On May 4 of this year, Brian Temple attended a scheduled meeting with his probation officer for prior convictions. After the routine meeting, Mr. Temple’s probation officer told him someone wanted to ask him some questions. She left the room and returned shortly thereafter with officer Peter Callahan of the Helena Police Department. Upon seeing Officer Callahan, Mr. Temple turned and ran to his car. He jumped in his car to leave, and began backing out of the parking space. Callahan chased him out to his car, drew his gun and positioned himself in front of Mr. Temple’s vehicle.
As they were in the middle of the street, and there was plenty of ample space, Mr. Temple turned left to avoid the officer and in order to go around him. Callahan, escalating a simple situation into deadly violence, fired his gun. The bullet went through the passenger side of the windshield and hit Mr. Temple in the chest, collapsing his lung and barely missing his heart. Mr. Temple miraculously managed to drive himself to the hospital, where doctors said he missed death by a narrow margin.
To justify this attempted execution, Callahan (as per usual police practice) claimed he feared for his life because Mr. Temple was driving at him. However, perhaps Callahan wouldn’t have been in that situation to begin with if he hadn’t chased, and pulled a gun on someone who simply didn’t feel like talking to him. In addition, the trajectory of the bullet as demonstrated by the hole in the windshield supports BrianTemple’s account – that he turned left to go around the officer.
The news was quick to paint Brian Temple as a less than sympathetic victim of police brutality. News sources pointed out his past record, reporting he had a past conviction of assault on an officer as well as theft, and noting in this instance that he had “fled the scene.” However, it is important to understand that during this particular instance,the only thing Mr. Temple was actually fleeing, was from a conversation. He was at a routine probation meeting. He was not under arrest. He was not committing a crime.
Even under the most bastardized interpretations of the Constitution, people have a right to refuse police questioning when they are suspects in a criminal matter, in the absence of an attorney. Callahan should not even have chased Brian, much less shot him in the chest. The penalty for fleeing a conversation with a police officer is not and should not be death.
Further, a quick investigation into Mr. Temple’s past conviction about 6 years ago reveals the previous “assault” on an officer was actually a situation in which Mr. Temple was confronted in a store by police for a theft matter. He turned to run. John Temple, Brian Temple’s father, says in that incident, the officer tackled his son to the ground when his son attempted to flee. As they both went down, the officer scratched his arm on a shelf. Under Montana law, this can result in an “assault on an officer” conviction.
The very next day after the earlier incident of alleged assault, John Temple coincidentally ran into the officer at the gym where they both work out. He asked the officer, Nick Painter, whether Brian had actually attacked or assaulted him in any manner. Officer Painter explained Brian had not kicked, punched, shoved, or otherwise retaliated in any manner that constituted assault, but the scratch on his arm from the shelf was enough for an officer assault conviction under Montana law.
John has mostly avoided reading news stories about the matter because he is aware of their bias. “I know my son has a lot of issues, and I know it looks bad,” said John Temple. “But most of it was for stupid stuff. He has some mental and emotional issues.” Indeed, Brian Temple has a history of bipolar disorder, diagnosed at a young age, as well as panic and anxiety disorders. John Temple stated these conditions would never excuse his son’s behavior, and certainly his son had to take responsibility for his own actions – but his son’s transgressions did not warrant an attempted execution in the street.
“He tried to kill my son in the middle of the street,” said John. “I want people to see this event from beginning to end. That day, and under those circumstances, and in that moment, it should not have happened that way. [The officer] only did it because he was angry. He was angry that Brian did not stop.”
John rightly makes the point that essentially, his son was shot because he disrespected authority. When he turned and ran from Callahan, he was not dangerous and was not evading arrest. As he was on probation, the police had his personal information and address. They clearly knew who his probation officer was. There were a multitude of ways in which they could have contacted Brian later. Officer Callahan had a variety of options to go about resolving the matter, but chose the most deadly and unnecessary one conceivable.
The bullet trajectory supports Brian’s account that he swerved left to avoid the officer, rather than the other way around. Ultimately, Brian was shot solely because he refused to engage in conversation with a hallowed man of the law, and because he refused to bow to authority.
John further noted that perhaps it would have been easier for Callahan had Brian died – since he could then tell all the lies he wanted to cover up the attempted execution. Not that Brian being alive to tell the tale has stopped corruption, by any means. Police know the public will side with them any day, over the word of an alleged criminal, and they take full advantage of their perceived holiness. John was recently informed that the Helena Police Department removed the windshield of Brian’s truck, which had previously been impounded as evidence. The police further refused his son’s attorney’s request to examine the windshield.
I would like to know if there was any prior history with Officer Callahan. It seemed like Brian was fine until he saw him. He didn’t run when he was told another officer was going to ask him questions, he ran when he saw Callahan. It makes me wonder if at some prior occasion Callahan assaulted or threatened him. While a parolee has far less rights than other people, he still has the right not to be summarily executed.(Callahan’s reaction to him running also makes me think there may be a history between them) The worst that should have happened to him was a revocation of parole.
