Innocent man shot by cops in Florida.

Published On July 16, 2012 | By CopBlock | Articles

http://www.wesh.com/news/central-florida/Deputies-shoot-kill-man-after-knocking-on-wrong-door/-/11788162/15527202/-/euk6tg/-/index.html

Like this Article? Share it!

About The Author

When you see "CopBlock" as the author it means it was submitted via our contact tab - see top of page. Anyone can share their police related story with CopBlock.org via this tab, we thank you in advance.
  • Pingback: Innocent man shot by cops in Florida. | OccuWorld

  • Bryanne B.

    Sad. Can’t even exercise our Second Amendment rights without some trigger-happy cops forgetting to announce themselves.

    Guns don’t kill people. Antsy cops kill people.

  • http://whentennesseepigsfly.wordpress.com/ WhenTennesseePigsFly

    Yet none dare call it murder…

  • Common Sense

    Because its not murder…it would be classified as homicide, and it will be determined to be justifiable as well. I wonder what drugs were inside the apartment, perhaps that led to his poor decision making.

    Moral of the story, don’t answer the door and point a gun at someone, they might just shoot back…

  • DKSuddeth

    common, no doubt that this will be ‘justified’. the system takes care of it’s own. and how is it poor decision making to answer the door with gun in hand when someone pounds on the door at 130 AM??? would YOU not have gun in hand in the same scenario????

    mark my words, the more that police are held unaccountable for their killings, the more that people will start deciding that cops are the enemy.

  • Common Sense

    @DK

    The trend is actually going the other way. Less lethal encounters between the public and the police.

    Sad to say, the only living witness(es) say he pointed the gun at them, the threat of lethal force was met with lethal force. I wonder what his tox will show? Perhaps too much THC lead to paranoia.

    Case closed.

  • certain

    Ok common moron, let’s completely gloss over the fact that they caused the whole thing by assuming the guy was inside the residence when he wasn’t.

    You’re the one that must be on some kind of dope, it has completely messed up your reasoning.

  • Common Sense

    @certain

    actually it was reported to the media, “drugs were also discovered in the apartment”

    again, maybe its just dopers, paranoid about a rip off who answer doors armed. Last time I checked, most, if not all, apartment doors have a peephole. I can’t wait to see what his tox comes back.

    We will never know, perhaps plainclothes officers with pistols out scared him, again, thinking he was going to get ripped off, so he raised up his to ‘scare’ them away because we know he would never hurt a fly. Maybe they didn’t have any pistols out but seeing his, they were quicker on the draw. Or maybe he ‘would rather die then go back to prison’ so he decided, poorly, to make a stand and shoot it out rather then go to jail for the drugs in his apartment…

  • Jim

    Ye gods, Common, I’ve been reading your comments for quite some time now, you are a consistent apologist for whatever LEOs wreak on the rest of us poor dumb serfs. You are a soul-less POS.

  • http://tyrannynews.com TyrannyNews

    @Common Sense

    I can’t figure you out. Twice you refer to drugs…”what drugs were in his apartment”…”Perhaps too much THC” despite no mention of drugs in the article.

    Is it your opinion that, if you open the door pointing a gun at whoever is there from inside your home that is a crime? I don’t agree, but do consider it aggressive behavior.

    What about answering the door “without” a gun but you “are” high on “THC”, as you put it? Is that a crime? I agree that, being under the influence even in your home is technically illegal, sure. I don’t agree with that though.

    Now, put the two together (Gun and THC). In your opinion, does this become a multiplier and constitute a more serious crime?

    Let’s say there’s no drugs involved and just the gun-pointing. What’s the crime there? My guess is “brandishing a weapon” or “terroristic threatening” or some such crap. Given that, was the “homicide” justified?

    My suggestion…Government, stop…cops, none…prisoners, free them. Think I’m kidding? I’m a Voluntaryist, so I’ve actually researched these scenarios while most people only assume the outcomes.

    Could we start a “No Cop Week” movement? No cops for a week and see how it goes?

  • Jason

    OMG!!!! Dude, that is hilarious! I laughed so hard I nearly hyperventilated. “Oh look! The cops are here. Better get my handgun.” What a retard. Blam! Blam! Blam! BUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

  • http://whentennesseepigsfly.wordpress.com/ WhenTennesseePigsFly

    In Common’s eyes, cops cannot ever do anything wrong… no matter how horrific their actions, he will always hold the blue line and defend his fellow cops unlawful actions.

