Houston: HPD shooting civilians - spec report by Hou Chron

[n5wd]

More than 25% of the civilians shot by HPD in the last 5 years had no weapon, and the last officer charged in a shooting was in 2004.

From the Houston Chronicle: http://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/i ... cmpid=hpfc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[gigag04]

If they keep getting cleared by grand juries then so what?

[texanjoker]

In all the shootings the cases were presented to the grand jury. The grand jury, a group of citizens, cleared the officers. If we want to tamper with our system and listen to the liberals, then Zimmerman would have to be retried as well. Where would we stop? In the time period quoted, 2008-2012, officers shot 121 people, 52 of them fatally. How many contacts were made by the same department during that time period that didn't result in shootings? Unfortunately in real life split second decisions will be made. Some tragically will be mistakes and there is no way to remove human error from the equation. Fortunately the grand jury apparently understands that and that the officers were within the law when they took that action. The same Houston area grand jury's clears all the CHL shootings that we read about as well.

I am also glad to see the Chief backing his officers vs. caving to political pressure Leo's go to work 24/7 and are put into bad situations. They need to know that if they are doing their job the department won't throw them under the rug when a controversial incident happens. That is not saying cover up illegal activity.

Police Chief Charles McClelland has defended his officers, saying they did nothing illegal. Under state law, police can use deadly force against an unarmed suspect if the officer believes the suspect could cause serious bodily injury or death to the officer or another person.

I found this quote interesting. This had to be off duty HPD officers in their own homes. Like everybody else they are protected by law when it comes to somebody breaking into your home.

For example, of the 10 unarmed suspects HPD police shot and killed in the last five years, three were attempting to break into the officers’ homes

.

[G.A. Heath]

I would assume that civilians make a much higher portion of the stats than 25%, after all unless someone is in the military they are civilians. I would be concerned if the stats showed a very high percentage of the people shot by HPD were not civilian. /nitpick

[Jaguar]

I would assume that civilians make a much higher portion of the stats than 25%, after all unless someone is in the military they are civilians. I would be concerned if the stats showed a very high percentage of the people shot by HPD were not civilian. /nitpick

You beat me to it.

[gigag04]

I would assume that civilians make a much higher portion of the stats than 25%, after all unless someone is in the military they are civilians. I would be concerned if the stats showed a very high percentage of the people shot by HPD were not civilian. /nitpick

You beat me to it.

I almost went there too...

[mojo84]

I too have always considered civilians to be all that were not in the military. Guess there are other definitions. From dictionary.com.

civilian[ si-vil-yuhn ]
noun
1. a person who is not on active duty with a military, naval, police, or fire fighting organization.
2. anyone regarded by members of a profession, interest group, society, etc., as not belonging; nonprofessional; outsider: We need a producer to run the movie studio, not some civilian from the business world.
3. a person versed in or studying Roman or civil law.

[Dragonfighter]

Not a fan of Houston but it is easy when the smoke clears, the crisis is over and the scene processed to say that a person was unarmed. During the crisis, under shoot/don't shoot scenarios not so easy. What are the LEOs supposed to do in the dark of night, wait and see if that shiny object in the hand of an erratic and confrontational subject really is a gun or knife?

If they keep getting cleared by grand juries then so what?

Maybe they actually weighed the whole circumstance vs. the singular "he was not armed" fact.

[Grillmark55]

If a LEO tells you to do something and you decide that you are not going to obey his orders, then I'd say you had better be willing to accept whatever happens after that. Yes, there are circumstances that may put the LEO in the wrong, but do you really want to stake your life on him/her being in the wrong and you being right? I realize that all circumstances have their own unique set of conditions, but I probably am not going to gamble with my life to prove a point. Do what they ask and chances are that you will have an opportunity to sort it out later - rather than have your survivors sort it out for you.

[n5wd]

I would assume that civilians make a much higher portion of the stats than 25%, after all unless someone is in the military they are civilians. I would be concerned if the stats showed a very high percentage of the people shot by HPD were not civilian. /nitpick

Read the article again. It says that of all the people shot by HPD in the last 5 years, fully one-quarter of them were not carrying weapons.

Does that make any difference in your thoughts about it?

[Dragonfighter]

I would assume that civilians make a much higher portion of the stats than 25%, after all unless someone is in the military they are civilians. I would be concerned if the stats showed a very high percentage of the people shot by HPD were not civilian. /nitpick

Read the article again. It says that of all the people shot by HPD in the last 5 years, fully one-quarter of them were not carrying weapons.

Does that make any difference in your thoughts about it?

I think the point was, since the lion's share of contacts by LEOs are civilian, the frequency of police shootings should naturally be a similar ratio. I don't think he was being dismissive about them being shot.

GigAg noted the grand jury's role and it occurs to me there may be any number of circumstance where a person found to be "unarmed" while investigating the shooting does not preclude reasonable justification for that shooting.

[G.A. Heath]

I would assume that civilians make a much higher portion of the stats than 25%, after all unless someone is in the military they are civilians. I would be concerned if the stats showed a very high percentage of the people shot by HPD were not civilian. /nitpick

Read the article again. It says that of all the people shot by HPD in the last 5 years, fully one-quarter of them were not carrying weapons.

Does that make any difference in your thoughts about it?

I would need to see more information than whats in the article, for example was the "unarmed" civilian driving a vehicle directly at the officer? Or maybe the unarmed civilian was beating/kicking the officer for all they were worth, or maybe the unarmed civilian ....