I believe they there is more to the story and as Guy said, there is probably a history, most people don’t just get up and run unless they are threatened. It makes you wonder if they should start pushing harder mental evaluations and other programs when they hire these cops instead of a good ol boy system or just run in circles or have a better academic test to weed out people who don’t get what it means to represent the people. A bunch of nut jobs who are cops now and they wonder why people arm themselves and scoff at trading guns in for whatever, have to have protection from the scoff laws and the protectors now. there are people out there that probably cause this way of thinking, but if you look at everyone that way, your just as bad as the people your going after, more or less your a criminal with a badge and gun, the title is the only difference between the two.
something similar happened in sprinfield vt a while back no one was shot, but the officer sot a fleeing car in the back of the police station in a domestic dispute. he returned to the station and never filed a report. the bullet holes in the vehicle strongley show he fired at a fleeing vehicle moving away from him, but some how endangering his life.
I’m to the point now where I think the best way to handle a police encounter is, get down on your stomach, put your hands behind your back, and shut the F up. Don’t help them. No info, no id, no communication. If they want to take you , they take you, you don’t get up. You don’t say nothin’. 3 days. They have to charge you with somethin’. Whats it gonna be? Resisting? You were in the arrest position from the get go voluntarily. Something you said?… You hopefully said nothing!! Everything that happens from the moment you lay down is rape. Let ‘em. Bible say “Agree with your advisary”, so agree. To the extreme! You are under arrest from the moment a police officer talks to you, don’t let them fool you, don’t think so?.. try it… go ahead… RUN! see if you under arrest.
Very well written!
The cop should not have shot him. However, if it was me, I would have stopped if a cop had a gun drawn on me. Otherwise, you risk getting shot by a criminal gang that have very little accountability.
I agree with you Brodie. I probably would not have run away in the same situation. But still, that doesn’t give the cops the right to chase him down and start shooting… pretty ridiculous.
Good article. I have to disagree with one statement: “Even under the most bastardized interpretations of the Constitution, people have a right to refuse police questioning when they are suspects in a criminal matter, in the absence of an attorney.”
Not in America today. Police authority is the highest authority in the land. As you well know, ANY disobedience to ANY police command is a crime punishable by any method, including and up to death. I’m sure in this case the police officer and all police officers will agree the policeman did absolutely nothing wrong.
Keep in mind, this is the same country where the IL Supreme Court ruled that it is a crime to resist criminal activity, if that criminal activity is committed by the police.
Sure, it’s wrong, I agree with that — but the courts, judges, and all the police with guns and jails think what they’re doing is a-okay.
Time for a cop culling
@ Ogre
Tried googling the words you used and some variations. Would you mind seeing if you could dig up a reference to that IL case, I would appreciate it.
Boy it,s a fact that there are worse things than dying,it,s a damn shame that one of them is being a legal U.S. citizen who exercises the bill of rights and U.S. constitution,the goverment is completely out of control with no conciense at all,and these stupid goverment/taxpayer employ,s don,t even realize what they are doing to the country much less themselves.
We are slipping down that slippery slope to an absolute police state here in the USA. From the ineffectual and ridiculously failed war on drugs, to the most sinister and draconian nighttime police swat raids, it is crystal clear that there is a war on we citizens. Or should I say, “we subjects”.
In the night, when we are asleep, who’s to know that the swat raid is not a home invasion robbery? In the confusion effected during the police break in, and when waking up to chaos, I’m surprised the cops themselves are not liquidated.
But maybe that is what the cops need, a reality check. What would THEY do if the situation were reversed?? They’d come up shooting! But of course, we are all held to a different standard.
It’s time we all wake up and do something about this before we wake up to a country worse than Hitler’s Germany.
Another great article by George Sand! You Rock!
i feel depression , helena police department should be held for responsible for his account innocence. And someone make consequence decison to stop cops i hope they need to wake up call. officers should know better who is criminal or innocent? ……
The only way we are ever going to see any justice in this country is if people start defending themselves against these criminals with badges. When a number of them rightly die either they will back down and try to rectify the tyranny or THEY will ratchet things up notch only to find out that they are vastly outnumbered.
y do have a pic of some asian dude and not grian
oh my bad i meant brian not grian
Monatanans don’t like injustice, the cop almost murdered this guy. It shows very poor training on the officers part. Why did the cop chase him in the first place, cause he took off? I think Helena PD got’s some explaining to do….
The Illinois Supreme Court story that Ogre was referring to happened recently. It relates to a SWAT team that went to raid a house, in this case the wrong house, so their warrant was illegal. The homeowner defended his home and was charged for basically resisting police authority. The court ruled that yes, the police were breaking the law and violating the man’s constitutional rights, but that did not give the man the right to defend himself against police authority. Because right or wrong, the police are always right. So says the Illinois Supreme Court.
Supposedly in the old days you couldn’t even be taken to jail by the police. You first had to have a trial and be convicted before your life or liberty could be taken from you. This was just too inconvenient for the police. Just like the constitution grants you the right to a trial by jury…except…when defending yourself against a traffic ticket because it is just too inconvenient when the state is trying to make some revenue and you want them to pay for a jury just to get a couple of hundred bucks out of you.
So basically you are entitled to all your rights unless they are not convenient in which case we are sorry but we will have to temporarily suspend your rights until we have deprived you of your life, liberty and cash. And if you resist, we will charge you with resisting too. And failure to obey. And if you look at us funny, we will charge you with assault since you were probably thinking about it. And conspiracy to commit assault. And conspiracy to resist. And anyone, including your lawyer who tries to help you will be charged with materially supporting terrorism. Just give up….
So when the police break into your house dressed in Darth Vader gear you have to just let them kill you and your family. Insane man really really insane. They are trying to create a cadre of cop haters.