    He personifies everything that is wrong with law enforcement today.

  • Common Sense

    Nah, I think about the 5th or 6th time, I’ll say again, yes, police misconduct does exist. Culpepper, the Bronx, BART, etc. clear cases of police misconduct. But here and in other ‘shocking’ cases, the cops were justified and thus not police misconduct.

    You can not like it all you want, but that’s the case.

  • Gangrell84

    Lets recap:

    Cops shoot and kill an innocent man and didn’t announce themselves…they didn’t follow protocol and they acted like thugs.
    Common defends their actions and blames the victim.

    IT MUST BE TUESDAY! This shit happens all the time and the only thing that Common can do is blame the guy who answered his door with a gun. He doesn’t blame the cops for their actions, he only blames the guy that got killed because it is obviously not the police’s fault.

    Seriously Common, you are so delusional that it is boarding on the psychotic. Why don’t you do the rest of us a favor and go kill yourself, this world has already filled its quota of stupid people and it cannot bare your weight any longer.

  • t.

    The police LEGALLY knock on the door. Guy answers by pointing gun at them for no reason.
    Police defend themselves

    You LEGALLY knock on his door. Guys answers by pointing a gun at you. You defend yourself.

    Where is the difference? Just because its the police.

    Have you fireamr with you when you answer the door, OK. Pointing it at the la dlord, or the Avon lady, or the police as in this instance, not good.

  • Lurker

    You can’t point a gun at someone for knocking on your front door. He did, and he got killed. If he answered the door just holding the gun or keeping it out of sight, i’m sure the result would be different.

  • DKSuddeth

    1) I answer the door that late at night with a gun in hand.
    2) the only living witnesses claim he pointed the gun at them. i’m guessing that since it’s a pair of cops, it MUST be that absolute truth.

    cops never lie, right t and common?

  • Gangrell84

    Cops didnt knocked. They banged on the door. And didn’t ID themselves. They were ready to shoot a suspect before they even arrived on scene. They are nothing more than a gang of thugs and each any everyone of these douchebags need to go to jail for manslaughter.

    CLEAN UP THE STREETS, start with the pigs first.

  • Common Sense

    Sorry, you can’t spin it to say it wasn’t justified. You just have to deal with it.

    Maybe you could beat your pillow with a tennis racket.

  • Tom

    These cops were grossly negligent and at a minimum need to be fired.

    You can clearly see if you watch the video, in the link, that the door has no peephole, but there is a window at one side. I’m willing to bet the cops involved were standing tactically to the other side of the door with weapons drawn, given the quickness of their reaction and the fact they’re trained not stand in front of a doors or windows during during a raid because a suspect can shoot through them. The fact that they were too afraid to identify themselves “for officer safety” lends credence to their state of mind being “we’re conducting a raid.”

    These officers wanted to be heroes and acted like reckless cowboys and as a result an innocent man is dead.

    If the Sheriff’s Office has any written policy on apprehending a wanted felony suspect I’m sure that it does not include, failing to call for back-up, and taking a wild ass guess at what a apartment he might be inside, and not identifying yourself as an LEO.

    By banging on a man’s door in the middle of the night without identifying themselves they created a situation where a homeowner could reasonably fear for his safety and rightfully answer the door for his protection.

    Once they realized he wasn’t the suspect the officers and the Sheriff’s department have clearly gone into CYA mode. Saying,”we found drugs in his apartment.” Is an irrelevant smear, on par with a newspaper reporting that a LEO killed in the line of duty beats his wife. They use the term “drugs” because it sounds worse than marijuana.

    His family’s civil suit will be settled for a sum north of 1M in 2 or 3 years.

  • Common Sense

    the reporting of ‘drugs’ in his apartment could be key. was he on sleep medication? or was is heroin? maybe he was on a paranoid meth bit or did he fear of returning to jail? Was it just weed? THC was the only drug found in the face-eater in FLA. was scott worried about being ripped off? was his reaction speed reduced so when police saw a pistol being pointed at them, they had time to draw and fire? Guess we’ll never know…but perhaps in a few months, more will come out.

    ..but for now, its a done deal.

