Drug Policy

DA Issues Report on the Eurie Stamps Raid: Cop Who Killed Unarmed, 68-Year-Man Tripped, Accidentally Fired His Gun

|

I'll have to do some research to find the exact number, but off the top of my head this is at least the eighth time a highly-trained, best-of-the-best SWAT team cop has killed someone by negligently discharging his weapon.

A stumbling Framingham SWAT officer accidentally fired his rifle and shot a beloved grandpa to death as he lay face-down on the floor of his own home, authorities admitted yesterday, sparking incredulous outrage by the 68-year-old retiree's family…

Officer Paul Duncan, who fired the fatal shot, did so after he tripped during a search of Stamps' home, according to a report issued yesterday by Middlesex District Attorney Gerard Leone's office. Duncan will not face charges.

"The actions of Officer Duncan do not rise to the level of criminal conduct, and the shooting death of Eurie Stamps was an accident," Leone's office said.

On Jan. 5, police were searching for Stamps' stepson, Joseph Bushfan, when they served a warrant on Stamps' home. Bushfan was arrested outside the home, allegedly carrying crack cocaine and money.

Officers then hit the home, throwing a stun grenade and ordering everyone inside to put their hands up and lie on the floor, the report states. Stamps, a grandfather of 12, had obeyed and was lying in the hallway when Duncan attempted to cuff and frisk him.

"As he stepped to his left, (Duncan) lost his balance and began to fall over backwards," the report states. "Officer Duncan realized that his right foot was off the floor and the tactical equipment that he was wearing was making his movements very awkward. While falling, Officer Duncan removed his left hand from his rifle, which was pointing down towards the ground and put his left arm out to try and catch himself. As he did so, he heard a shot."

So assuming the report is accurate, all that equipment Duncan was wearing to protect himself from the unarmed Stamps is what caused Duncan to accidentally kill Stamps. If in all the commotion of the raid it was Stamps (who no one suspects was involved in any criminal activity) who accidentally shot and killed Duncan, I don't think there's any doubt he'd be facing a felony charge.

I don't believe Duncan murdered Stamps in cold blood. I do believe he at the very least was negligent with his weapon. And it resulted in someone dying. Like the other cases in which a SWAT cop accidentally killed someone, he's getting a break that regular people don't get, including people who have made honest mistakes in the midst of the same sorts of highly-volatile police raids.

The argument here is not to start putting police in prison for making honest mistakes under incredibly difficult circumstances. The argument is to stop creating those circumstances when it isn't absolutely necessary. Short of that, we're once again left with this: An innocent, unarmed man was shot dead by a cop. But the cop isn't responsible. The victim isn't responsible. And the policies that created the situation aren't responsible. Which means that in a few days, or a few weeks, or a few months, I'm going to be writing all of this again.

NEXT: Drug Sentencing Reform in Kentucky

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “accidently” shoot a cop and see what happens.

    1. I believe that Balko ran a story about a kid who accidently shot a cop a few months ago. Yeah, they put the kid administravely leave with pay for a few weeks.

      1. jeez… put the kid on admistrative leave…

        1. Try again. Administrative.

          Not that I’ve ever done anything like that. Nope.

          hehehe…

      2. wish I could’ve been so lucky in my youth, I had to work for my pay as a child 😉

  2. While falling, Officer Duncan removed his left hand from his rifle, which was pointing down towards the ground and put his left arm out to try and catch himself. As he did so, he heard a shot.

    There’s a step missing in there somewhere.

    1. I’d guess that he had his finger inside the trigger guard and his grip instinctively tightened when he felt himself falling. In other words a basic violation of gun safety rules.

      1. Yeah, the step I was thinking of was “He pulled the trigger.”

        There is no way an accident report this shoddy and lacking in detail–and lacking in corrective and preventative action–would ever be allowed in private industry.

        1. “We came to work that day, and turned on assembly line #5, set the flow rate to standard, and then, well, long story short, the whole factory burned to the ground. But it was nobody’s fault, honest.”

          1. Adolf Hitler was rejected as a young man on his application to art school… One thing led to another… And the United States dropped two atomic bombs on the sovereign nation of Japan.

            – Brian Regan

            1. Maybe they just redacted the “Yadda Yadda Yadda.”

              I think Costanza may have written the report.

              1. And they didn’t even mention the bisque in the report!

          2. I’m probably sensitive because I’ve worked in manufacturing management and engineering my entire career. I’ve had to train employees not to produce shoddy investigative work like this time and time again. And I’ve been held to that same standard by my superiors. No root cause or causes were identified, and no corrective action was specified.

            I’ve had to deal with direr consequences when an employee cut his finger or strained his back. And people wonder why libertarians claim that private industry is more accountable than government.

            From JD the elder’s comment, I assume he has some knowledge of these procedures too.

        2. The missing step is “the gun went off.” Criminals and police NEVER pull the trigger. Who trains these guys? Sometimes they shoot each other because the unarmed victim is in the middle of a gaggle of these murderers.

      2. No, it says he removed his hand from the gun as he fell.

        Of course, that begs brings up the question of why he even had his hand anywhere near the trigger of his weapon when surrounded by unarmed, prostrate “civilians”.

        1. He removed his left hand from the gun. My reading is that he removed his left hand from the fore end, but kept his right hand on the trigger. Which is just plain bad form. Everyone knows (except highly trained SWAT professionals, apparently) that you don’t walk around with your finger on the trigger.

          1. Mother Superior jump the gun
            Mother Superior jump the gun
            Mother Superior jump the gun
            Mother Superior jump the gun
            Mother Superior jump the gun
            Mother Superior jump the gun

            Happiness is a warm gun
            (Bang bang, shoot shoot)
            Happiness is a warm gun mama
            (Bang bang, shoot shoot)
            When I hold you in my arms
            (Oh yeah)
            And I feel my finger on your trigger
            (Ooo, oh yeah)
            I know nobody can do me no harm
            (Ooo, oh yeah)

            Because happiness is a warm gun mama
            (Bang bang, shoot shoot)
            Happiness is a warm gun, yes it is
            (Bang bang, shoot shoot)
            Happiness is a warm, yes it is, gun
            (Happiness, bang bang, shoot shoot)
            Well, don’t you know that happiness is a warm gun mama
            (Happiness is a warm gun yeah)

        2. No, it says he removed his hand from the gun as he fell.

          As Zeb pointed out, he removed his left hand. Where was his right hand? I’m going to take a wild guess as to where his right index finger was.

          And it’s not like removing both hands from the gun makes this in any way better.

      3. “Mistakes were made.”

    2. My thoughts exactly. Weapons training 101 – never put your finger on the trigger until you are ready to fire.

      From the description he was presumably holding the rifle with two hands, right index finger on the trigger. When he tripped and let go with his left hand he lost control of the weapon and squeezed with his right hand to hold tight as he fell. In squeezing to hold on to the rifle, he pulled the trigger.

