of using less than lethal force to stop the assailant (He is a campus police officer after all and I would hate to think that his only measure of handling a drunken frat boy or to break up a fight would be to pull his gun).

If it comes to light that this was indeed the worst case scenario and that the officer was alone and had no other deterrent than his service weapon then I would 100% agree with you that he had no other choice than to shoot.

First off, I would like to thank you for taking the time to post on here and lending us your years of knowledge as a law enforcement officer. Secondly, I would like to state that I am in no way a law enforcement expert and that anything I state is simply my own personal opinion. If I have caused any offense I sincerely apologize, it is not my intention to offend or in any way impugn or pass judgement on the subjects in my posts. My only intention is to engage individuals such as yourself in discussion over these real life scenarios so that we as a community may learn and grow.

To answer your questions, while I have had exactly zero experience in dealing with an individual in a psychotic state in the capacity of law enforcement officer, I have had hundreds if not thousands of encounters with mentally unstable individuals in a clinical setting. While you may chastise me for forming my opinions on what is a rather ambiguous news report, it is the only information that I am made privy to at the time, and to be able to get the complete and unadulterated facts of the incident I would either have to be a participant in the investigation committee or a member of the jury (should it come to that).

Keep in mind that my opinions are by no means set in stone, they can and will probably change as soon as more information is made public. An opinion is just that, what a person feels at the time with the knowledge on hand. For example, if someone were to ask you " Hey ddurkof, what do you think of that Atkins diet?" Do you tell them A) Your opinion based on what you know at the time ... or B) Tell them that you don't know but that you will go home and read every medical journal, magazine article, clinical study, and personal review and that you will get back to them in 6 months? To assume that a person has invested hundreds of hours of research into a subject just to simply form an opinion is quite simply unreasonable.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/06/justice/a ... index.html

Authorities in Mobile, Alabama, are investigating why a University of South Alabama police officer shot and killed an 18-year-old freshman who they say was naked and acting erratically outside the campus police station early Saturday.

While I am certain drugs had something to do with this, I don't think deadly force should have been used in this situation. Opinions?