  • Lurker

    The police have no obligation to announce themselves then they knock on a door. I’m not sure where that idea came from, but it’s not law and I highly doubt its even written policy.

  • Army Vet Retired

    @Common

    This story represents bad recon and intel. If the police had merely conducted surveillance and maybe set up shop for a day or two, they would have known the face of the dead individual and not even bothered knocking at the door. Also, if the officers had identified themselves, just as a Sheriff’s Deputy did for me at 2 in the morning about seven years ago, while I was armed, making my way to the corner of the room, aiming about one foot from the top of the door and slightly to the right to ensure a head shot with my rifle, the individual may have put down his weapon as I did. Unfortunately, the office of the Sheriff in this particular county did not require such simple actions. IN this situation, I would not have answered the door. Instead, I would have taken appropriate measures to ensure that who ever was trying to make entry into my home was dead or wounded.

    Now for the drugs, THC has already been widely accepted to have medicinal effects. It is currently legal for use in 16 states. So, the former being a fact, weed is medicine, beer is poison, suck it. Also, no one just stays up all night getting hammered on marijuana. Your comment shows me that you probably haven’t partaken in a joint as often as me but I respect your opinion and your stance, because it is your right.

    Now for rights. As I have mentioned, you have your rights and you may use them as you see fit. Police are endowed with privileges as well as the rights given to every citizen of this nation. What police need to be briefed on is the fact that they are not above a civilian, and, under Marshall law, may be executed for not following the orders of a private with one day in the Army.

    Rights are here for a reason. They are not to be trampled on. This man’s rights were violated by two sworn officers. They took an oath, and so did I. I am bound by my oath to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. This line comes before any other simply because my duty to protect that piece of paper, and what it means to not only the people of today but also my children and future generations, comes before anything else. The department in this county needs to hold the deputies in charge of these men accountable for the misdeeds that occurred that night. They should also hire some guys with balls. Every house I raided had a guy with an AK-47, 78, in it and we didn’t just shoot the shit out of them before announcing our presence.

    Murder, unjustified due to circumstances, is the charge. These deputies were following orders. Fry their supervisors before they have a chance to pat these poor boys on the back for what they have done.

  • Common Sense

    He raised the gun and paid for it. That’s it, that’s as far as it goes. Announce or not, 1am or not, it doesn’t mean much if anything. They are looking for an attempted murder suspect, he opens the door and raised a gun and and the cops were ready. Had he answered the door without holding a gun, or raising a gun at a group of cops or even shouted through the door, he might still be delivering pizzas.

    Again, unless there is some video or some witness, it’s a done deal.

  • t.

    Army vet: They didn’t “trample” his rights. They knocked on his door. They didn’t break downhis door. And do surveillance for days !?!? What. They didn’t go looking for a drug raid.

    Thank you for your service to our country. But you are just simply wrong about this one.

  • http://whentennesseepigsfly.wordpress.com/ WhenTennesseePigsFly

    While the police will do a wonderful job investigating this and insuring it will be completely “justified” and the DA will dutifully decline to prosecute these state sanctioned murderers.

    Fortunately for the victims here, in this country we have civil recourse against government negligence and misconduct.

    Both State and Federal Tort Claims Acts will ultimately apply here and a civil jury will hear the “facts” of this case and decide if the state actors were infact reckless, careless and engaged in official misconduct.

    It seems that this is the only way any justice can be found for victims of police abuses, misconduct and acts of official cover ups these days.

    Fortunately for us, the police have very limited abilities to direct or control such causes of action. Unlike criminal cases where they hold he upper hand.

    While this will never directly affect the cops involved due to implied immunity. With enough pressure you can make it so expensive for departments to continue to do business they might rethink their policies and the employment of their trouble makers.

    One can also forever entomb the names of all those officers involved into state and federal civil case law for others to dig up, when those officers act out again in such a manor they provoke additional law suits naming them as defendants.

    While it will have little effect on the bearing of the additional cases, the media can and will dutifully report the facts that said officers have histories of actions which have resulted in departments being sued over and over again.

    Political pressure begins to build, then eventually someone with power over the chief of the department will instructs that chief. Its time to rid themselves of the trouble making officers.

    Another strategy lawyers are currently beginning to use. In cases involving officers who have been sued multiple times is to involve the insurance carriers directly in the claim. By filing your intentions with the court to ask for much more than the city’s liability police affords.

