Police Abuse

Baltimore County Cops Kill Woman After Trying to Serve Bench Warrant for Disorderly Conduct, Resisting Arrest

Male suspect with a warrant for assault was apprehended while trying to flee

|

Facebook

23-year-old Korryn Gaines became the ninth black woman shot and killed by police this year—one of all but two who were armed, but the first, as the Washington Post notes, to gain national media attention.

Baltimore county police only began to use body cameras a few weeks ago, so it's unclear whether the incident was caught on tape.

Police came to Gaines' apartment in search of her and another man to serve warrants on, according to NBC News, which reports her bench warrants were for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest (and "numerous" other traffic violations) while his were for assault. Police say they did not get a response when they knocked on the door but could hear activity inside so obtained a key from a landlord.

NBC News reports:

When an officer opened the door, he allegedly saw Gaines sitting on the floor pointing a long gun at him. Police retreated to the hallway and called for tactical personnel.

At this point, the male suspect tried to flee the apartment with a 1-year-old child but was apprehended, Johnson said. Other residents were evacuated from the building.

For the next several hours, officers attempted to negotiate with Gaines who remained inside the apartment with the older [five-year-old] boy. Throughout the standoff, the woman repeatedly pointed her long gun at officers and made threatening remarks, Armacost said.

"If you don't leave, I'm going to kill you," Gaines said at 3 p.m., according to Armacost.

That's when one of the officers opened fire and the woman fired back twice, Johnson said.

Police fired back, killing Gaines. The five-year-old was also hit by a bullet, but authorities say it is unclear whether he was shot by police or Gaines—he is expected to survive.

NEXT: Comedy, Outrage, and Free Speech: Can We Take A Joke is Available for Download Now!

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. It’s going to take some startling new evidence before I blame the cops for this.

    1. I concur, but I do have a problem with the police firing first, especially after a “several hour” stand-off.

      1. Virtual impunity or not, personally I’d have trouble firing in the direction of a child.

        1. ^^^THIS

          So, justified or not when will the investigation into the police shooting a 5 yo begin?

          Yeah, cause she didn’t shoot him with a long gun. That was cop panic fire.

        2. You don’t have the right stuff, obviously.

      2. I’ve said it before (and think it should apply equally to the cops) if you point your gun AT someone absent appropriate justification it is an assault.

        Expect to get shot at.

        1. Exactly. The idea that self defense defense(ahem) requires the other person to strike first or shoot first is a principle completely at odds with principles of survival. Preemtive strikes when alternative actions are preclude one one expects an attack have often succeeded in court – and rightly so.

    2. Why?

      They could have simply retreated and vacated the premises.

      They could have simply come back and served her the next day or they could have tracked her movements and presented her with the warrants in a public space.

      Failing to effect the issuance of the warrant on the day in question would not have signaled and end to civilization.

      Blue lives do not matter more than negro lives and vice-versa #

      1. What would make you think it would have turned out any differently any other day? I’m pretty sure she was a pretty high flight risk, not to mention that she was a danger to everybody around her, including her children whom she clearly had no problem with risking the lives of. Had they waited until she left the apartment, she just would have gotten in a shootout out in public, where more people were in danger.

        1. Of course, neither you nor I know that it would have turned out any differently on another day.

          The matter should be viewed through the prism of a peace officer paradigm and not through the prism of a law enforcement paradigm. A peace officer would have sought to defuse the situation and sometimes that means swallowing one’s testosterone and retreating so that the chances of lethal confrontation are diminished.

          Thus, addressing your concerns:

          (1) Flight risk. So what if she was a flight risk? We are going bankrupt financing the prison building / prison administration complex. So a nasty negress who has outstanding assault charges is at liberty. We will survive.

          (2) Danger to others. It would appear that you are assuming facts not in evidence by asseverating that “she was a danger to everybody around her.” That she defended herself from the cop’s violent aggression, does not, per se, establish that she was a danger to everybody around her.

          (3) Danger in public. Do you know that she carried every time she left her crib? Do you know that the cops could only apprehend her in a public place where others were present? She could have been arrested in a public place where others were not present.

          1. All three – there is no valid reason to surrender the initiative to someone who had done what she did.

        2. She had bench warrants out for “resisting arrest” and “disorderly conduct”, which are the classic “contempt of cop” charges, along with traffic violations. She’s not some master criminal they had to take down right then and there.

