Recently retired IMPD Officer victim of robbery, shoots suspect, possible lesson

[IndyDave1776]

Not quite like this. The perp lived.

While I agree with you, the perp lived with the understanding that his breathing career could have ended at that point. It may make him rethink his life. Then again, it may simply make him rethink his methods in crime. Hard to say.

 

[eatsnopaste]

So he was willing to kill a man for what was in his wife's purse? Lets try another scenario, you wake up and hear a noise downstairs, you head down the stairs and see someone running out the door with your wife's purse. You see him jump in a car and drive away, you make it to the street and let off a few downrange, luckily hitting him...what's different about this other than he is a retired PO and it is your home and not a restaurant? Nobodies life was in danger, is purse snatching even a felony? (I'm assuming it would have to be above a certain dollar amount. But I'm guessing) I hate crooks and I am pro police, but this just seems like it is ... Hell we have a retired member here charged for scarring a dog away....somebody help me understand.

 

[j706]

It's human nature to make up facts when you don't know the truth. For years people believed the sun was hauled across the sky by some dude with a chariot. The facts that they had was the sun moved...everything else was the most likely conclusion based on the information that they had. Part of the issue with the "...yeah, but if a non-cop did it..." crowd is that they don't have those stories as they don't make the news. Ignorance is no excuse but maybe it would help if the cops gave a few examples. Though I could give myself carpal tunnel just covering the "iffy" non-cop shoots from the last five years, Here are two of the more odd ones:

Cops are in a shoot out with a bad guy on the east side. In mid shoot out an intoxicated man runs out of the a nearby bar, throws his beer on the ground, pulls his colt python, gets in a weaver stance between the cops and the bad guy and starts cracking off rounds... No handcuffs...several WTFs?!?!! from the popo. If that was an INGO member here I'd like you to sound off and explain what you were thinking. It was really dumb at the time but hilarious looking back.

In a news reported "home invasion robbery" on the "north east side" a father of four shot at an invader with a shotgun. This event was actually a drug dealer robbing another drug dealer. The shooter was a "serious violent felon" in possession of a handgun. He went to jail for a host of other things but wasn't charged for being a felon with a gun.

LMAO on your 2nd paragraph!! I guess the dude figured you guys needed a little help.

 

[TaunTaun]

Now, if the cop had been a white-hispanic, the media would have seen him as looking for trouble. Cracking off shots at a fleeing suspect? Suspect is trying to run away? Suspect had not physically threatened him prior to leaving? Shooter only felt threatened when he stepped in front of a moving vehicle?

I hear that the CBP pulls crap like that too, in order to justify arresting/shooting/detaining someone.

Sorry, but something like that would be tied up in the courts for YEARS with one of us non-cops. Depending on where you live, and the tendencies of the prosecutor's office, your life could be a living hell for a long time.

I guess he should have just been a good witness for the police.

For those of us up in true Indiana (North of US 30, and east of Starke/Lake/Porter counties), I could see Elkhart not prosecuting, K-county probably wouldn't. St. Joseph would be iffy as well as Allen.

JMHO, BIDSIAHILN

 

[88GT]

There is no need for facts here for some. He could have been ran over by naked clowns throwing puppies out the windows while they ripped tags off mattresses and still be wrong. How dare he defend himself, He clearly was violating their rights and militarizing himself. And we just can't have that…….

It has less to do with the fact that he defended himself (which is questionable, who the hell stands in the middle of the road and doesn't think there's risk of being hit by a car? Can I go shoot at the cars on 465 now if I stand in the middle lane?) but with the fact that he gave chase and re-engaged. While Indiana certainly doesn't require you to retreat, there's question about whether or not voluntarily putting oneself in harm's way creates a bona fide self defense situation. In this case, I believe he was given a free pass because he was LE. I am not convinced that Joe Citizen making the same exact choices would have the same outcome.

 

[TaunTaun]

Okay, let's look at some news articles here:

Self-Defense on Road Okay:
Road rage shooting being called self-defense - wave3.com-Louisville News, Weather & Sports - Assault with a deadly denture. Guy gets off motorcycle, dentures fall out, woman in SUV that was tailgating thinks she has been spit on, fears for life. Jeffersonville, IN


Recent, but outside Indiana:
EagleCountryOnline.com VIDEO: Dash Cam Of Officer-Involved Shooting » EagleCountryOnline.com
Bunch of stories about CBP using this to manufacture reasons to etc, etc, etc.


But overall, not a whole lot mentioned in the news on this...

 

[Denny347]

It has less to do with the fact that he defended himself (which is questionable, who the hell stands in the middle of the road and doesn't think there's risk of being hit by a car? Can I go shoot at the cars on 465 now if I stand in the middle lane?) but with the fact that he gave chase and re-engaged. While Indiana certainly doesn't require you to retreat, there's question about whether or not voluntarily putting oneself in harm's way creates a bona fide self defense situation. In this case, I believe he was given a free pass because he was LE. I am not convinced that Joe Citizen making the same exact choices would have the same outcome.