    Under civil rules you can do this and it triggers a hearing where the insurance carrier will come argue against it. But…

    This has a chilling effect on the departments when the various insurance companies begin reviewing their policies to prepare for the hearing. What they usually find is that there is a huge problem with a group of trouble making officers.

    And the insurance carrier will usually send some nasty worded letters about sky high premiums if they settle of lose this lawsuit. ANd if we are lucky they will drop the policy all together after the case is over.

    Once a city loses its liability insurance over lawsuits, they are labels as high risk for a period of 5 years. During this time they are limited in who they can buy insurance from. And the costs are usually so prohibitive few can afford them.

    This also triggers a US DOJ review similar to what is occurring in Seattle currently.

  • wiguy

    I’ll speculate; the man was awoken by cops literally pounding on the door. How jarring would that be 2 hours into a deep sleep. Confused, he comes to the door with his handgun. He didn’t point it at the cops but was simply holding it. Several of the cops had their guns trained on the door and one yells, “Gun!” The rest is history.

    These cops are all over the age of twenty. By the age of 20, a reasonable person knows that just because a motorcycle is parked in front of an apartment doesn’t mean the owner is inside that particular apartment. Apartment complex parking is first come first serve, we’ve all been there.

    This is lack of due diligence and the taxpayers will pay dearly.

    And the drug thing? What a shameful event. They gun a man down in cold blood then search his domicile. It was likely a pipe and a dimebag of pot. But…always support a brother in blue right? Very sad state of affairs in modern, “Policing.”

  • Common Sense

    …and armed man is not ‘cold blood’ — Culpepper, cold blood. Bronx, cold blood. And adult, armed with a handgun, who aims at the police is not ‘cold blood.’

    …and no, the masses will not ‘rise up’ against the police.

    Even now, the trend this year is to have yet again, another decline in the number of persons killed by the police.

    37 – July
    40 – June
    8 – May
    6 – April
    3 – March
    6 – February
    8 – Janruary

    108 for the first 6 months. With a previous average of 350-400 annually, this might be the lowest number on record.

  • Common Sense

    whoops, january

  • http://yahoo larry

    Cops are not part of any thing in this country. They are unto them selfs. They think that they are at war with every one in this country. They are idiots.

  • certain

    You morons are so funny. THEY WERE NOT AT THE CORRECT PLACE. PERIOD. It doesn’t matter what the guy did (and as pointed out above, it’s only the shooters version of events that is being told), they had no reason to be banging on his door in the middle of the night. But you would all excuse them because since they “thought” their suspect was in the residence all is legal and good. That reasoning right there is what is wrong with out broken and corrupt justice system. Bang on a cop’s door in the middle of the night with a gun in your hand, not even pointing at anyone, and see what happens. And even if your surviving family members swear that you thought your 12 year old daughter was in the house being gang-raped by a squad of meth-fueled steroid using paranoid gangsters, the cop who lived there shooting you dead would be excused as well. 2 faced piles of shit.

  • Lurker

    @Certain-

    Oh, you think the police have no right to knock on your door? They don’t need a reason and it doesn’t matter the time of day. The guy who got shot was a moron for pointing a gun at the cops and its his fault he died.

  • Yankee Fan

    Lurker,
    The issue here is that if the story was altered and it was the police who had entered the residence, walked in and was greeted by this guy to 6 shots killing the 2 deputies, what would the story be? I am only asking this to see if all the cop posters would argue the same that this guy had a right to self defense against peoples in his home who didn’t identify themselves. I doubt in reality you as well as the others would say…well they were idiots and should have been sure of their actions and made sure they were at the right place because this is what law abiding citizens are allowed to do against intruders. Maybe i am wrong but all cops would be screaming for justice. There seems to be a distinct double standard on these issues. I know it is rare to have that scenario i layed out but just for the sake of arguement that happened what would the cops say?

  • Common Sense

    @yankee

    It has happened, where a home owner shot at/the police thinking they were the burglar. Charges were not filed in either case to my knowledge against the homeowner.