      Which is why you never put your finger on the trigger until you are ready to fire. Which is the sort of situation that they have “negligent homicide” for. Which would also include the commander who sends in heavily armed swat teams on a “raid” to serve these sorts of warrants.

      1. Ive said in cases like this before that even negligent homicide doesnt qualify. After training, you only put your finger on the trigger with intent to pull, so he meant to shoot someone, if not the person he actually shot.

        Murder 1. Premeditated. The premeditation was putting the finger inside the guard.

        1. He should have had the weapon on “Safe” also. It simple to activate and deactivate the safety one handed.

    3. It was incompetent gun handling in several respects. As everyone notes, his finger should have been off the trigger. Also, if you have a loaded and cocked gun (Im assuming it was an AR15) pointed at someone, at the very least, the safety should be on until the decision to fire is reached.

      This certainly qualifies as reckless conduct which resulted in the death of another person. Where I live that is called involuntary manslaughter. Why isnt this cop being charged? Yes, I know the answers to that.

  3. An innocent, unarmed man was shot dead by a cop. But the cop isn’t responsible. The victim isn’t responsible. And the policies that created the situation aren’t responsible. Which means that in a few days, or a few weeks, or a few months, I’m going to be writing all of this again.

    Fantastic conclusion, Radley.

  4. And yet the anti-gun zealots still say that “only teh police should have guns…they’re highly trained professionals!”

  5. While falling, Officer Duncan removed his left hand from his rifle, which was pointing down towards the ground and put his left arm out to try and catch himself. As he did so, he heard fired a shot, fatally injuring an unarmed man laying at his feet.

    Oh, and Radley:

    The argument here is not to start putting police in prison for making honest mistakes under incredibly difficult circumstances.

    My argument is for treating police exactly like any other citizen.

    What would have happened to, say, a hunter who stumbled and shot somebody laying at his feet? Nothing? I doubt it. Maybe nothing is what should happen, but that’s not how Joe Citizen Serf would be treated. This cop should be treated the same way.

    1. What would have happened to, say, a hunter who stumbled and shot somebody laying at his feet?

      Depends on who the shooter is.

      1. Didn’t Dick Cheney already do you scenario? who’s gonna punish the rich and people in power?

    2. What would have happened to, say, a hunter who stumbled and shot somebody laying at his feet?

      He should receive an apology from the man he shot.

  6. While falling, Officer Duncan removed his left hand from his rifle, which was pointing down towards the ground and put his left arm out to try and catch himself. As he did so, he heard a shot.

    Alien hand syndrome strikes again!

    1. Or Invisible Hand.

  7. “the shooting death of Eurie Stamps was an accident.”

    An accidental killing is still a crime for us peons if I recall. Negligent homocide or involuntary manslaughter would be the most common charges.

    1. Ha! See my comment below. I skimmed over to post and then came back to read all. Looks like you and I had the exact same thought.

      1. Both of you guys beat me to it.

  8. There are FOUR RULES. You have to break at least two to have such an accident. He was negligent and just plain stupid.

    http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org…..unttip.htm

    1. K = Keep your finger outside the trigger guard until ready to shoot. If a hunter stumbles with a firearm in one hand and nothing in the other, whatever that person does with their free hand will automatically happen with the hand holding the gun. If a finger is inside the trigger guard, that hand is likely going to close around the pistol grip of the gun and on the trigger causing an unwanted discharge.

      I didn’t know that the government was running a bureau full of psychics.

    2. As a prior Marine, I must agree Sir.

  9. Any of you sick fucking cops want to come and defend this shit?

    I have to say you have done a great job of thoroughly turning law abiding citizens against you. Keep up the good work!

    I’m dying to hear your PR spin on this and other similar cases!

    1. Duuuuuuuunphy…..Duuuuuuuunphyyyyyy

  10. The argument here is not to start putting police in prison for making honest mistakes under incredibly difficult circumstances.

    It sounds like the officer didn’t exercise proper trigger safety. I’m pretty sure that is a part of SWAT training. Even the 2 hour class I had to take to get my CCW permit made a big deal of trigger safety. He was negligent and someone died. I’m no lawyer, but that sounds like involuntary manslaughter to me.

    1. Incredibly difficult circumstances? What an asshat.

    2. Two-hour class? I couldn’t even get through the mandatory 15-minute lesson at my local NRA shooting range without convincing them I understand that rule. It’s the single most basic principle of gun safety. Don’t put your finger on the trigger if you’re not preparing to shoot, and if there’s anything alive in front of you, don’t prepare to shoot if you don’t want to kill it.

  11. I wonder what happens if a “civilian” trips, falls, and hears a shot that winds up killing a cop.

    1. At least he’ll have some respect from his fellow prisoners while serving his 10-20 years.

      1. At least he’ll have some respect from his fellow prisoners while serving his 10-20 years on death row.

  12. Notwithstanding the officer’s individual incompetence, why the fuck do they need rifles other than to be tacticool, or am I answering my own question?

    A handgun is a much better indoor weapon, and probably would have been dropped in this situation. Although if he really thought it necessary to hold a gun on the grandpa as he cuffed him (shouldn’t a non-cuffing officer have covered that?), maybe the result would have been the same.

    1. “why the fuck do they need rifles”

      Because rifles are the choice of big game hunters and as we all know, perps are animals.

    2. In all fairness, most 5.56mm rifle rounds actually penetrate less than most service pistol rounds. So it is a good choice if/when they are actually justified in shooting someone.

    3. Pistols aren’t necessarily any safer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aSJgcpqePk

  13. I guess the phrase “criminally negligent” or “involuntary manslaughter” has no meaning here.

    Because it was “just an accident.” Oopsie! My bad! Sorry! Sorry I killed your grandpa. Whoops! Just an accident. I didn’t mean to do that. Have a nice day.

    So IOW, not only do cops have no duty to protect you from crime, they don’t have even any standard of care to which they must adhere to avoid “accidentally” killing you.

    I mean, how egregious would the officer’s negligence have to be in order for him to be held accountable for “accidentally” killing someone?

    What ever happened to always being aware of what your weapon is pointing at?

    1. The military has negligent homicide. If a soldier did this to an Afghan civilian much less another soldier, he would be up on charges. But cops can do this to Americans and even get to keep their jobs. I just fucking hate them.

      1. I think you’re being a little too harsh. It’s not like there’s is no punishment when a cop accidentally murders someone. They’re usually forced to take a paid vacation, temporarily depriving them of the enjoyment of abusing and murdering citizens.

  14. I suppose it is too much fucking trouble to train cops to put their weapon on safe until right before they fire it. We do of course train soldiers, some of whom have the ASVAB scores of middle of the curve Golden Retrievers to do such things. But it is too much to expect of fucking flatfoot to do that.

    I hope that fucking incompetant cop rots in hell.

    1. middle of the curve Golden Retrievers

      sweet!

    2. and we retrieve everything we kill!