          1. Or maybe she was a reckless hothead who previously got by with wrist slaps because she was a petite, minority female.

            Not to say that you cannot be correct, just that there is a whole universe of other possible options.

        3. That’s what all the people in the WaPo forums are saying–“She failed to comply! There was a warrant! Death was too good for her!–and best of all–“She might have harmed the child!”

          She had a warrant for failure to appear on charges that seem to amount to getting chippy with a cop during a traffic stop. Let’s say the court just decided to pretend it never happened. How many people would be injured as a result of that? Would it be worth getting into a gunfight with a woman holding a child?

          I’m not saying this from a “fuck the police” perspective, I’m just saying that by pressing the issue and refusing to back down those officers put themselves in a situation where they escalated the confrontation and could have killed a child. There were plenty of other options. If what those police did was the best choice they could make, we need to ask some serious questions about law enforcement policies in this country.

          1. “She might have harmed the child!”

            And that’s a job for the police, apparently.

        4. With the commentary in this thread, it would appear the police can be safely disbanded since they technically have no job, thus why pay them. If we wanted people to kindly ask people to do things without any repercussions we could do it ourselves.

          Not that I think traffic violations such as going 10MPH over the speed limit should be punishable by jail time, but that law isn’t the fault of the police it’s the fault of the legislature and the judges that issue the warrants. Shooting this woman for pulling out a rifle to keep from going to jail, and taking her 5 year old hostage to facilitate that, wasn’t going to end well for her and if the police just left her do you think there’s even a sliver of a chance she wouldn’t have run with that rifle and been in the exact same situation the next time the police came calling? How many times is the right number of times to defer shooting dangerous crazy people?

          It seems every time one of these things happens, no matter what the circumstances, there are a few people who’s only word of advice is ‘let them go and maybe they won’t do it again’. I get where you’re coming from as a Libertarian, but that’s just as much Utopianist bullshit as anything the far left or far right ever put forward only with less logical underpinning.

          1. Maybe you’re misreading the discussion here, because it sounds like you’re proposing some sort of binary policing where you either have no police whatsoever or police who can’t arrest someone without a gunfight. What those of us who are critical of the police in this instance are saying, at least what I’m saying, is that the police took what should have been an uneventful arrest and through either an absence of or extremely poor planning and too much willingness to use lethal force made it a tragedy. If this is the standard for policing then there really is no standard.

            1. Boiling it down further

              Even in cases where its reasonable to believe the use of deadly force was legal or justifiable, its worth critically examining cases where police use deadly force to see what can be done different that could possibly have avoided the use of deadly force.

              “She had a gun and threatened police, case closed” says that there is nothing to be learned.

            2. So it’s your contention that the police, who had legal authority from the property owner to serve their warrant, escalated things. Instead of, you know, the rifle toting woman they were there to arrest who was apparently using her own 5 year old as a bargaining chip?

              Does that about sum it up?

              Please, continue, because I might be missing the granularity of this issue.

        5. “Disorderly conduct”? What did she do to get that arrest?

          “Resisting arrest” is probably from not wanting to go with the po-po on the disorderly conduct case. And warrents for “numerous” (zero is a number) traffic violations? She ignored the government’s revenue-farming scheme.

      2. As I said, maybe some shocking new facts will come to light, but right now it looks like she was waving her gun at cops with a 5 year old in the apartment. I can see why the cops wouldn’t want to retreat.

        1. Why can’t they dart her like do with out of control animals at a safari? We have figured out how to control a prized animal, but can’t be bothered to do it with people? And yes, I know tranquilizers are not immediate, but there didn’t seem to be an immediate threat here (i.e., she wasn’t holding a gun to her kid).

          1. “Why can’t they dart her..”

            Or, put another way, “why cant they SHOOT her with a somewhat less lethal projectile?”

            Think about it that way should make at least one problem obvious – that being her likely response to the perception of being shot at.. In that sort of situation it is not remotely reasonable to expect her to recognize that the attack is not intended to be lethal.

            IOW – fight’s on, and she will be blazing away while falling under the influence of a potent sedative. Sure, she still may not want to shoot her child, but who’s to say it won’t happen anyway?

        2. “Waving her gun” in her own home. Maybe cops shouldn’t be inviting themselves in anymore.

          Since when is an arrest warrant enough to enter a private home? I thought they needed a separate warrant for that. Or at least to trick you into opening the door like they’re vampires.