  • Yankee Fan

    Common,
    I am sure it has and in fact I looked at the map that shows all kinds of shootings including officer shootings and remember 2 cases where 1 guy received like 24 months after killing a cop in which his sentence was reduced or something like that and another guy as acquitted of capitol murder charges. I should have cleared up my statement to make sure I was asking without implying anything. I guess what I mean is a civilian who shoots and injures or kills a police officer will have his casescrutinized a lot deeper than if it was a police officer shooting at a civilian even though both are investigated. I could be wrong but I do think thats what would have happened if the scenario I presented did happen.

  • certain

    Cops point their weapons at people when they feel even the smallest threat to their safety. They freaking shoot people because they “reached for their waistband”, or made some other movement that, once again, caused them to fear for their safety. Whether it was a reasonable fear or not, if they feel the slightest threat to their safety they feel free to point a weapon and even shoot. And everything is justified based on the concept of “Officer Safety”.

    Getting woken up in the middle of the night by somebody pounding on your door is enough to make anybody fear for their safety. So why shouldn’t a citizen point a weapon at whatever is causing the fear? And that’s assuming once again, that the cops aren’t full of shit about him pointing it. It makes much more sense that he had it in his hand, and because they were all full of adrenalin and had their own guns out, thinking they were confronting a dangerous felon, they shot him as soon as they saw it, knowing it would be called a “good shoot”. But somehow you all excuse it, saying he shouldn’t have pointed a gun. And why can’t a citizen point a gun if they feel threatened? Because they aren’t a cop? Really? And you don’t see the problem that the average citizen might have with that? As I said in an earlier post – 2 faced pieces of shit.

  • certain

    Where do yo get your stats, Common? DOJ? LOL

  • Bryanne B.

    Apparently, the guy they were looking for in the first place was a former cop.

    http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/07/18/48483.htm

    And here is a thorough treatment of the subject, complete with pictures and videos, AND where they mention drugs, but did not state what kind.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2174381/Andrew-Scott-Outrage-police-shoot-kill-wrong-man-hunt-attempted-murder-suspect.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

  • certain

    It was whatever kind one of them had in his freaking pocket to cover instances like this, most likely. Haven’t you noticed? Every time they shoot somebody in their own home by mistake, they “find” drugs. Even when they raided and killed that old lady in the south, they planted dope so they could claim “drugs were found”. Who’s going to argue in this case? The dead guy?

  • certain

    Hey Lurker (stupid ass) Did I once mention anything about anybody having any right to be anywhere? No, I didn’t. I am only saying that they executed a guy for doing the same thing any one of them would have done if woken up in the middle of the night by somebody banging on their door. But from all of your completely moronic comments, it is apparently only cops who are allowed to protect themselves and their families. And the point I keep stressing has nothing to do with their “right” to be there or not. It’s the simple fact that they made a mistake which cost an innocent person their life, and once again, it is not only excused by you bunch of 2 faced fuck-wits, it is called justified.

  • certain

    “They did not identify themselves because of safety reasons.” Really? I bet the dead guy would argue over how safe it was. So they thought it would be safe to bang on a persons door in the middle of the night without announcing themselves. In my book, that makes this at least involuntary manslaughter on the cops part. If that’s not reckless disregard on their part, I don’t know what is. Once again, they all know how THEY would answer the door if somebody started banging on it in the middle of the night. Lying murdering criminal fuck-wits.

  • t.

    It isn’t illegal, or necessarily wrong, to have knocked on his door. If this guy was just scared…why didn’t he challenge (ask Who is it?) from behind the closed and locked door? Why? Because there is more to the story. But answering the door, and pointing a gun at anyone (regardless of who it might be) is stupid. What if it was Joe Dude who accidentally knocked on the wrong door looking for his friends house. And the gun is pointed at him. But he’s carrying too. So he draws and fires. Who’s in the wrong there? You all need to think it through again. Don’t just react emotionally. Anyone could have knocked on his door, that doesn’t give him the right to assault or kill them.

  • Common Sense

    @t

    I agree, tragic as those it was, once he aimed at the deputy, he was no longer ‘innocent’ – you can answer the door armed, but once you take aim, you loose those protections. I do wonder what the tox will show, perhaps nothing, but I reason there was something in his bloodstream.

    Justified shooting…

  • certain

    I still say he didn’t aim at shit. Cops are guilty of negligent homicide, period. Their actions completely led up to the guy getting shot. If they were not sure the suspect was in that apartment, they had no business banging on the door without identifying themselves. As with most everything they do, they took actions which escalated the situation.