    1. WTF? (and I am not clicking that)

  15. There’s little doubt he was negligent. Generally speaking, the CRIMINAL standard is “gross negligence”. That may or may not be the case.

    Also, the issue that a civilian would automatically have been charged may be true, but not necessarily.

    We had a case recently where a guy shot his girlfriend who was sitting in his lap (she was a runaway and 16 yoa and hiding at his house) as he readjusted his holster and inadvertently fired his gun into her, killing her.

    He wasn’t charged.

    We also had an accidental shooting (of a bow) by a bow and arrow hunter of one of his hunting party not too long ago. He wasn’t charged either. It was very cheney’esque

    Policywise, a SWAT officer with a rifle should NOT be the one handcuffing ANYBODY. Nobody should handcuff who is holding a long gun. Anybody with a handgun MUST have his handgun holstered before going hands on.

    This was a major tactical fuckup. Whether or not he is criminally charged, there needs ot be a big-ass lawsuit(tm).

    I should note also that I agree with a previous poster that using a rifle in a confined space like inside a house is very problematic. Rifles should be used by perimeter guys etc. I’m not a fan of rifles in an entry team on a residence.

    1. I expect you will be willing to provide the Stamps family your “expert” testimony for the civil trial right Dunphy?

      1. when and if i am an expert (in firearms tactics) and./or claim to be one, let me know. neither i, nor anybody else here (i assume) is an expert, or has claimed to be one

        when and if one is required to be an expert before commenting on a blog, about misuse of firearms, let me know.

    2. Also, the issue that a civilian would automatically have been charged may be true, but not necessarily.

      What happens when a civilian accidentally shoots a cop was the question dunphy. Both your examples are civilian shooting civilian.

      1. true enough.

    3. Why can’t you retarded fucks recieve or learn proper dicipline with a fire arm? First steps of infantry training consists of constantly dry firing and learning how to switch your safety on and off before firing. No infantry soldier runs around with the safe off on his weapon off safe. You just learn the muscle memory to always flip the safety before you fire.

      Why the fuck can’t cops learn to do that? Why do you baboons keep killing people? I am a former prosecutor. I am a veteran. I have sent people to jail for decades. Don’t fucking call me some kind of a hippie libertarian. I am not. I am a law and order guy.

      But I hate you motherfuckers. I hate cops guts. I am laugh my ass off everytime one of the dumb bastards gets himself killed. And I am not alone in this. How did it come to this? How have you rotten bastards managed to commit so many union protected atrocities that someone like me hates your guts and cheers at your death?

      And a law suit wont’ bring that man back. The dipshit who shot him and the guy in charge of the raid need to be locked in a cell and ass raped for about ten years. Then justice will be served.

      1. I somehow doubt this is the real John. But if so — just back away from the keyboard, buddy. It’s gonna be OK — assuming we can find you some MDMA.

        1. It is the real me. Honest. If it were a spoofer, I would say so. I am really angry about this.

          1. Understandable.
            I just fear you might be posting a bit rashly. But hey. I’m not my comrades’ keeper.

            1. It is a serious question. I and many of my friends and famile, who are all very conservative by the book law and order kind of people, all have developed a serious contempt for cops over the last fifteen or twenty years.

              Apologists like Dunphy need to be asking themselves how it has come to this. It is one thing for a bunch of dope smoking hippies to hate you. It is quite another for a significant segment of the law abiding population to hate you. The latter is a real problem.

              1. Hate is a strong word.
                Personally, I feel mistrust and contempt. Hate? Not so much.
                I still feel bad when I see a story about a cop getting shot, just like I would if I read about about a lumberjack having a tree fall on his noggin.

                1. Unless, of course, the lumberjack was raiding the wrong guy’s tree house.

                2. “Hate is a strong word.”

                  Having worked with homeless kids (who shouldn’t be a cops hide-a-way run away “girlfriend” at 16) and seeing how those motherfuckers treat black youth, I’m going with hate as well.

      2. lighten up, francis.

        and who the hell are you talking to? who called you a hippie libertarian? was it somebody here, or the voices in your head? tia

        1. I am not going to lightenup you miserable bastard. That man is dead. And you come in here acting like it is nothing. That man is dead because of the serial and criminal indifference and incompetance of a profession you claim to call your own. There is nothing to be light about.

          1. Give in to your hate. Right you are John. Although CN has a good point, hate is a strong word. Contempt works better for me too. But then again, as I am sociaopathic, contempt is pretty much a way of life. =)

      3. That is some goooood rage there, John. I like it.

      4. “””Why can’t you retarded fucks recieve or learn proper dicipline with a fire arm?””

        Part of the problem is when they take Dunphy’s class, they think he’s a hack because he’s teaching. Therefore anything Dunphy is telling them goes in one ear, out the others. Going to class is just bullshit that keep you off the street and cracking heads. The sooner the class is over the better.

        I’m half kidding.

      5. John, anyone who doesn’t understand your rage has serious problems.

      6. Okay, I have to wonder where are all the active prosecutors who put high value on the lives of we mundanes, as they say? And for whom the default position is not to always give the police the benefit of the doubt (or much worse)? I think the same thing whenever I see The Judge on TV – where are all active judges committed and dedication to personal, individual liberty?

    4. Putting finger inside trigger guard is premeditation. He intended to fire.

      Murder. Period. End of story.

    5. Fuck you Dunphy. You want to claim some kind of special status, you need to be held to one. If an innocent person dies because of the actions of a cop, a cop goes to jail, period. The guy who did this should have been cuffed and stuffed that moment. Instead he will walk free and not even lose his job. And you are not even outraged by it. You make me sick.

      1. i’m not claiming special status. you can attack all the straw you want.

        as for “if an innocent person dies because of the actions of a cop (or anybody else) , a cop (or anybody else) goes to jail..

        IF that was the law, then you would be correct. it’s not the law. innocents die, sometimes due to cops, sometimes due to civilians. the standard for criminal action in most states is “gross negligence”. i gave examples where people who were not cops were not charged despite the fact that an innocent died.

        and you say i am not outraged by this case? how the hell do you know? did i state that? no. so, you are a mind reader now, too?

        do you do bar mitzvahs and parties? what do you charge?

        1. I am fully aware of the law you dipshit. And that is not the law for the military. The military has negligent homicide. They have that because what they do is dangerous and people need to be held to a different standard. Cops are analogous to the military. The law needs to be changed. Cops ought to be held criminally liable any time their negligence on the job results in a death. As it is, they are never held responsible for anything. It is sickening.

          1. cops are analogous to the military, but they are not the same thing. different rules apply. that’s why we have posse comitatus, for instance. different rules of engagement, different mission, etc.

            if you think the law should be changed, groovy. i was commenting on what the law is, not what it would be in your magickal fantasy world

            1. “cops are analogous to the military, but they are not the same thing. different rules apply.”