          1. Internet Legal Minds in the WaPo forums seemed to be under the impression that you can’t enter a residence to execute an arrest warrant unless you know for a fact that the targets of the warrant are inside, which the police did not.

            1. Correct me if I’m wrong but the properly belonged to the complex, not this individual, and it seems the owner provided the police with a key and their blessing to check.

              if memory serves that’s at least semi-legal, legal, or illegal depending on the state/circumstances.

              1. IANAL, but my impression has always been that while the resident doesn’t own the property they still have the same rights in terms of search and seizure and so forth that a homeowner has. You need a separate warrant to enter the premises, and it’s not clear whether the police in this instance had that.

                1. Yes, which as you might recall means that if a warrant is presented to them they are required to open the property up. This wasn’t a no warrant arrest or something, so you might want to stop pretending it was.

                  1. No warrant was presented to them.

                    An *arrest* warrant was presented to the landlord. The people in the apartment chose not to answer the door to find out who was knocking – I doubt the police loudly yelled they were the police when they knocked.

                    Still, I would have thought one of the other women killed this year would have made a better martyr than this one. Is it because she’s light skinned that they chose to make a big deal over this one?

              2. Its more complicated than that with rental property.

                There’s an issue of who has the *right* to enter and the right to grant entry. Just being the owner of the property does not give you blanket rights to enter units that you have rented out at your whim.

                1. As far as I know the legal owner of the property has all rights reserved that aren’t spelled out by the State as belonging to the renter, and even then serving an arrest warrant is usually one of the things they can allow entry for. I’d find out for sure, but I know that’s the case in my state.

        3. As for shocking new facts possibly coming out, note that the story we are getting is 100 percent the cops’ side. No surprise it makes the case that what went down was 100% the occupants’ fault.

          1. And even with their version it’s not 100% cut-and-dry that they did the right thing here.

      3. Libertymike: Seriously? Someone points a weapon at cops, so the go away and come back another day?

        Sounds like a nursery rhyme.

        1. If someone breaks into your home you should have a right to threaten their lives with deadly force until you are assured they have a legit warrant.

          Else every homeowner who owns a gun can be legally executed by cops, or at least imprisoned on entrapment, by cops “accidentally” entering the wrong property or forgetting to identify themselves till they see a gun drawn.

          1. That makes no sense, since there was no “break in” in a sense that’s commonly used, and she was pointing guns at cops when it was abundantly clear that they had legal right to enter her house.

            If I owned guns, I wouldn’t wave them at Jehovah’s witnesses or random strangers who walk through the open door mistaking my house for his girlfriends’ (which happens occasionally). Ridiculous.

            1. That’s the legal standard and it’s supported by case law. Your right to defend yourself with lethal force during a home invasion obviously varies from state to state in the details, but it doesn’t change based on the identity of the invaders. After all, as has happened in the past, people can impersonate police for the purpose of breaking into a home and robbing or killing the occupants. And for that matter real police may nevertheless use their official identity to do illegal things.

            2. Despite how safe and serene your suburban hippie lifestyle apparently is, not everyone can afford to be so negligent in protecting their home.

            3. “That makes no sense, since there was no “break in” in a sense that’s commonly used…”

              Um, I’m pretty sure a landlord cannot willy nilly open one’s apartment door without proper notice. Sad to see you think it is okay for cops to perform an unauthorized entry when they quite obviously did not have permission. Cops had no idea who was in that apartment.

              Oh, the cops were worried about breaking a door but aren’t about shooting dogs. This must be a kindler gentler PD.

            4. “That makes no sense, since there was no “break in” in a sense that’s commonly used…”

              Um, I’m pretty sure a landlord cannot willy nilly open one’s apartment door without proper notice. Sad to see you think it is okay for cops to perform an unauthorized entry when they quite obviously did not have permission. Cops had no idea who was in that apartment.

              Oh, the cops were worried about breaking a door but aren’t about shooting dogs. This must be a kindler gentler PD.

              1. You’re ‘pretty sure’ huh? I’m not saying a lease is the end-all-be-all of legal precedent as they can be contested but if the police have a warrant and give it to the landlord they have every justification in opening the house to be searched.

                I mean, seriously, are we going full retard?

