Police Abuse

In Phoenix, Another Fatal Police Shooting, Over a Bottle of Pills

|

Phoenix PD

Out responding to a burglary call Tuesday night, officers at an apartment complex in Phoenix were told by a resident that there might be a drug deal going on in an SUV outside. Cops ran the plates, and apparently found that the car was registered to an address on a block that had an open noise complaint that night. According to police, that complaint was canceled (the police account, as relayed by The Arizona Republic, drops the burglary call from its narrative by this point) and cops went to the SUV to question the people in the car.

The Republic reports:

The officer said the driver, later identified as [Rumaine] Brisbon, got out and appeared to be removing something from the rear of the SUV. The officer told Brisbon to show his hands, but Brisbon stuffed his hands into his waistband, [police spokesperson Trent] Crump said.

The officer drew his weapon and Brisbon ran toward nearby apartments, Crump said. A short foot chase ensued.

"Witnesses indicated to us that the suspect was verbally challenging to the officer," Crump said.

Brisbon refused to comply with the officer's commands to get on the ground, and the two struggled once the officer caught up with him, Crump said.

"During the struggle, Brisbon put his left hand in his pocket and the officer grabbed onto the suspect's hand, while repeatedly telling the suspect to keep his hand in his pocket," he said. "The officer believed he felt the handle of a gun while holding the suspect's hand in his pocket."

According to police the struggle then made its way into an apartment after a resident happened to open the door. Eventually the officer, unnamed but identified by witnesses as white, shot and killed Brisbon. He was found to have been holding on to a bottle of oxycodone pills, according to police.

The police department says it is running a fair investigation of the incident, and is defending the enforcement priorities and police practices that led to this fatal interaction. "Let's be very clear: The officer was doing what we expect him to do," said Crump. "Investigate crimes that neighbors are telling him are occurring in that part of the complex." Even voluntary transactions. 

Also appearing to miss the point on enforcement priorities was Ann Hart, chair of the African American Police Advisory for South Phoenix, who called for "a deeper dive into why police officers are feeling compelled to shoot and kill as opposed to apprehend and detain, arrest and jail" instead of why cops are directed into interactions over trifling infractions with sometimes very serious legal penalties in the first place.

Advertisement

NEXT: Global Warming 36 Year Update: Atmosphere has warmed an average of 0.14 C per decade, or just over one-half degree C (0.91 degrees Fahrenheit).

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. Really? Is the recent spate of cops shooting civilians actually increasing these incidents? I mean, do cops fear even more for their safety than before? Like, are cops becoming even more paranoid due to unrest in St. Louis, NYC, etc.?

    1. Just imagine being a *Black* cop! They must be afraid *constantly*!

      1. Black cops are often even more racist than white cops. They have to go to extremes to convince their coworkers that they’re not “going native”.

    2. I can’t see how they wouldn’t be, especially since we already know they’re pants-shitting cowards in the first place who already thought everyone was the enemy, including 12-year-olds with toy guns.

    3. “People are upset that we are killing people. We must then kill more people. This will surely bring about calm. So we can go back to killing people undisturbed.”

      /cop logic

    4. I think it’s more that we’re just hearing more, now, about such incidents, nationwide. There are hundreds reported in the media each year (and, by some accounts, several times more instances of excessive police violence that don’t appear in the media), but, I think they usually don’t travel outside the local media.

  2. “Witnesses indicated to us that the suspect was verbally challenging to the officer.”

    What does this even mean? “At least one witness said Brisbon was yelling”?

    1. Was he yelling “help” or “don’t shoot me”?

      1. “Couldn’t tell exactly, but it could have been ‘I be cappin’ you, motherfucker!'”

    2. Hey man, words are “resistance” now. Just talking is now resisting arrest. How dare you verbally challenge an officer!

      1. If words can be triggers, they can be resistance. I blame SJW’s.

      2. I knew a guy who told a cop to fuck off, and was promptly arrested for assault.

        1. I shitcanned more than one assault charge and/or “disorderly conduct” charge written up by cops with themselves as complainant/victim.

          A few really didn’t know the law, but many did and just used the charge as an excuse to cuff and cage someone for mouthin’ off.

    3. Probably “you aren’t going to arrest me if I can help it” or something to that effect. Or perhaps “you’ll never catch me alive, copper”.

  3. I’ll be curious to see how the details shake out. I’m hopeing for a security cam or cellphone video.

    1. “Look man, the cop was clearly aiming for his knees.”

      1. If the cop really did try tackling him and restraining vs shooting him the back I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt about thinking to guy was going for a gun. It’s the cops who shoot within two seconds of an encounter I don’t give any slack.