              The rules ought to be even stricter for cops than for the military. If the military messes up foreigners die. If cops mess up, American citizens die. Instead the rules are loser for cops. We let cops do things to Americans that we dont’ let soldiers do to our enemies. That is disgusting. And don’t give me “I am just pointing out the law”. What the law is is not the debate. The debate is what the law should be.

              And we will never change the law since your crooked unions own most of the politicians.

            2. “”cops are analogous to the military””

              And that’s part of the problem. They shouldn’t be. You are just a civilain like everyone else not in the military.

              1. And that’s part of the problem. They shouldn’t be. You are just a civilain like everyone else not in the military.

                Agreed. However, they are government employees with enforcement power, so they should be held to a high standard than the rest of us civilians.

                However, using the term civilians to refer to the rest of us should be an immediate firing offense for any cop.

                1. However, using the term civilians to refer to the rest of us should be an immediate firing offense for any cop.

                  That’s a good point. However, most cops don’t view us as “civilians” but as “potential lawbreakers.”

            3. cops are analogous to the military,

              No, they absolutely are not, in any way, whatsoever, analogous to the military.

              Just because they wear uniforms, doesn’t make it so.

              Just because they carry weapons, doesn’t make it so.

              Their function in society is (or should be) completely different. Cops are citizens, period, full stop. The militarization of cop culture is one of the biggest problems we have in this country. Cops who call other citizens “civilians” are a symptom of cop culture that has completely lost its way.

        2. And you wanna claim that having his finger inside the fucking trigger guard with the muzzle pointing at a prone senior citizen that was complying with his demand is not fucking gross negligence? This is one the supposed “Only Ones” that are so much more well trained than us mundanes you fuck. Yes, if a cop, who is supposedly trained, kills someone by “accident” he is guilty of gross fucking negligence. Fuck you and every other fucking ass-hat, cowboy shit bag cop.

          1. i’m not claiming that at all. i am saying where is the evidence that he HAD his finger on the trigger when he had it pointed at the guy while he was standing there, which is the claim.

            it’s clear he pulled the trigger when he was falling or as he hit the ground. i haven’t seen where it’s clear he had finger on the trigger while he was standing there. if it’s in the article, point it out. i missed it

            tia

            1. Fingers dont fall inside the trigger guard. He thus had it on the trigger before he fell.

        3. “” i gave examples where people who were not cops were not charged despite the fact that an innocent died.””

          Can you give an example of a person accidently shooting a cop and not charged?

          I agree that shit happens, and a lot of times it’s not criminal. People accidently kill people. But there is a HUGE disparity with what happens afterwards. In the regular world, people would be removed from that job or fired. I would like to see some examples of workers who accidently killed someone staying in the same job and later being promoted.

        4. Fuck your anti-Semitist mouth you asscunt.

    6. Generally speaking, the CRIMINAL standard is “gross negligence”. That may or may not be the case.

      So standing inside a house with your rifle pointed at the guy lying handcuffed on the floor, with the safety off and your finger on the trigger – i.e., every single condition necessary to fire the weapon is met – a set of circumstances that should exist ONLY when you are in fact pointing at a target you fully intend to shoot – and then “accidentally” shooting and killing the completely innocent guy – does not constitute “gross” negligence?

      OK, got it, thx.

      1. i don’t see where it says his finger was on the trigger before he fell? is that in the article or are you making it up or inferring it?

        tia

        1. His finger was sure as hell on the trigger when the weapon went off. His failure to have it on safe alone amounts to criminal negligence.

          If you were anything but a human baboon you would realize that. Instead you think charging around crowded homes with a locked and loaded weapon not on safe is a wonderful idea.

          1. way to evade the question.

            let’s rehash…

            the previous claim was that the officer stood there with his rifle pointed at the guy and his finger on the trigger.

            that’s not in evidence that I could see.

            again, if his finger grasped the trigger as he fell it does not therefore necessarily follow that his finger was on the trigger when he was standing there , and assuming he was pointing the rifle at the guy at the time.

            he MAY have done so, but i see no mention of it in the article. it was an unfounded assumption.

            1. If the weapon had been on safe, it wouldn’t have mattered. That is the point. I dont’ care where his finger was when he fell. He should have never been in that situation and not had the weapon on safe. That is what makes him and you an idiot.

            2. How the fuck did he pull the trigger if he finger wasnt on the trigger?

              1. Maybe it was one of those self-firing guns the liberals keep telling us about. The ones with a mind of their own.

                1. Probably one of those plastic guns, too, fully able to pass through airport security undetected.

            3. I’m also not terribly convinced about the “oh, I slipped and nearly fell” story either.

              We heard the same thing not that long ago from the SWAT team member who was getting out of his car and “accidentally” shot and killed the guy they were arresting for bar-betting. That was only a few weeks back. He claimed the car door hit his arm and made him fire the gun – which he just so happened to have pointed directly at the guy being arrested, although his fellow officers were standing there talking to the guy and in the process of arresting him.

              And then the expert witnesses and forensics proved it could not possibly have happened the way that cop claimed – and none of the other 8 or so cops who were all standing right there, just a few feet away, saw what happened. Riiiiiight.

              So we’ve got supposedly the most highly-trained of the police force – let us not forget that SWAT stands for “Special Weapons And Tactics.” And yet this highly-trained weapons specialist still manages to discharge his firearm into a prone, innocent senior citizen because he “slipped”?

              We can suppose and infer all we want, and no doubt we will, but we’ll likely never know the true facts. Because I, for one, am not going to believe the story the cop tells. It’s been proven time and again that cops lie to cover their own asses.

        2. Are you implying the weapon discharged without the trigger being pulled?

          1. no. the claim was that he stood there and pointed the rifle at the guy with his finger on the trigger. that’s not in evidence.

            it’s pretty clear he pulled the trigger as he fell (or as he hit the ground). it does not therefore necessarily follow that his finger was on the trigger as he stood there.

            that was an assumption unsupported by evidence

            1. That assumption is exactly supported by the evidence. Your finger doesnt fall inside the trigger guard.

              1. it’s not a GIVEN. you can have your finger outside the trigger guard AND in the course of falling and/or hitting the ground, grasp the trigger.

                that is the point. cops are SUPPOSED to index. iow, place the trigger finger extended against the side of the gun ABOVE the trigger.

                that does not completely eliminate the possibility of a cop grasping the trigger if he falls and/or hits the ground. it makes it much less likely. it also diminishes the possibility of “startle response” to result in trigger activation while standing and indexed

                1. it makes it much less likely.

                  Occam’s razor.

                  As kinnath pointed out, orders of magnitude difference. And we know from previous incidencts that there are enough dumbshit cops who dont index properly.

                  The safe assumption is finger on trigger. If there is film of the incident showing the freak occurence of him going from index to trigger during fall, I will change my position.

            2. And the purpose of the trigger guard is to prevent inadvertant operation of the trigger, correct?

              So the office had already placed his finger on the trigger prior to falling…..

              Or the trigger guard is defective….

              I’m guessing the probability of event 1 is several orders of magnitude greater than event 2.