            5. Also, not to jump on you, but I do own guns. When I rented, a couple of guys opened my front door and came in thinking it was a different house. They were unarmed and apologetic, and hence the situation was calm. Had a group of armed men claiming to be police pounded on the locked door and then forced it open, it would’ve been a much tenser situation, and I won’t swear that I wouldn’t have taken cover and drawn on the officers until I was 100% convinced they were actually police.

              1. That’s great that you have guns, seriously; but police announced themselves, had a warrant, and the key to her door. She didn’t open fire when they entered, they didn’t open fire when they entered, they also retreated and that started hours of an armed standoff.

                So in what universe are these police ‘maybe robbers’ at that point, good sir? Also don’t be afraid to jump on me if you want, I’m sturdy.

                Personally it doesn’t sound like she deserved what she got, but she got what she asked for at the end of the day and that sucks for everyone involved. She should have just shown up in Court, but apparently that’s asking too much of her. Even her assumed boyfriend with an assault warrant did the smart thing here, including removing the younger child away from mommy. What does that tell you about her state of mind?

        2. Has the bodycam video been released?

          The way everybody’s saying the fact pattern as presented (ie. the cops’ side of the story) is clearly true implies that the video already has been released.

          To which I’d point out that it’s remarkably how quickly the video gets released when it makes the cops look good, and how it’s covered up when it doesn’t.

        3. I see you prefer the law enforcement model of policing over the peace officer model.

          In a free society, cops do not get to enter private property, including rental premises, without the express consent of the dweller.

          Do you want a society where the citizen fears the cop or where the cop fears the citizen? Yes, it is a binary proposition. After all, the cop, theoretically, is the servant of the citizen.

          Stop sucking cop cock.

          1. This ^ post was in response to T U Tandem.

          2. In what universe would someone rent property to someone, in a property owners market, where the person renting had control over all entry to the owners investment? Read a lease, it doesn’t work that way right now and it wouldn’t work that way in Libertopia either. If you want full protection without a search warrant for your property, buy it don’t rent. QED.

            Also, if all you have are so-called ‘peace’ officers you might as well fire them because you could do their job with sternly worded letters. Obviously they shouldn’t be storm troopers, but ‘peace officer’? Really?

            1. Most leases require 24 hour notice of entry except in the event of an emergency like a water leak et cetera. And even then, the lease allows for the landlord or his authorized agents to gain entry, not cops or any other third party acting without the owner’s consent.

      4. “Failing to effect the issuance of the warrant on the day in question would not have signaled and end to civilization.”

        Civilization must understand who is in control and failure to respect their authoritah for even mere minutes or hours will not be tolerated. Do not phuck with the Force

        Submit or die & Semper Tyrannicus should be the mottos on cop cars.

      5. Exactly:

        In a case like this, wait her out. The chances are severely decreased that harm would come to anyone if they had.

    3. I’ll want to see video. If I don’t, I’m afraid I’m not prepared to accept the police narrative. They’ve blotted their copybooks too thoroughly.

  2. 23-year-old Korryn Gaines became the ninth black woman shot and killed by police this year?one of all but two who were armed, but the first, as the Washington Post notes, to gain national media attention.

    SHE WAS BLACK?!?!?!? EXTRA OUTRAGEOUS

  3. So, one article on Saturday and now four in 18 minutes on Tuesday.

    May I respectfully refer to a suggestion made by a commentator some years ago: perhaps Reason could take some of these weekday articles and post them on a weekend?

  4. ninth black woman shot and killed by police this year?one of all but two who were armed, but the first, as the Washington Post notes

    Trying to parse…

    1. I think that means seven of them were armed, and two weren’t.

      1. Had to run that through my mental mesh a couple of times, but I believe you are right. All but 2 means 7 were armed. Interesting way to put it.

      2. oh yeah, I seriously couldn’t figure it out either, but that does make sense.

  5. he ninth black woman shot and killed by police this year?one of all but two who were armed

    OK, I may be slow today but I’m really not sure what this means.

    1. 7 armed and 2 unarmed?

      1. I think so. Damn strange way to write that.

        1. Damn strange indeed.

        2. I get the opposite from that….2 armed and 7 not. Since she was armed she was 1 of the 2. I know that does not seem right that 7 unarmed would be gunned down but remember who we are talking about.

        3. I get the opposite from that….2 armed and 7 not. Since she was armed she was 1 of the 2. I know that does not seem right that 7 unarmed would be gunned down but remember who we are talking about.