I have responded to the EXACT same scenarios as has BBI with no charges. People say this all the time, "If that was one of us he/she would have been charged." It is their perception, thus their reality. It is inaccurate.

 

[stephen87]

Saw a case last year where a civilian shot at two unarmed suspects as they fled. No charges. One of my own cases where civilian shot at fleeing suspect. No charges.

Some folks should fact check before they start the us v them BS.

The did fact check. The facts came from posts of your local cop haters

 

[Trigger Time]

The only wrong I see in this is that we have laws in Indiana where you cannot shoot criminals. Fleeing, stealing, Ect. I believe we should be able to shoot them. You want to be a dirt bag and steal other peoples hard earned stuff .... Die for it! If criminals knew death was a real option maybe they'd think twice before breaking the law. Because right now at least in Marion county you can go downtown and shoot people and be back out to do it again before you can blink.

good for the CIVILIAN in this case!

 

[vitamink]

It has less to do with the fact that he defended himself (which is questionable, who the hell stands in the middle of the road and doesn't think there's risk of being hit by a car? Can I go shoot at the cars on 465 now if I stand in the middle lane?) but with the fact that he gave chase and re-engaged. While Indiana certainly doesn't require you to retreat, there's question about whether or not voluntarily putting oneself in harm's way creates a bona fide self defense situation. In this case, I believe he was given a free pass because he was LE. I am not convinced that Joe Citizen making the same exact choices would have the same outcome.

Did nobody read my drunk guy on east tenth street story?


Good, questionable, and bad shootings happen here all the time and nothing happens. Shootings happen all the time where the "victim" is a lifetime violent criminal that can't even watch a movie where a firearm is involved and nothing happens. A lot of factors play into deciding if there are charges or not.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

1. The Media often screws up the story and may have this one screwed up too.

2. Yes those dripping in qualified immunity often have more leeway.

3. Every shooting is a world to itself.

Wait and see.

 

[rockhopper46038]

It has less to do with the fact that he defended himself (which is questionable, who the hell stands in the middle of the road and doesn't think there's risk of being hit by a car? Can I go shoot at the cars on 465 now if I stand in the middle lane?) but with the fact that he gave chase and re-engaged. While Indiana certainly doesn't require you to retreat, there's question about whether or not voluntarily putting oneself in harm's way creates a bona fide self defense situation. In this case, I believe he was given a free pass because he was LE. I am not convinced that Joe Citizen making the same exact choices would have the same outcome.

My point behind posting the article is touched on by 88GT's comment. I see this as a good story for all of us law abiding gun owners if the former LEO is not charged. I'm not a lawyer (maybe one will chime in), but aside from perhaps having LEOSA privileges, this former IMPD officer has no legal status I am aware of that differs from a non-former LEO. So what we may have here is the person with the oft-referred to (by anti-2nd Amendment folks) "decades of law enforcement experience" that illustrated that experience by chasing down a perp and then, when he found himself in the path of the perp's car "felt his life was in danger" and engaged the perp with his handgun. While making absolutely no critique (positive or negative) of the actions that the former LEO chose for himself in this situation, I would have to believe that if the prosecutor does not choose to file any charges in this matter it will represent a rather clear precedent for what could and couldn't not be prosecuted in the future. I could be wrong; maybe there are legal privileges enjoyed by former officers (aside from LEOSA) that I am unaware of, but wouldn't it be awfully difficult going forward to put the squeeze on anyone that acted in quite similar fashion in similar circumstances, and if a prosecutor in the same jurisdiction tried to do so, wouldn't a defense attorney be able to trot out a statement like "well, a 20/30 year IMPD former officer, using all the training and knowledge developed over that LEO career, made the decision that deadly force needed to be employed in order to prevent death or extreme bodily harm from resulting to his person; my client was faced with the same circumstances and reacted in the same manner. Why again are you bringing charges against him/her?

So my post was mostly around this perhaps being another helpful incident for the defense of the use of force in Indianapolis, were it to become necessary for one of us Central Indiana folks.

Having read Kirk's comment that "every shooting is an event unto itself, perhaps I am misinterpreting it's potential value.