              So, yeah a reasonable person can conclude the officer had his finger on the trigger when he tripped.

              1. I’m guessing the probability of event 1 is several orders of magnitude greater than event 2.

                Exactly. The probability of event 2 doesnt even reach reasonable doubt standard for me. He had his finger on the trigger. Which, as Ive stated elsewhere, based on his SWAT training, means he was about to pull the trigger even if he hadnt fallen.

                At the absolute minimum, if the last wasnt true, then there is no way this doesnt meet Dunphy’s “gross negligence” standard. I have no problem with murder, but I never assume incompetence in other people.

                1. I have no problem with murder, but I never assume incompetence in other people.

                  Correct to: I have no problem with charging him with murder, as I never* assume incompetence in other people.

                  *yeah, not really true.

                2. generally speaking, and especially when dealing with the govt. (to paraphrase PJ ORourke) I will always assume the likelihood of incompetence as the correct explanation over intentional misconduct.

                  regardless, if you think it rises to the level of “near certainty” iow reasonable doubt such that the fact that he pulled the trigger either during the fall, or after he hit the floor means that he necessarily was not indexed when he was standing there… i disagree. but i can respect your opinion

                  1. i disagree. but i can respect your opinion

                    Do you agree that if it comes out that he wasnt indexed properly that the proper charge is murder?

                  2. So, do we really need a bunch of incompetents running around armed with any thing more lethal than flyswatters?

                    You just made the case for disarming all cops.

              2. the purpose of the trigger guard is to primarily prevent snags etc. from activiating the trigger. cops (and other people) generally are supposed to index by placing the trigger finger on the side of the gun ABOVE the trigger, not on the forward edge of the trigger guard. many can’t even reach the latter (depends on position and length of the finger)

                but in brief, you are operating from a false premise. the trigger guard (the semicircular arc of metal surrounding the trigger)’s primary purpose is to prevent ANYTHING (objects etc.) from activating the trigger, etc. INDEXING is what is supposed to prevent inadvertent trigger pull due to startle reflex etc. unfortunately, it doesn’t work perfectly and it is possible to inadvertently grasp the trigger as you are falling or hit the ground EVEN IF you are indexed while you are standing

            3. “”no. the claim was that he stood there and pointed the rifle at the guy with his finger on the trigger. that’s not in evidence.”””

              Let’s say you’re right and his finger wasn’t on the trigger. But his finger did pull the trigger when he was falling. That would mean his instinctive action when falling was to put his finger on the trigger, therefore accidently firing the weapon. Would you agree that person should not be in a profession that carries a firearm? What’s to keep him from doing it again the next time he trips?

              1. again, reading comprehension fail.

                i am not “right” if his finger wasn’t on the trigger. i didn’t say it was OR wasn’t. i said i see no evidence/claim that it was.

                an agnostic position does not equal a positive claim.

                again, reading comprehension fail

                what i am saying is that the claim that he was NOT indexed is not supported by any evidence I see, thus i asked for the basis for this belief

                hth

                1. Do you know what “let’s say you’re right” means?

                  It does not mean that you ARE right, it means for the sake of argument we will pretend it so.

                  And you want to fault people for reading comprehension fail?

                  “””an agnostic position does not equal a positive claim””

                  No shit sherlock. I’m not saying it does.

                  But good way to avoid the question.

                2. “what i am saying is that the claim that he was NOT indexed is not supported by any evidence I see, thus i asked for the basis for this belief”

                  I agree that it is fully possible – even probable – that he was indexing.

                  At least right up to the point that he placed his finger on the trigger before pulling it.

    7. “We had a case recently where a guy shot his girlfriend who was sitting in his lap (she was a runaway and 16 yoa and hiding at his house) as he readjusted his holster and inadvertently fired his gun into her, killing her.”

      A cop is hiding a juvenile runaway (his girlfriend???)? Do you have any fucking idea how fucked-up that is?

      1. We had a case recently where a guy shot his girlfriend who was sitting in his lap (she was a runaway and 16 yoa and hiding at his house) as he readjusted his holster and inadvertently fired his gun into her, killing her.”

        If Dunphy beleives that story he is either retarded or never been around weapons in his life. There is no way a pistol can go off from readjusting the holster. That rat fucker cop just murdered that girl.

        1. it wasn’t a cop, dipshit. it was a CIVILIAN. that’s my point.

          also, it was a single action revolver that was older than dirt, in a quick draw type holster and the whole case was a clusterfuck.

          1. I call bullshit. I have done quick draw shooting. No way the firearm cocked itself and fired from readjusting the holster.

      2. a GUY. not a cop. just a GUY.

        can you people fucking read? it was in response to the claim that only cops get away with fucked up negligence. it was a counterexample to show that citizens (iow noncops) get away with it too.

        jesus christ.

        1. can you people fucking read?

          Dont confuse the rest of us with John. We are well aware he cant read (or spell).

          However, that guy wasnt SWAT trained, I assume. Higher fucking standard for a SWAT member.

          1. absolutely. while SWAT officers are not “experts” to address the hmm canard… they clearly are better trained in firearms and tactics than the average cop or civilian. heck, much better trained.

            note that i never said this wasn;t gross negligence. i never made a determination either way. what i said is it’s not clear to me that it WAS gross negligence. contrast with, for example, the Oakland BART shooting, that clearly WAS imo gross negligence, and imo that’s why i agreed with Balko that involuntary manslaughter was the correct charge

            1. The BART shooting was murder.

              As was this, probably, although I might accept gross negligence. Having it off safe qualifies as gross negligence. I dont know how you cant reach that level.

              Im willing to say this one was murder. Finger not indexed + SWAT training == He was about to fucking fire anyway.

              1. Exactly. I’m willing to let slide dunphy’s crazy explanation of finger possibly outside the trigger guard. But after subduing the grandpa and he’s lying prone on the ground, how do you not–as John and robc have both pointed out–put the gun on safety???

                That is why gross negligence should be the minimum and voluntary manslaughter or even murder 1 should be the maximum.

            2. I said nothing of a duck…

            3. Enough head or person sweeps in a CQB training exercise will get you booted from military programs. I’m betting these swat training runs look like retarded monkeys swinging MP5s and ARs from the three point strap around their heads.

              Most of these fucktards, SWAT or not, shouldn’t even have a fucking gun in these situations. Their a bigger danger to everyone than the damn criminals.

  16. The Stamps family will get PAID. I hope they then use some of that settlement to seek “alternative justice” on this POS pig. And his commander and the fucking d-bag D.A. Make ’em pay two ways. They think there is a war on cops now. Wait until people finally get sick and tired of shit like this.

    1. anybody who thinks there is a war on cops is an idiot. but that;s been commented on before

      1. Oh, there’s a war on cops alright, bitch.

      2. Most cops seem to think there is a “war on cops”.

  17. quicker than a death panel for gramps. pass the soylent green please…

  18. IIRC, the stepson was carrying a few dime bags and about $1K.

    Not exactly a Medellin cartel level bust.