          1. So 4 were armed and 14 unarmed??

            Seriously, I see it as 2 armed: “one of all but two who were armed”

      2. OK, that does seem to fit.

    2. I actually tried using google translate on this by moving from spanish and back to english. Didn’t help.

    3. That’s because it was written in such a way as to make you think most were unarmed.

  6. For the next several hours, officers attempted to negotiate with Gaines who remained inside the apartment with the older [five-year-old] boy. Throughout the standoff, the woman repeatedly pointed her long gun at officers and made threatening remarks, Armacost said.

    “If you don’t leave, I’m going to kill you,” Gaines said at 3 p.m., according to Armacost.

    That’s when one of the officers opened fire and the woman fired back twice, Johnson said.

    If this is accurate, my outrage meter is flaccid.

    1. Mine, too. If. It sure would help me believe if the cops had video and made it available quickly.

      Bets?

      The cops aren’t used to having to prove themselves. They’d best get used to it, though. They’ve been caught saying one thing while video said something else a little too often.

  7. Carriage Hill was always a shithole complex. Doesn’t surprise me a bit.

    For non-Marylanders, be aware that Baltimore County is a totally separate political entity than Baltimore City. There’s an interesting path for black flight from NW Baltimore through Randallstown and Owings Mills, largely driven by civil service.

    1. Can confirm. Source: I lived there for a few years. Still, it’s less of a shithole than Baltimore proper.

      1. Which is a pity. I was in the Baltimore area for several years, during its renaissance in the Late ’70’s to early ’80s. Since I was busy dropping out of college and being a bum in general, I got to see the city pulling itself up by its bootstraps, and several downtown areas shifting from urban combat zones into nice places to wander. Pity the bootstraps seem to have broken.

        I bet the safest place in the city at 3-o’clock in the morning is still The Block (if it exists), a one-block (more or less) zone of peep-shows and strip clubs one block away from Police HQ. It used to be said that anybody dumb enough to start trouble there should be planted head down, like the turnip he was the intellectual equal of.

        1. Which is a pity. I was in the Baltimore area for several years, during its renaissance in the Late ’70’s to early ’80s.

          We will never again see the likes of Don Schaeffer.

  8. This lady got pulled over with a cardboard license plate claiming she wasn’t subject to any laws. She told her son to bite the police officers as they tried to remove her from the car when the tow truck got there, screaming that they would have to kill her before they got her out of the car. The man she was with in the apartment also had a warrant out for assault, and he was captured peacefully and then released on his own accord. This is not a case with too many questionable actions on the side of the police. This lady had a death wish. If the child was on her lap at the time when the cop fired the first shot, then that is unacceptable, but this lady chose to use her child as a human shield.

    1. “…with a cardboard license plate claiming she wasn’t subject to any laws.”

      Libertarian moment?

        1. I larfed

        2. I gave a short, bitter laugh.

        3. What’s really the difference between a crazy black woman and a sovereign citizen, after all is said and done?

    2. Given that encounter, why wasn’t she arrested on the spot/ Why did they turn her lose, and then get a warrant to arrest her?

      1. My guess is she somehow made bail or managed to actually escape the police.

        1. If she escaped, how did they track her down? Did they run the [cardboard] plate and figure out who she was?

        2. If she made bail, why was there an arrest warrant?

          1. Presumably because she subsequently didn’t show up for her date with the judge.

            I don’t know Dean, but you’re more than capable of finding out without channeling The Judge here.

  9. She had a gun and fired some shots. Don’t automatically try to make her a victim here.

    1. Whycome you must disparage such a strong sistah?

    2. Maybe she was just doing some target practice in her apartment.

    3. Agreed. I think we need to hear more about this but on its face I can’t say this one sounds particularly outrageous.

    4. She returned fire after the police shot first. The police shot first. Don’t automatically try to make them the heroes here.

      1. Those aren’t either or positions.

        1. It doesn’t logically follow that her returning fire during a standoff removes responsibility from the police for conducting the standoff in the first place. They had the person with the more serious charges. They had no reason to believe that she would harm the child, and don’t seem to have claimed that they fired on her to protect the child anyway.

