Thin blue line

[phylodog]

I'm just going to leave this here.

California Officer Shoots Fellow Officer During Arrest Attempt

 

[shibumiseeker]

Wow. That's a tough one.

 

[KG1]

I'd say they had no choice. They handled it the way they should have. I commend the Dept. and the officers involved for having the fortitude and integrity to do the right thing and take down this alleged bad actor. It's just to bad it was one of their own and it escalated to the point that someone lost their life. I'm glad none of the good guys got hurt.

 

[hornadylnl]

I think the article said that the officer who shot the cop was on the check point with him. I wonder if the officer that shot was aware of what was going on behind the scenes or if the investigating officers left him in the dark.

 

[rw496]

I didn't see how old the officer was, but that isn't even illegal in Indiana

 

[shibumiseeker]

I didn't see how old the officer was, but that isn't even illegal in Indiana

The details are vague from the article, but it was suggestive that pictures and explicit material was involved, and if so then it is very illegal and the officer could be charged with child pornography. A police officer and child pornographer would have no chance in jail.

 

[buckstopshere]

Would this be considered suicide by cop? I mean, he's at a DUI check point surrounded I'm assuming by his peers and superiors. He had no chance of fighting his way out.

 

[Scutter01]

I didn't see how old the officer was, but that isn't even illegal in Indiana

The age of consent in Cali is 18.

What is the California Legal Age of Consent for 2012?

 

[rambone]

Sigh. All I could think about was the bad laws that caused the confrontation and led to his death. He was in love with a 17 year old. Is that really a good reason to take away his freedom, his guns, his career, and brand him as a sex offender/child molester/pedophile?

That DUI checkpoint was really getting on my nerves too.

 

[rw496]

The details are vague from the article, but it was suggestive that pictures and explicit material was involved, and if so then it is very illegal and the officer could be charged with child pornography. A police officer and child pornographer would have no chance in jail.

Possession of child pornography is a child under 16, unless you're producing a movie, then its 18, which sounds unlikely in this case. Maybe this cop was 22 and liked kinky sex with a little younger girl. In Indiana, the age of consent is 16, like many states. Regardless, this was handled terribly. The department confronted an on-duty police officer aggressively in front of people, IMO, to make a show that they will not tolerate that type of behavior and the chief or sheriff can be on the front page saying how he is cleaning up the department. All the rest about, we had to act immediately, sounds like them covering their asses afterward. They could have just as easily called him into the Chief's office, non-confrontationally, and told him to turn in his badge and gun. Without them releasing any other information about what the emergency was, or what was so explicit about the consensual sexual relationship that they had to act immediately, it makes me believe this is them covering their collective asses. Bottom line: a cop is dead at the hands of another cop because he was having consensual sex with a 17 year-old girl, an act that is not even illegal in other states.

 

[jgreiner]

Sigh. All I could think about was the bad laws that caused the confrontation and led to his death. He was in love with a 17 year old. Is that really a good reason to take away his freedom, his guns, his career, and brand him as a sex offender/child molester/pedophile?

That DUI checkpoint was really getting on my nerves too.

The law didn't get him killed. His CHOICE to draw his weapon, fire on fellow officers, and resist, is what got him killed.

Equating a bad law to his death is no better than equating his death to guns being present.

 

[KG1]

Bottom line: a cop is dead at the hands of another cop because he was having consensual sex with a 17 year-old girl, an act that is not even illegal in other states.

Bottom line is the alleged cop in question pulled his firearm and was subsequently shot and killed for doing so, not for having consensual sex. He alone made a bad situation worse.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

It appears to be a blackletter self-defense shooting. I cannot imagine the officers being found in any fault here.

Is there some sort of litigation over this?

 

[Prometheus]

Bottom line is the alleged cop in question pulled his firearm and was subsequently shot and killed for doing so, not for having consensual sex. He alone made a bad situation worse.

In general, people don't like being locked in cage. No one should ever be surprised when a person resists being chained and caged.

Suicide by cop is a good thought. It probably was.

