Off-duty police officer badly beaten by customer at Shell

[texanron]

http://www.khou.com/news/local/Witness- ... 85583.html

I really hope they catch this thug and have to take him to the ER before taking him to jail.

[speedsix]

...I do, too...reminds me of one of my brand-new rookies...came to work one night when he'd been with me about a week...sporting the prettiest black eye...I asked him what happened...he was at a 7-11, saw a man shoplifting, walked up to him and tried to arrest him with his badge...the guy round-housed him...my rookie, who was a short kid who played football in high school and was built like a tank, managed to get him down and hold him till a squad showed up...his gun and cuffs were in the car...."too big to conceal", he said about his Model 66 issue weapon...we had a short discussion, and he decided to borrow the money from his MIL to buy a Chief's Special the next day, and to ALWAYS carry, and to carry his cuffs...and NOT to make shoplifting arrests off-duty, but instead drop a quarter in the pay phone...there are a lot of folks out there that can clean a lot of cops' plows...and they're not bound by any "be-nice" rules...

[longtooth]

Young guy needs a good education in CC gear. That 66 is not anywhere near too big to carry if he has a 4"barrel or shorter. The 2.5 is double EASY to carry w/ proper gear.

[speedsix]

...that youngun' went to Captain...then to Asst. Chief...now retired...at that time, I had the big rubber Packy grips on my 4" 66...carried it under my shirt IWB just like I carry now...no trouble at all...you can if you want to...I think the biggest thing I carried like that was a 6" Trooper...now THAT caused me pain a coupla times...policin's kinda like preacherin'...you ain't NEVER off-duty!!!

[speedsix]

Young guy needs a good education in CC gear. That 66 is not anywhere near too big to carry if he has a 4"barrel or shorter. The 2.5 is double EASY to carry w/ proper gear.

PM

[Jumping Frog]

Once outside, witnesses said the customer got the upper-hand on the officer, got on top of him and punched him extensively.

There is no doubt in my mind that a person sitting on top of another person and punching them repeatedly in the head is an imminent risk of serious bodily injury, or possibly death. In my opinion, the customer is using deadly force.

Look, I already know the dangers and pitfalls of intervening in someone else's affairs, and am also aware that a CHL badge is not a batman cape, so that is not where I am taking this discussion. I'd like to focus on the question of justification of force and justification of deadly force. First, since the whole "aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery." does not apply, we are left with the general justification of protecting against the other's unlawful use of deadly force:

PC §9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. . . .

PC §9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; . . .

PC §9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect a third person if:
(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31 or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and
(2) the actor reasonably believes that his intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.

So, in your opinion, is a CHL legally justified in intervening in this circumstance? Does it make any difference to you if you are aware it is a police officer or not?

I know we discuss justification until we are blue in the face, but I still like to frequently mull it over in my mind so that I can lessen the risk of making the wrong decision at the wrong time . . .

[teraph]

Instinctually I would have to agree with your assessment Frog, but I think that there may be a way to de-escalate it without shooting. I say this bc however much we train (whether civilian, military or law enforcement) there is always that chance to miss, whether bc of nerves or that 1 in the million chance the under dog gets the upper hand.
Personally my mind would have always go the route of escalation of force and draw on the customer beating the cop.
But the Army has instilled in me (through Combatives and getting the $#!t kicked out of me in demos) that there are times when that isn't a good idea. This is actually one of the scenarios we go through periodically, where you assault a building and a BG tackles a buddy. That is when (after the room/area is clear) you go over and plant a boot in the BG's face and then get your weapon on the BG. For the simple fact of over penetration, flailing limbs and one of the 4 Rules (the one that says never point your weapon at anything u r not willing to destroy). And because after doing this so many times and thinking about it, it actually makes a lot of sense (barring the BG from attacking my buddy with a knife bc directly after the boot in the face there would be a shot to the chest/head) and I'm willing to bet that Law Enforcement in most states wouldn't have any issues with this approach (even though in TX we have a statute that seems to protect us w/o a problem)

[VoiceofReason]

Instinctually I would have to agree with your assessment Frog, but I think that there may be a way to de-escalate it without shooting. I say this bc however much we train (whether civilian, military or law enforcement) there is always that chance to miss, whether bc of nerves or that 1 in the million chance the under dog gets the upper hand.
Personally my mind would have always go the route of escalation of force and draw on the customer beating the cop.
But the Army has instilled in me (through Combatives and getting the $#!t kicked out of me in demos) that there are times when that isn't a good idea. This is actually one of the scenarios we go through periodically, where you assault a building and a BG tackles a buddy. That is when (after the room/area is clear) you go over and plant a boot in the BG's face and then get your weapon on the BG. For the simple fact of over penetration, flailing limbs and one of the 4 Rules (the one that says never point your weapon at anything u r not willing to destroy). And because after doing this so many times and thinking about it, it actually makes a lot of sense (barring the BG from attacking my buddy with a knife bc directly after the boot in the face there would be a shot to the chest/head) and I'm willing to bet that Law Enforcement in most states wouldn't have any issues with this approach (even though in TX we have a statute that seems to protect us w/o a problem)

This is my opinion and what I would do. I would then face whatever consequences came to pass. I would not fault anyone for handling it differently or for doing nothing. I personally could not stand by and watch someone take a beating like that.

If one got on top of the other (even if I didn’t know the underdog was a cop) I would have yelled “that’s enough". If he ignored me and kept punching, I would have smacked him upside the head with my metal cane. If at any time he came toward me, it would have been fatal for him.

With 45 hydra shok, I don’t think I would have to worry about over penetration. If I was, I also carry hydra shok in my pocket 32.

[speedsix]

...my Mama didn't raise no men who'd stand still and let anybody beat a DOG...much less a human being...

[Rikk101]

I think in cases like this, pepper spray might be useful...........especially in cases where you may not be absolutely sure who is the good guy.

[MoJo]

One word - - - Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle (TASER) He would have gotten off the cop.

[speedsix]

...do you know the origin of that name???

[SwimFan85]

speed=swift?

[Jumping Frog]

Instinctually I would have to agree with your assessment Frog, but I think that there may be a way to de-escalate it without shooting. I say this bc however much we train (whether civilian, military or law enforcement) there is always that chance to miss, whether bc of nerves or that 1 in the million chance the under dog gets the upper hand.
Personally my mind would have always go the route of escalation of force and draw on the customer beating the cop.

Well yes, I agree that I would not start off with a head shot. There are steps that can and should be taken prior to pulling the trigger. But I also believe that if you are going to draw on someone, you'd better know you already have justification to shoot if it comes to that. I don't draw as a "threat" or a "warning". If the act of drawing makes the behavior stop immediately and shooting becomes unnecessary, that is great.

But I've also heard of people who drew without the willingness to shoot and had the BG get irate and in their face, "what are you going to do, shoot me?" That can go downhill quickly.

Anyway, cop or not, I am not willing to watch someone get beaten to death. Wasn't raised that way.

[VoiceofReason]

I think in cases like this, pepper spray might be useful...........especially in cases where you may not be absolutely sure who is the good guy.

I may not be absolutely sure who the bad guy is but the one on top beating the snot out of the other one is not a good guy.