  • Yankee Fan

    In my post on this one, I asked the question, if it was the story of 2 deputies being shot and killed in his residence and it was proved they never identified themselves, would we making the same arguement that he had a right to defend himself. I submit the answer is no. I want the same objective standard applied to the police. Common sense says he was no longer innocent when he pointed a weapon at the police, I agree that any person has a right to self defense in any situation which includes homeowners thinking cops are intruders. To me, any police officer shot and killed in a residence that did not ID themselves as cops are not cops but intruders and no homeowner should face hell from the legal system for doing what any reasonable person would do if they were rousted out of bed at o dark thirty to deal with what he thinks are scum bags in his house.

  • t.

    @Y.F.: Not trying to insult you…but they weren’t “inside”. Simple.

    @Certain:……”I still say he didn’t aim at shit”. Another @certain statement without a factual basis.

    But I will ask you both. If there is no window near the door or peep hole in the door, and someone is knocking, or especially “banging” on the door at 130 am, would you guys not think it more sensible to maybe say “who is it?” before answering the door and point a firearm at someone?

    It’s never a good thing when anyone gets hurt or worse killed. But this guy made some really bad chooses and one of them got him killed.

  • Yankee Fan

    I am not offended T but my original post was based on the attitude that what would we be saying if they were.

  • Yankee Fan

    I made my original post asking the law enforcement types what would the conversation be. I said that there most likley be a double standard that a civilian shooting dead a cop in his house would face a tougher investigation than a cop would. I also stated that anyone in this world who has a weapon thrust in their face has a self defense right. I am aware they weren’t inside and i posed the what if just to see or ask the law and order types would you have defended the guy if the story was different and they were inside and it was proved the did not ID themselves would the cops sing the same tune. I stated IMO that they would want justice and would have a hard time buying a self defense arguement from the home owner. I am aware that there are situations where people have been acquitted of murder of LEO’S or received small prison sentences because of the circumstance but i asked a what if. I do not take offence to anyone but those that do not clearly read what I wrote.

  • Yankee Fan

    1 last thing T…. this guy was stupid for doing what he did the way he did it. I would have waited down the hall, announced I am armed and if you come in, you die. So do me the favour of not putting words in my mouth because I have no issue with the cops defending themselves. So before you make assumptions about me, read my first post then you will get an idea for my position overall before you make an ass of yourself.

  • t.

    @Y.F.: I just saw your last post so I re-read the earlier ones. I understand your question…but your thought process is wrong. I clearly answered what you asked, but kept it in the context of what happened. You throw out the false idea that the police are not questioned or held accountable. That is patently false (in almost all cases). There are legal reason for the police to enter someone home such as exigent circumstances, hot pursuit, search warrants. Any of those would negate your thoughts. You need to keep in mind the thought of “reasonableness”. Is it reasonable for this guy to answer the door pointing a gun at whoever was on the other side? The answer is objectively no. And there have been lots of occasions of citizens assaulting and even killing police officers who weren’t clearly identified, with no charges or limited charges (you can’t just assault or shot people…regardless of who they are).

    So my statement to you and @Certain remain directly on target. They knocked on his door, he responded in an unreasonable fashion, and the officers justly defended themselves.

  • Yankee Fan

    My thought process was a what if to ask a critical thinking question. It was designed to see if you police officers would defend a homeowner with the same level of zeal as you would a cop who did what this guy did. I am aware of those exigent circumstances but if you read my conclusion on my first write up I stated the scenario I presented was rare but what if that did happen what would you say to a citizen shooting a killing cops that he believed were real intruders in his home where the investigation concluded the cops were wrong period. It is a genuine question and negates nothing because cops do make mistakes as this case illustrates from my own seat.

  • Yankee Fan

    I also do not throw out false ideas about cops not being held accountable. I stated IMO that they would investigate a homeowner much more in depth than they would a police officer as you know in todays climate all you need to do is claim I feared for my life and I submit to you that a homeowner would not be able to make that claim as easily. I am aware of legal reasons to enter a home as i do read and educate myself but you can act all the legal you want and be legal but if you are wrong you are wrong and I do admit police usually dont get warrant raids wrong. So to ask again, If this story was police enter a mans home believe a fleeing murder suspect is in there but get greeted to a homeowner who opens fire and kills 2 deputies who had not identified themselves and the initial investigation shows the homeowner believed them to be intruders, what would you say about his self claim based on what I gave you here. It is a simple question designed to provoke a valid response. Ill add this disclaimer that I know that scenario is very rare and doesnt happen but once in several lifetimes it seems

  • t.