As to trying to disassociate the cause for the arrest and the consequences there of is to over look the elephant in the room. They go hand in hand.

That must have been one chaotic scene. If it had to go wrong somewhere, at least it was atty a un constitutional scene.

 

[ATOMonkey]

That is 360 degrees of ****ed up.

 

[rw496]

Bottom line is the alleged cop in question pulled his firearm and was subsequently shot and killed for doing so, not for having consensual sex. He alone made a bad situation worse.

I don't agree with that. Anybody can be backed into a corner or induced to fight. The hallmark of good police work is convincing people not to fight or de-escalating. He made a bad decision definitely, people who are aggressively confronted and are in fight or flight do that. You should never try to take an on-duty armed police officer into custody except as a last resort. I think they know that and that's why they are trying to cover their asses now.

 

[shibumiseeker]

Possession of child pornography is a child under 16, unless you're producing a movie, then its 18,.

Ummm, do you have a cite for this, because that's not how I understand USC Section 18. It only addresses minors, it makes no age mention below the age of majority.

From the US DOJ website:

Child pornography is defined by law as the visual depiction of a person under the age of 18 engaged in sexually explicit conduct. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 2256(1) and (8). This means that any image of a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct is illegal contraband. Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. See 18 U.S.C. § 2256(2). A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive. In addition, for purposes of the child pornography statutes, federal law considers a person under the age of 18 to be a child. See 18 U.S.C. § 2256(1). It is irrelevant that the age of consent for sexual activity in a given state might be lower than 18. A visual depiction for purposes of the federal child pornography laws includes a photograph or videotape, including undeveloped film or videotape, as well as data stored electronically which can be converted into a visual image. For example, images of children engaged in sexually explicit conduct stored on a computer disk are considered visual depictions.

 

[rw496]

It appears to be a blackletter self-defense shooting. I cannot imagine the officers being found in any fault here.

Is there some sort of litigation over this?

If you look solely at the moment the fatal shot was fired it is clearly a self-defense shoot and I don't see the firing officer at fault in any way. It is the administrative decision of sending two officers/co-workers to arrest an armed on-duty officer that led to the violent encounter. They knew or should have known that this type of encounter was inevitable.

 

[rambone]

The law didn't get him killed. His CHOICE to draw his weapon, fire on fellow officers, and resist, is what got him killed.

Equating a bad law to his death is no better than equating his death to guns being present.

Obviously the final straw was his reaction. But this whole confrontation over his girlfriend should have never happened in the first place. Sad.

Bottom line is the alleged cop in question pulled his firearm and was subsequently shot and killed for doing so, not for having consensual sex. He alone made a bad situation worse.

The bad situation came from bad laws.

I don't agree with that. Anybody can be backed into a corner or induced to fight. The hallmark of good police work is convincing people not to fight or de-escalating. He made a bad decision definitely, people who are aggressively confronted and are in fight or flight do that. You should never try to take an on-duty armed police officer into custody except as a last resort. I think they know that and that's why they are trying to cover their asses now.

 

[rw496]

Ummm, do you have a cite for this, because that's not how I understand USC Section 18. It only addresses minors, it makes no age mention below the age of majority.

From the US DOJ website:

Child pornography is defined by law as the visual depiction of a person under the age of 18 engaged in sexually explicit conduct. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 2256(1) and (8). This means that any image of a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct is illegal contraband. Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. See 18 U.S.C. § 2256(2). A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive. In addition, for purposes of the child pornography statutes, federal law considers a person under the age of 18 to be a child. See 18 U.S.C. § 2256(1). It is irrelevant that the age of consent for sexual activity in a given state might be lower than 18. A visual depiction for purposes of the federal child pornography laws includes a photograph or videotape, including undeveloped film or videotape, as well as data stored electronically which can be converted into a visual image. For example, images of children engaged in sexually explicit conduct stored on a computer disk are considered visual depictions.

I was referring to Indiana: 35-42-4-4, it is in-line with the federal law and diferentiates between possession and dissemination.