 

[Denny347]

My point behind posting the article is touched on by 88GT's comment. I see this as a good story for all of us law abiding gun owners if the former LEO is not charged. I'm not a lawyer (maybe one will chime in), but aside from perhaps having LEOSA privileges, this former IMPD officer has no legal status I am aware of that differs from a non-former LEO. So what we may have here is the person with the oft-referred to (by anti-2nd Amendment folks) "decades of law enforcement experience" that illustrated that experience by chasing down a perp and then, when he found himself in the path of the perp's car "felt his life was in danger" and engaged the perp with his handgun. While making absolutely no critique (positive or negative) of the actions that the former LEO chose for himself in this situation, I would have to believe that if the prosecutor does not choose to file any charges in this matter it will represent a rather clear precedent for what could and couldn't not be prosecuted in the future. I could be wrong; maybe there are legal privileges enjoyed by former officers (aside from LEOSA) that I am unaware of, but wouldn't it be awfully difficult going forward to put the squeeze on anyone that acted in quite similar fashion in similar circumstances, and if a prosecutor in the same jurisdiction tried to do so, wouldn't a defense attorney be able to trot out a statement like "well, a 20/30 year IMPD former officer, using all the training and knowledge developed over that LEO career, made the decision that deadly force needed to be employed in order to prevent death or extreme bodily harm from resulting to his person; my client was faced with the same circumstances and reacted in the same manner. Why again are you bringing charges against him/her?

So my post was mostly around this perhaps being another helpful incident for the defense of the use of force in Indianapolis, were it to become necessary for one of us Central Indiana folks.

Having read Kirk's comment that "every shooting is an event unto itself, perhaps I am misinterpreting it's potential value.

You are correct, retired means just that, retired. Outside of LEOSA, his actions are judged the same as any other fellow non-LEO's actions are.

 

[Trigger Time]

It's human nature to make up facts when you don't know the truth. For years people believed the sun was hauled across the sky by some dude with a chariot. The facts that they had was the sun moved...everything else was the most likely conclusion based on the information that they had. Part of the issue with the "...yeah, but if a non-cop did it..." crowd is that they don't have those stories as they don't make the news. Ignorance is no excuse but maybe it would help if the cops gave a few examples. Though I could give myself carpal tunnel just covering the "iffy" non-cop shoots from the last five years, Here are two of the more odd ones:

Cops are in a shoot out with a bad guy on the east side. In mid shoot out an intoxicated man runs out of the a nearby bar, throws his beer on the ground, pulls his colt python, gets in a weaver stance between the cops and the bad guy and starts cracking off rounds... No handcuffs...several WTFs?!?!! from the popo. If that was an INGO member here I'd like you to sound off and explain what you were thinking. It was really dumb at the time but hilarious looking back.

In a news reported "home invasion robbery" on the "north east side" a father of four shot at an invader with a shotgun. This event was actually a drug dealer robbing another drug dealer. The shooter was a "serious violent felon" in possession of a handgun. He went to jail for a host of other things but wasn't charged for being a felon with a gun.

The first story it movie scene worthy!
The second story is what's wrong with Marion county prosecutors and judges and why cops get killed by people who should be rotting in prison for prior things.

 

[Denny347]

1. The Media often screws up the story and may have this one screwed up too.

2. Yes those dripping in qualified immunity often have more leeway.

3. Every shooting is a world to itself.

Wait and see.

A retiree has no qualified immunity.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Did nobody read my drunk guy on east tenth street story?


Good, questionable, and bad shootings happen here all the time and nothing happens. Shootings happen all the time where the "victim" is a lifetime violent criminal that can't even watch a movie where a firearm is involved and nothing happens. A lot of factors play into deciding if there are charges or not.

No. He didn't have any writing on him!

Seriously, I would have joined the police by adding one more WTF. If he would do something like that, did he also refer to his Python as Monte?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

A retiree has no qualified immunity.

Yes, we are quite aware of this fact.

I was commenting on law enforcement in general as the complaints here are directed at law enforcement.

 

[poppy]

Now, if the cop had been a white-hispanic, the media would have seen him as looking for trouble. Cracking off shots at a fleeing suspect? Suspect is trying to run away? Suspect had not physically threatened him prior to leaving? Shooter only felt threatened when he stepped in front of a moving vehicle?

I hear that the CBP pulls crap like that too, in order to justify arresting/shooting/detaining someone.

Sorry, but something like that would be tied up in the courts for YEARS with one of us non-cops. Depending on where you live, and the tendencies of the prosecutor's office, your life could be a living hell for a long time.

I guess he should have just been a good witness for the police.

For those of us up in true Indiana (North of US 30, and east of Starke/Lake/Porter counties), I could see Elkhart not prosecuting, K-county probably wouldn't. St. Joseph would be iffy as well as Allen.

JMHO, BIDSIAHILN

Can you explain further what you mean by "true indiana"?

 

[Mark 1911]

Good for the officer. Any of us should be able to defend ourselves. Want to criminals to think twice? This is the way! Good!

 

[Denny347]

Yes, we are quite aware of this fact.

I was commenting on law enforcement in general as the complaints here are directed at law enforcement.

Ok, why does it even need brought up? It's not what most people think it is, you of all people know that.

Qualified immunity | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia | LII / Legal Information Institute