    I would answer your question with a simple “yes”.

    Because the reality is that any shooting involving the police…police as shooter or as shot…are looked at far closer than most others. An regardless of the falseness put forth in this site and others, police action, especially when a firearm is used, is held to an almost ridiculously high standard. Instead of police actions being overlooked and police officers cleared cartel Blanche, officer s are disciplined even when they are in the right.

  • Yankee Fan

    T,
    I wasnt trying to be a smart guy, just trying to ask a question on the level is all. I personally have not had any issues with cops nor do I know them and all my contacts have been positive. I saw the story and thought the guy was a dumb ass to blindly open a door at 130 am and now a cop gets to deal with this forever and it seemed like a perfect story for a what if. As I have stated I am not a cop blocker as I prefer to have a degree of intellectual honesty. I will agree with some takes here and will disagree with others but thats all I was asking on this particular story.

  • Todd

    This OUT OF CONTROL cop took a life. Put this cop in prison for LIFE. ALL cops are CROOKS!

  • jayjay

    I hate posting on these things since it achieves absolutely nothing. But Common Sense and the others supporting the police in the murder of an innocent man might be interested to know what the PHYSICAL evidence shows, rather than going entirely on what the police say happened:

    1. There were more than 8 bullets through the front door and all entered at less than a 15% angle. This means that the shooters were standing close to or against the wall (on the right facing the building). The angle also shows that the door was never more than a foot open.

    So – there is little chance that the innocent man living in the house could see the police through the peep hole and it proves that he never opened the door the entire way….if the police saw a gun it would have been in the innocent man’s left hand, while he opened the door with his right.

    Police saw the weapon and opened fire through the door, killing the man in his home. They are saying he ‘flung’ the door open and jumped out pointing the gun. The evidence (bullet holes and blood being in the house – not on the front of the door) shows that this is complete lie.

    Now – the ‘drugs.’ The police have only ever stated the following:

    There were drugs, a scale, baggies and a pipe. Right now, I have all of four of those things in my house and so do you!!!!

    A scale = I have a scale in my bathroom to weigh my bloated behind

    Baggies = I have baggies to pack my lunch for work and to keep nuts and bolts in

    A pipe = A pipe can be made out of anything

    Drugs = I have a medicine cabinet full of all sorts of drugs (tylenol, advil, stuff for my back)

    What the police didn’t say is the kind of drugs. They also never said he had illicit drugs. I’m betting the guy had some weed in his place and all of this comes down to that. The police are justifying their incompetence and the way their incompetence led to the murder of an innocent man in his home because he MAY have had some weed.

    The physical evidence shows the police stood where they could not be seen, they shot and killed the man through the door from the side and they also shot long before the door was even more than a foot open.

    As for their claims that there were drugs, baggies, a scale and pipe = they are intentionally not saying the kinds of drugs, how many and the fact that they gained that information by performing an illegal search of a citizen’s property.

  • t.

    @jayjay: Excellent analysis. Well, not really but good try. First the biggest flaw in your reasoning….the police weren’t even there looking for this guy, so what he had in his apartmentis kinda means nothing. Blood “inside” his apartment is ENTIRELY consistent with the police story. All of the information you posted about the door is interesting, but kinda useless without knowing the swing of the door. By the way, the police e new er stand directly in front door there goofball. Interesting information but without a lot more….it’s not really very useful.

  • courtofpublicopinion

    murder, homicide, whatever NOT JUSTIFIED!! this young man was a pizza delivery driver, a son, father, and soon to be husband. too bad he didnt take shooting lessons then maybe the tables would have turned and it would have been 2 sneaky dead cops, and the young man could have hired jose baez to get him off like he did casey anthony now that would be a great story

  • courtofpublicopinion

    i cant wait till some goofball team raids the wrong house and it is full of armed preppers[even the children are taught to shoot as young as 5] and if you watch the show you will see they practice they train they know their homes and are ready to defend it against any threat at a moments notice, so they will drop at least half of the strike force before they get 20 feet inside the door,