        1. give him the benefit of the doubt about thinking to guy was going for a gun.

          Because he “felt an object”? So now simply having something in your pockets is justifiable homicide?

          1. If he is reaching for something in his pocket during a struggle it is not unreasonable to believe he is reaching for a weapon. In my earlier post I hoped for video. I do not take the police at their word. However if it did playout like the police say, a lone officer fighting with a suspect, who was reaching for an unknown object, it might have been reasonable to use deadly force. I’m slow to make judgments in this cases because all too often the “facts” change over time.

            1. When does it ever play out like the police say? Ever?

              1. Rarely, but I am willing to believe there are outliers in any data set. If a video confirms exactly what was in report I would be surprised.

              2. The Michael Brown grand jury found Wilson’s story to be convincing enough to not indict him.

                1. I would be okay with a GJ not indicting if it would have been fair. You can’t have a prosecutor shooting holes in his own case, not indict, and then say the system works.

                  1. How did the prosecutor “shoot holes in his own case,” other than by presenting all available evidence to the grand jury? Is he supposed to withhold exculpatory evidence, so that he can get an indictment, only to lose at trial?

                    Face it, Brown attacked Wilson as Wilson and various witnesses said. The prosecution didn’t have a good case.

                    1. Then don’t take it to GJ. Face the mob and say we aren’t charging anyone.

                    2. The prosecutor did seem to use the grand jury to take the heat off himself, which is understandable. Even so there was one plot to kill him.

                      Personal issues aside, I think it was better to have the decision made by a grand jury and not just one person.

                2. The Michael Brown grand jury found Wilson’s story to be convincing enough to not indict him.

                  (snickers)

                  1. So, Episiarch, what do you know about the case that the grand jury did not? Please tell us what they missed.

            2. I’ve decided that “just doing my job” is no excuse for enforcing drug laws. So they are fucking murderers no matter what happened. A person is completely justified morally in using deadly force to keep from being arrested for drugs, just as you would be if I tried to keep you prisoner in my basement. Maybe stupid because of the consequences, but completely morally justified. Any cop who doesn’t refuse on principle to enforce drug laws is an evil piece of shit.

  4. I look forward to the day that all law enforcement is handled by armed drones. That way I don’t have to lay awake at night worrying whether our heroes in blue will make it home safely.

    1. You have three seconds to comply!

      1. Grow up dude. Why would you even waste precious fuel and ammo space on a drone by installing a speaker?

      2. +1 prime directive.

    2. Drones would be more honest, and, if they developed their own intelligence, more compassionate and moral.

  5. Maybe someone should have sent this to Brisbon.

  6. Fuck the choked guy in NY and the 12-year-old kid in the Cleveland park. However, this alleged drug dealer merits our undevided attention.

      1. I could be wrong here, but I think he’s saying the race hustlers and their media allies are going to fixate on this case and ignore the more sympathetic victims, again.

        1. Jordan gets it.

          1. Meant to say antisocial-ist gets it.

        2. I find this victim plenty sympathetic. Drug laws are wrong and immoral, period. Any resistance to their enforcement is good, rational and completly justified.

      2. He’s one of those law & order types who believes that whatever happens to people who break the law is completely deserved.

  7. ” Out responding to a burglary call Tuesday night, officers at an apartment complex in Phoenix were told by a resident that there might be a drug deal going on in an SUV outside. Cops ran the plates, and apparently found that the car was registered to an address on a block that had an open noise complaint that night.”

    So the cops stopped investigating a crime with an actual victim to check out an SUV which may or may not have been related to a fucking noise complaint because somebody inside of it might be buying or selling something?

    What kind of an idiot thinks like that?

    1. Coward pigs who would much rather make an easy bust of a victimless crime than actually do some work and solve a real crime that may have been carried out by someone slightly more dangerous?

    2. An idiot who might be able to seize an SUV for The Department.

      1. Ah, I hadn’t considered the asset forfeiture angle!

        1. Always follow the money

    3. “Out responding to a burglary call Tuesday night, officers at an apartment complex in Phoenix were told by a resident the burglar that there might be a drug deal going on in an SUV outside.”

    4. What kind of an idiot thinks like that?

      The kind of idiot we give a gun and then praise when he kills anyone or anypet he feels like.”

  8. Since when is living on the same block as someone who filed a noise complaint probable cause for being questioned? And when did you start to need permission to walk away from a cop that has no reason to detain you?

    Having said that, this one doesn’t seems quite as cut and dry as Gardner or Rice.

    1. Well, I think the point of the article is that this confrontation wouldn’t have happened if not for asinine drug laws.