    1. Squirrels, please ban this fucker now.

      1. You forgot to say “please.” Politeness goes a long way around here. Just ask — hey, the squirrels won’t let me post the Arabic characters in the comment field. Damn you fuckers to hell!!!

        1. know who else writes in arabic?

          1. Arabs?

      2. ALLAH AKBAR! *BOOM*

        I mean really LOL !

    2. How come he’s able to use arabic script in his handle but I can’t ever comment with Japanese hiragana or Kanji in my message?

  19. IIRC, the stepson was carrying a few dime bags and about $1K.

    Not exactly a Meddelin Cartel level bust.

  20. The argument here is not to start putting police in prison for making honest mistakes under incredibly difficult circumstances.

    Well it should be. “Criminally negligent homicide” was invented for a reason. If there are not going to be any consequences for bad actors, what is any Police Department’s incentive to reform the policies that “cause” these incidents?

    1. begs the question by assuming no consequences. there will be no state charges, that is true. that’s hardly the only consequence. there is still the possibility of massive civil liability, etc. so, it’s hardly the case that there are no consequences. as for the officer, the consequences could include firing, and civil liability as well.

      1. there will be no state charges, that is true.

        That is what gets civilians’ collective goat, Ofc. Dunphy. I’m similar to John: I appreciate a semblance of order in society and the reasonable expectation that when I leave the house and go about my business that I can do so without too much fear. However, and I’m not basing this on just Mr. Balko’s posts (where he has stated that “not all cops are bad”), but what I see in my home state and others through which I have traveled. I see more and more police officers displaying open contempt to outright hostility to those they are sworn to protect. In John’s emotive, and to quote you, “frothy”, way, he speaks for a lot of Americans. I’m a professional person (PharmD), and considered upstanding in my community. I have had very few encounters with the police, sans a speeding ticket or two. I have not seen the business end of a nightstick, taser or a pair of cuffs. The point is, when I see a police car behind me, I don’t feel safe or protected. And I truly believe a big chunk of Americans feel this way.

        From the link I provided:

        # #37 | Radley Balko | May 4th, 2009 at 9:23 pm

        Ian ?

        Because cops and soldiers have different missions.

        Soldiers are trained to kill people and break things ? to destroy an enemy. The job of a police officer is to keep the peace. Yes, they’re charged with fighting crime, but to do so while upholding our constitutional rights. A soldier obviously has no such obligations to the residents of the country where he’s deployed. Collateral damage is an accepted part of war. It is not an acceptable part of fighting crime. We don’t say police officers should be able to wipe out a block of Chicago because some drug kingpins live there.

        We have long had a law in this country called the Posse Comitatus Act which forbids the military from domestic policing functions for exactly these reasons. That law is still in place, but it’s being eroded in spirit because the police are becoming more and more like the military.

        I’d encourage you to go to the Cato Institute’s website and download the paper I wrote on this issue. It’s called “Overkill” and you can download and read a copy for free.

        I realize that you are not going to post profanities or “frothy righteous indignation”, which is probably what many of the posters want you to say. That’s fine. But I believe John to be correct in his observation that police officers, when committing acts that would get “civilians” (and I personally hear police officers use this “Us v. Them” nomenclature) lives ruined and cops (and their families, friends, and other favored interests) appear to get off scott free in comparison, how can you not understand the outrage?

        I’m not going to insult you, since you at least post here, I have to give credit where credit is due.
        If you do feel that sense of dread and anger, it does not come through in your posts. It is not a criticism, just a fair observation.

        1. Very well said, DNS. I’m not sure that the police understand the situation that they’re creating. They seem to think that if the citizenry are intimidated and frightened by them, then the citizenry will respect them. That, unfortunately, is NOT how you build respect.

          Many of us, like John, who wouldn’t have a problem with the police (in my case, I’m more libertarian than John, but recognize that my real issue on such things as the War on Drugs is the government writ large not just one part like the police) nonetheless have learned to treat the police the way you would a dangerous animal: avoid contact and be prepared to fight or flee. That may make the police feel tuff but interferes badly with their stated mission to serve and protect the community. Without citizen cooperation their job is utterly impossible.

          1. When the Master governs, the people
            are hardly aware that he exists.
            Next best is a leader who is loved.
            Next, one who is feared.
            The worst is one who is despised.

            If you don’t trust the people,
            you make them untrustworthy.

            The Master doesn’t talk, he acts.
            When his work is done,
            the people say, “Amazing:
            we did it, all by ourselves!”

            – Lao tzu

  21. “The actions of Officer Duncan do not rise to the level of criminal conduct, and the shooting death of Eurie Stamps was an accident,” Leone’s office said.

    Another giant “Fuck you, civilians!”

  22. Better ten thousand civilians murdered while lying handcuffed on the floor, than one cop exposed to the slightest risk.

    1. he’s exposed to plenty of risk – lawsuit, firing, discipline, etc.

      he is not exposed to criminal jeopardy thouhg. that is true.

      1. he’s exposed to plenty of risk – lawsuit, firing, discipline

        LMAO

        Yeah, who would want to be suspended with pay for two weeks?

        1. suspended with pay is not discipline. try understanding terms before commenting on them

          hth

          1. suspended with pay is not discipline.

            It’s professionalism. It is entirely professional to pay people for obvious negligence, incompetence, or malice, and for services not rendered.

            1. suspended w/o pay is discipline. administrative leave w/pay is due process.

              1. “”administrative leave w/pay is due process.””

                Really? I thought that’s what you got while you were waiting for due process. It’s not called punitive leave.

                1. admin leave can be for any # of reasons. you can get admin leave just because of a traumatic incident. i once had a guy blow his head off a couple of feet from where i was standing. they gave me admin leave until i felt comfortable with coming back. it’s not punishment. i also got admin leave for a shooting once where i didn’t even fire. it’s not a punishment. i got shot at (bullet plowed into the wall right next to me) and you get time off for that. it’s a mental health thing in those type of cases. admin leave is also given in investigations because since no determination has yet been made if it’s going to be a criminal thing, or discipline, or whatever, they can’t suspend you on mere suspicion

              2. Got to disagree. Due process would involve arrest, charges and bail. Or is there a two-tier system for manslaughter now?

        2. Let’s just make it clear we’re keeping both the benefits and the pension.

          1. well, my state’s pension plan is funded 118%. so, that’s an affirmative

      2. Get this through your skull. Law enforcement used to be a noble profession because they risked their Lives to protect the public. That is what made it noble. Risking a law suit doesn’t cut it. I hate to break it to you, but your job is to write a check for your life to the public that is redeemable at any time. That is what it means to serve the public. That means that if the choice is to risk cops lives or civilian lives, you always risk the cops life. That is what they are paid for.

        If you don’t like that, get the fuck out of the profession.