          There’s obviously a lot that we don’t know about the situation, but there doesn’t seem to be any urgent reason why the police had to arrest her at that moment and not, say, send a couple plain clothes detectives to grab her on the street. If the primary objective was to prevent any loss of life the police could have accomplished that and still executed the warrant at some point. Which, and this is incredibly germane to the situation, was for failure to appear on what seem to be a couple traffic violations and a misdemeanor.

          So she obviously had a role in the events leading to the warrant but the police chose to raise the intensity of the confrontation, even to the point of opening fire on her. That she returned fire does not make her less a victim in that regard.

    5. “She had a gun and fired some shots. Don’t automatically try to make her a victim here.”

      I don’t. But note that SO FAR all I have is the cops word on it. And, dammit, the cops have been caught lying a little too goddamned often for my comfort.

      I would be a LOT happier if there was video. It isn’t as if the scenario the cops propose didn’t give them time to get it set.

  10. according to NBC News, which reports her bench warrants were for … (and “numerous” other traffic violations)

    You speed, you bleed.

    1. She was pulled over for having cardboard license plates reading “Free Traveler”. She was asked for her information and she spewed a bunch of nonsense about her being immune from laws. She then resisted getting out of the car when the tow truck came and told her son to bite the police officers, proudly saying they would have to murder her if they wanted her to get out of her car. The cop was pretty calm and polite through most of it. Also, the man she was with in the apartment was wanted for assault. He was apprehended peacefully and then released of his own accord. If the cops really wanted to kill a black person, why didn’t they kill him or lock him up?

      http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne…..story.html

      1. Thank you for taking the time to repeat a previous comment in regards to my expert, non tongue-in-cheek, legal analysis of this story.

  11. “Baltimore county police only began to use body cameras a few weeks ago, so it’s unclear whether the incident was caught on tape.”

    A different article I read said the body camera ‘malfunctioned’ or the officer wasn’t ‘trained’ properly in it’s use. Either way, it appears that there is no video record again. It’s amazing to me that we keep spending more and more money on video recording equipment. But, we still don’t get any of these incidents on camera. It’s almost like they don’t want any video evidence or something.

    1. FOP! FOP! FOP!

    2. Apparently I was wrong. There are so many of these stories now that I’m getting them mixed up. Anyway, the one I read that I thought was about this incident was actually in Chicago where 3 officers had body cameras and all 3 malfunctioned. But, it is still weird that they can’t figure out if anyone had a body camera on them in this case. I guess they need to review they footage before they determine if they have any footage or not.

      1. The woman was live streaming the entire thing.

        1. Really? I haven’t seen that yet. If so, that’s great. Sunlight is a beautiful thing.

    3. ” It’s almost like they don’t want any video evidence or something.”

      Haha Yeah, almost.

    4. I work in government. We’ve spent millions literally on tech equipment & software. Including lots of video/audio surveillance equipment.

      Sadly, we get little out of it. Most of the staff is too ignorant to use it.

      What’s that about men, boys and their toys?

      Tech will not solve the social issues that militarization of the police has created. No matter how much we spend on it.

  12. The five-year-old was also hit by a bullet, but authorities say it is unclear whether he was shot by police or Gaines.

    Of course it was the fuzz.

    Easy to second-guess without more information, but why would they try to engage her if a five-year-old was in even remote danger of being by a shot from the police? Keep waiting it out, not for her sake, but for the child’s sake.

    1. What’re you talking about? The cop saved the kid’s life by shooting him in the way Keaneau Reeves shot Jeff Daniels in Speed.

    2. Its the kid getting shot that bothers me. Why take a shot at mom with the kid standing right frickin’ there? Violates ye olde rules of gun safety, for one. And I’m pretty sure a serf who plugs a bystander when shooting in self-defense would be charged with something for it, for two.

      Sounds like a fraught situation, and not one, for once, that was entirely created by overaggressive cops.

      Outrage meter: 3 out of 10, for sloppy gun handling that resulted in a kid catching a bullet.

      1. Inadequately trained, psychoemotionally retarded cops. Doesn’t make Gaines’ moronic decisions any better, though.

      2. The thing that pisses me off about this is that it’s a damn bench warrant for traffic shit and a misdemeanor. Hell, I’ve had friends who’ve forgotten to deal with traffic tickets and had bench warrants issued. Usually, if you don’t want to be SuperCop, you just wait until the person gets pulled over again, at which point the warrant will show up and they’ll get taken in. Or you wait until they’re in court for something else, or you get them at the DMV when they renew their license. Digging them out of their home at gun point is something that’s done for violent felons, not this petty shit.