  9. According to police the struggle then made its way into an apartment after a resident happened to open the door.

    RIGHT. That sounds totally plausible.

    1. “What the hell is going on out there?”

      “I’ll go tell them to knock it the fuck off…back in a minute.”

  10. This one’s hard to judge. Tense physical struggle ensues, in the confusion the cop feels what he thinks is a handle of a gun…

    The problem here, of course, is the war on drugs. If cops are allowed to restrain you, question you, start barking orders at you, based on baggie or bottle of something that may or may not be in your pocket, they leave themselves with little choice but to escalate every encounter with people into a deadly struggle.

    For instance, I’m wondering what Washington State cops are going to do now that using the I-smelled-marijuana pretense is now no longer valid. What’ll it change to… I smelled XTACY? I smelled Heroin? I smelled Oxycontin?

      1. Take a real deep whiff officer

    1. “Furtive movement”

        1. Don’t forget “weaving” for our citizens in automobiles.

    2. Crack? None of those other things really smells much.

      1. That’s kind of my point. I don’t know what other drugs ‘smell like’ but I’m guessing there aren’t many that smell much at all unless you’re burning them in some fashion.

  11. Out responding to a burglary call Tuesday night, officers at an apartment complex in Phoenix were told by a resident that there might be a drug deal going on in an SUV outside. Cops ran the plates, and apparently found that the car was registered to an address on a block that had an open noise complaint that night. According to police, that complaint was canceled (the police account, as relayed by The Arizona Republic, drops the burglary call from its narrative by this point) and cops went to the SUV to question the people in the car.

    Anyone feel like drawing up a list of commenters that will swallow this incoherent nonsense hook, line and sinker?

    1. Sounds more like a crazy liquor and cheeseburger party gone wrong. I’ve seen it happen before

      1. “Shit-Hawks!”
        *watches sky nervously*

      2. We know what you and Randy get up to, no need to brag about it.

        1. I’m gathering evidence. On you and on everybody here and, when I have enough of it, I’ll spring the shit-snare and buy you all a one-way shit-ticket back to con college. Shit abyss.

          1. con college

            Hey it’s three squares, and the dopes pretty good I hear.

    2. Sounds legit

  12. Cops responded to a burglary, and when seeing an opportunity to bust someone for a victimless crime they dropped what they were doing to investigate. Seeing an opportunity to steal someone’s car, they pursued the victimless criminal. When the victimless criminal resisted, he was killed. The officers went some safely that night, disappointed that they were unable to steal a car for the department.

    FIN

    1. You sure they didn’t go back for the SUV?

      1. I didn’t think of that. You know, they probably did impound it. It’s not like the owner is going to pick it up.

  13. Brisbon put his left hand in his pocket

    Ahhhh. pronoun trouble will get you shot.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e1hZGDaqIw

  14. HANDS IN MY POCKETS!

    NOW WHAT?

  15. Oh, wait, the perp corpse was black?

    OH.

    Good shoot.

  16. Even if you accept the officer’s story at face value *and* accept that its OK for a cop to shoot someone who’s struggling with him – this is a bad shoot, and here’s why.

    The officer didn’t have PC to stop the guy in the first place.

    He had a report that *maybe* there might possibly be a drug deal going on.

    Everything else comes from that – he didn’t have authority to search, he didn’t have authority to demand the guy submit, the guy had no obligation to ‘stand and deliver’ – IOW he had every right to leave this interaction, even by running away, the cop didn’t have authority to pursue, and the cop didn’t have authority to attempt to subdue the guy because he ran.

    The cop didn’t have a *suspect*, didn’t pursue a suspect, didn’t fight with a suspect.

    1. Yeah, but common sense should tell you that asserting your rights isn’t always the wisest option, and fighting with police is almost always a really, really stupid option.

      If a cop tells you to show your hands, just do it. It’s a minor infringement on liberty, and may prevent you from being shot by a cop who thinks you have a gun.

      1. All of what you said is irrelevant.

        I know its ‘common sense’ to submit – either to a cop, a mugger, or a rapist.

        His *not submitting* may make him ‘stupid’ but it does not make this a good shoot.

        1. No, it’s totally relevant. It doesn’t matter whether it’s a good shoot or not. My point is how to not get shot. One way is to not get into positions where police have a reason (good or bad) to shoot you.

  17. Six months ago I lost my job and after that I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a great website which literally saved me. I started working for them online and in a short time after I’ve started averaging 15k a month… The best thing was that cause I am not that computer savvy all I needed was some basic typing skills and internet access to start… This is where to start…
    ?????? http://www.payinsider.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.