        1. law enforcement IS a noble profession and many of us have risked our lives to save others. i did so both as a firefighter (former) and now as a cop. i wear a medal on my uniform for doing exactly that. pulling people out of a burning building, and i suffered smoke inhalation injury because of that. i;m not tooting my own horn, but if you are going to make an accusation, i will respond.

          in brief, i totally agree with you. i think cowardice has been institutionalized over the years. the perfect example of that was colombine. where cops sat outside an active shooter scene waiting for SWAT. that was an embarassment, and they should have resigned for cowardice imo

          academies teach, and many sgt.’s insist, for instance, that officers MUST wait for backup even when they are at a DV and hear somebody getting their ass kicked. that’s rubbish. if you aren’t willing to risk your life to save others, you shouldn’t be a cop. I’ve worked as a lifeguard, firefighter, and cop and accept that noble duty in all 3 professions

          1. LE can still be a noble profession. But there is nothing noble about throwing a flash grenade into a house full of a family and running in and terrorizing them. It just infuriates me not because I don’t understand what a noble profession it can be. But because I do understand it and see how bastardized it has become.

            1. and I agree, John. i have complained about the overmilitarization of police, the overuse of SWAT (including in my own agency – and guess what – they eventually CHANGED the policy), and the institutionalization of cowardice. the ASAP program is one example of incremental change for the better, and away from the columbine cowardice model.

              SWAT *is* a useful tool, but it must not be overused. fortified meth compound? use SWAT. but don’t OVERUSE it.

              like any other institution, SWAT seeks to increase its power, scope of influence and justify its existence. that works against the benefit of the citizenry imo

          2. “”law enforcement IS a noble profession and many of us have risked our lives to save others.””

            A noble person would fall from grace for killing someone because they tripped. What’s the odds this guy will not only keep his job, but still get to carry a firearm as part of his job.

            Being noble is not about excuses. You fuck up, you pay the piper. That’s something I learned back when I wasn’t a civilian.

          3. I just wrote a long diatribe about how I know a first responder to columbine and how you are a horrible uneducated person…since you are not worth the electrons, I deleted it. Consider, even for entertainment’s sake, yourself ignored…forever.

            1. I’m at that point with dunphy myself, Bandit. Rather than turgidly rehash negligence definitions and the difference in consequences between LEO screwups and when everyone else kills people through rampant stupidity, I’ll just write this:

              Look, most of us are middle-aged, middle class guys. We have stable jobs that don’t involve wearing a paper hat. We own houses; some of us have children. We are the demographic that should be vehemently pro-police. Dunphy, if we are saying that your co-workers are screwing up; that the way they are policing is wrong, leaving many of us with the attitude towards police, so eloquently expressed by DNS above; and is more apt behavior for an occupying army than for a police force that is part of the public: then you should listen. Not make ridiculous excuses when one of your fellow officers kills a man through inexcusable negligence.

            2. columbine was an example of cowardice by law enforcement i couldn’t give a flying fuck whether you ignore me or not. that’s my opinion. waiting outside an active shooter scene, where frigging innocent kids are being slaughtered becase “I have to wait for SWAT” is fucking inexcusable cowardice.

      3. “”he’s exposed to plenty of risk – lawsuit, firing, discipline, etc.””

        The city is more at risk of the lawsuit, firing and interal discipline are not common. Cops are really big on protecting their own and often they don’t view the mistake as wrong.

        1. “internal discipline” is not common? in what universe?

    2. Good thing they used the stun grenade, or else somebody’s life might have been put at risk.

  23. As he did so, he heard a shot.

    Are you fucking shitting me? They have the balls to actually put that in writing?

    1. “What about jeannie’s kid? He was in an argument, a lousy $10 card game. He pulls out a gun. The gun goes off. Some kid gets killed.”

    2. Surprised that the language wasn’t “a shot was heard.”

    3. They might as well have begun the report with, “it was a dark and stormy night.”

      1. buck savage, is that you?

  24. Forget criminal jeopardy, pal. That motherfucker should have his balls chopped off with an axe.

  25. “As he stepped to his left, (Duncan) lost his balance and began to fall over backwards,” the report states. “Officer Duncan realized that his right foot was off the floor and the tactical equipment that he was wearing was making his movements very awkward.

    A plain argument for removing tactical equipment from police.

    Why don’t you want the police to have the maximum mobility the need to protect the public and, blah, blah, new professionalism?

    1. like many other things, it’s about tradeoffs. that’s why street cops don’t wear full body armor, etc.

      personally, i think if you can’t run a 100 meters WITH GEAR on sub 14 seconds, you got too much fucking gear, buddy. or you are a fatass or a cardio geek.

      with rare exceptions, like one local agency that requires approaching stolen cars to clear them while holding ballistic shields. that protects officers w.o putting citizens at risk

  26. Are you fucking shitting me? They have the balls to actually put that in writing?

    They didn’t put anything in writing. Clearly, writing had appeared and was then read by P Brooks.

    1. god knows that be true

  27. I’d trust an 18 year old Marine fresh out of boot on my entry team more than any SWAT. The level of retarded cowboy mentality to mental/physical control in civilian cops is astronomical.

    1. several of my dept’s swat team were marines and had training far beyond boot. one was a navy seal commander (he’s been reactivated to go to afghanistan twice so far), and we also have rangers, etc.

      in fact, it’s kind of a running joke that if you don’t have “the right tattoo” (iow former marine, ranger, etc.) you won’t even be considered for SWAT. that’s not really true, but it is true that most of them tend to be former military, and of those – a disproportionate # were marines.

      i have no problem with the marines, except when they try to apply their uniform standards etc. to us. sorry, i’m not a marine, i roll up my long sleeves sometimes, and i don’t spit shine my patrol boots.

  28. The truly surprising thing is the cops didn’t try to call it suicide.

  29. he MAY have done so, but i see no mention of it in the article. it was an unfounded assumption.

    You’re pathetic, dunphy. Eat shit and die.

    1. that’s a brilliant response to a request for evidence/justification of the claim that several people have made, but none have justified with anything except unfounded conjecture or assertions.

  30. “The actions of Officer Duncan do not rise to the level of criminal conduct, and the shooting death of Eurie Stamps was an accident,” Leone’s office said

    Isn’t that normally called, “Involuntary Manslaughter”?

    I mean, regular police officers are trained extensively (on pain of being… retrained!) to keep their damn finger off the trigger *until they are ready to fire*, and are not supposed to even muzzle anything unless they intend to destroy it.

    This guy, by contrast, was a SWAT officer – who, given that their job involves a significantly high proportion of *going into unknown situations with guns drawn*, should have been expected to maintain the utmost discipline with regards to weapon handling, and any failure to do so would be considered *at minimum*, total professional incompetence but more reasonably considered gross misconduct that warrants severe penalties. I mean: safety was off, the finger was on the trigger, and he was pointing it at a guy laying flat on the floor. Thats not an “accident” = that’s fucking purposely setting up conditions for disaster.

    I mean, it’s not like you can say, “No harm, no foul”, right? This fuckup has a BODY to go with it.

    If I fucked up as a securities analyst (say I accidentally sent a file to a client that provided priviledged information, or left documents in a cab that resulted in material disclosures, etc), I’d likely at minimum be banned from my career for life; more likely, I’d also suffer some fines and possibly misdemeanor conviction.

    I don’t get how cops can just go, “Whoops!”, and call that ‘professional oversight’. When the cost of *accidentally shooting someone to death* amounts to…what? Having to apologize?

    1. “”Having to apologize?””

      How often do you get that? Apologizing means you did something wrong.

    2. again, where’s your evidence his finger was on the trigger when he was pointing at the guy? do you have any? or is an assumption

      the fact that he pulled the trigger either as he fell, or as he struck the ground does not establish that his finger was on the trigger when he was on target, if he was on target at all (or just at indoor or low ready).

  31. A firearm can be discharged one of two ways: intentionally or negligently. There’s no gray area here; there’s no “accidentally.”

    I wonder, though, how many times the words “accident” or “accidentally” appear in the official report.

    1. I will add, though, that “there’s no accidentally” – UNLESS the firearm is defective or otherwise malfunctioning. It is possible for a broken gun to fire unintentionally and without negligence.

      Of course, if you’re following the safety rules, it should minimize the possibility of a bad outcome if a gun is faulty and fires when it’s not supposed to.

      1. correct. this was a negligent discharge, NOT an accidental discharge. there are no accidental discharge (apart from really rare weird malfunctions or something), only negligent ones

  32. Not to mention that cops should not be conducting paramilitary raids conducting a completely unconstitutional “drug war” in the first place. Here’s a question, if we required a Constitutional amendment to make alcohol illegal (as completely asinine as that was) why don’t we need one to criminal every other prohibited substance?

    1. That is a very good question.

      1. Interstate Commerce, General Welfare, Necessary and Proper.

        That is all you need to know.

        Serf.

    2. here’s a fucking hint. the DRUG WAR SHOULDN’T EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE. but cops don’t write the laws that enable it. legislators (dem and republican) do. they don’t write the warrants that justify the raids. judges do.

      legislators are elected. judges (sometimes) are.

      the drug war is wrong. and it isn’t cops that create it. it’s our legislature.

      1. You are right. The law is the underlying problem. Police tactics could mitigate disasters such as this case, but again that is a policy decision. As long as there is a drug war, and police policy to is to do no-knock raids in the middle of the night, innocent people will die and honest citizens (like most on this board) will become more and more disenchanted with the police.

  33. Let’s say dunphy is right, and we can’t prove the killer’s finger was on the trigger when he slipped, that in the process of flailing around, it just sort of got inside the trigger guard.

    That still doesn’t address the issue of why his safety was off.

    Either way, criminal negligence, it seems to me, at an absolute minimum.

    1. why his safety was off

      They’re not experts or anything, RC! derpfy told me so…so it’s OK that there was another isolated incident.

      1. i told you so because it’s a truism acknowledged by criminal courts, civil courts, grand juries, ACTUAL experts, and firearms enthusiast, and tactical organizations.

        and it’s not OK that this incident happened. you can keep trying to misstate what I said, but i never for a second said that this was “ok” or excusable

    2. it is utterly unsurprising that during any entry, the safety is supposed to be off. feel free to contact any firearms rifle instructor. im not a rifle instructor, just a handgun/shotgun instructor but i certainly know that much. the safety was SUPPOSED to be off. if he’s at low or indoor ready the safety is definitely supposed to be off

  34. Stupid joke handle off.

  35. Well, derpfy, thanks for enlightening with your usual assplanations of how the non-expert pole lease are really a “noble profession” despite the continued “collateral damage” from their “fuck ups”.

    Fuck tha police.

    1. and thank you for that acknowledgement. the fact that some cops are fuckups and there are also any # of institutional problems with how law enforcement (like ANY govt. institution) is run, doesn’t take away from the fact that it is a noble profession and most officers do a good job

  36. I wonder if any of the witnesses have a different version of the event?

  37. I don’t think anyone’s mentioned the other unbelievably awful part of this:

    On Jan. 5, police were searching for Stamps’ stepson, Joseph Bushfan, when they served a warrant on Stamps’ home. Bushfan was arrested outside the home, allegedly carrying crack cocaine and money.

    Officers then hit the home, throwing a stun grenade and ordering everyone inside to put their hands up and lie on the floor, the report states.

    So they go to arrest a dude, arrest him, and so far that’s actually a success story (relatively speaking) in my book.

    But then they do a violent tactical entry, with the grenades and the automatic weapons. Why? Why put yourself, and other people, at risk?

    1. But then they do a violent tactical entry, with the grenades and the automatic weapons. Why? Why put yourself, and other people, at risk?

      They already popped their pills and pulled the toys out. They were gonna party, come hell or high water. It’s just too damn bad that family didn’t have a dog.

    2. THAT is a good question. if the exigency dissapeared because they had already arrested the person believed to be violent etc (that justified the dynamic entry) then they no longer had justification to do a dynamic entry.

  38. 1. End asset forfeiture to get the cops, DAs, and judges out of the armed robbery business.

    2. Change police policy to only use SWAT where there is a real risk of violence.

    3. End the no-knock raid on non-violent offenders BS.

    4. As a matter of policy when police are arresting druggies they should surveil the suspect to take him down in a benign environment. Kicking in his door at 4:00AM while his wife and kids are sleeping in the house is criminal.

    5. End the drug war, then 1 through 4 become moot.

  39. Radley knows how to generate page hits.

  40. Can you give us some statistics on police killing innocent unarmed people?
    In Grand Junction,CO Jason Kemp was killed this way last year by a Colorado State Trooper, but this time Two State Troopers have felony charges.

  41. Let’s be honest, a fair number of cops get into the business because they want to have authority over others and exercise that authority over others and they want the opportunity to use their weapons and use deadly force. Not all cops mind you and many are wonderful human beings. I have know a couple. But to pretend that there are not a significant number who relish the excitement of life and death encounters and putting on those swat outfits and going into battle is just silly. I agree that the militarization of the policy is a horrible trend. Good God, some departments even have tanks. This needs to be turned back. What’s worse is that most of these deadly encounters involve crimes that would not be crimes at all in a sane society.

  42. dunphy, the weapon discharged, therefore his finger was on the trigger; i can’t see how he would accidentally get his finger in there while falling if it wasn’t there already. guns don’t usually shoot fire themselves, and if that had been happened i’m pretty sure they’d have been quick to mention it. barring truly outlandish circumstances, if one is holding a weapon they are responsible for whatever that weapon does. that would sure as hell be the case if the shooter weren’t a cop, regardless of whether whomever they shot was an officer or not. they might not be charged criminally, but they’d sure as hell be held responsible. all we’re asking is that cops be subject to AT LEAST the same level of accountability.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.