    3. Exactly my point. And for what is at worst a list of misdemeanors.

  13. Police came to Gaines’ apartment in search of her and another man to serve warrants on

    I think it would be important to note what sort of crime they were serving a warrant *for*.

    Unpaid parking tickets? or burning orphanage down? the police attitude serving the warrant would be influenced by how dangerous they presume the suspect is.

    from wapo = “”The man was wanted on an assault charge, while Gaines, 23, had an arrest warrant for failing to appear in court after a traffic violation in March””

    so, its actually *worse* when you consider that.

    1. Well, according to the cops she held them off with a gun and holed up in the apartment for several hours, with a young child.

      I think the escalation in this case can pretty much be blamed on our suspect.

      1. All this is based on the cops’ report, maybe startling new evidence will come out making things look worse for the police. But so far, it sounds like she didn’t want to be taken alive, and so she wasn’t.

      2. I wasn’t disputing that – and wasn’t trying to say the cops were consequently at fault just because of that

        – just that its odd how choosy they tend to get about picking what facts to highlight and what facts to omit when they flag these “Cop Shoots Person” stories.

        The fact that the person had a previous batshit-encounter with cops is probably also relevant.

        I’m a huge supporter of Reasons’ “cop-coverage” , which i consider partly the legacy of Balko. However, i’d hate to see it turning into some super lazy “LOOK ANOTHER BLACK PERSON MURDERED-BY-COP” -routine. which is what i think the danger is. There’s more than enough aspects to these stories to show that the ‘excess use of force by cops’ is a serious issue. but i don’t think hiding details/downplaying details/or exaggerating details is ever a good idea regardless. particularly when it seems like the rest of the media uses the same stories to create the impression of a one-dimensional ‘race problem’.

      3. The role of good policing is to de-escalate situations. So that everyone gets out alive.

        Sheesh! I’m not even a cop and I know that. All cops I know, of all ranks, would agree with that statement.

        Only in the military to they train for the aggressive attack approach.

    2. When you cut off the rest of Ed’s sentence, it does look like he’s derelict in his journalistic duties. Nice catch, Gil.

      1. my 2nd comment @ 2:49PM wasnt exactly based on anything i saw lacking here (or my mitaken presumption that anything was lacking) so much as just a general concern that there is some glossing-over sometimes being done.

        but yes, i braintarded that particular paragraph

        1. There certainly can be, but it read like you were singling Ed out for a minor offense here. Which would be *puts on shades* unwarranted.

          And he did not sneak-edit the warrant info. I read the post with a couple minutes of Ed publishing, and saw the info then.

          1. Which would be *puts on shades* unwarranted.

            re: sneak-edit – i know the 3rd graf had that info from the beginning, but if the headline/strapline changed after the fact for greater clarity, then someone seems to think it DID need to be highlighted.

      2. lol – did the headline & strapline just change to include the warrant info? almost makes me wonder if i actually did misread anything initially (im pretty sure i did)

  14. You know there are too many cops when they start killing people for ‘resisting’.

  15. I have very little sympathy for Gaines. She was holding her child in front of her holding a firearm and threatening to use it against police. She was essentially using a kid as a shield. That’s a pretty disgusting and terrible thing to do. If you use a child as a shield against bullets, I don’t really care if you end up dead.

    That being said, panicking and firing at a woman who is hiding herself behind a child is a fucking stupid and terrible thing to do. I don’t care if she threatens to open fire unless you leave the room. I don’t fucking care how long the standoff and attempted negotiations take. I don’t care if you have to wait until the bitch passes out from exhaustion before moving in. The JOB of the police, in instances like this, should be to put the welfare of the child as the top priority. Don’t fire at the bitch using the kid as a shield unless she has opened fire FIRST and there is literally no other option. The child’s life is of much more importance than the cop’s, who’s job is (or at least SHOULD be) to risk their life to protect the child. A single woman is LITERALLY incapable of holding a single child as a shield indefinitely, at some point in time she will need food or water or sleep. Just fucking do your job and WAIT for her to be exhausted.

    1. “Police fired back, killing Gaines. The five-year-old was also hit by a bullet, but authorities say it is unclear whether he was shot by police or Gaines?he is expected to survive.”

      The five-year-old was almost certainly hit by the cops, as the mother was holding the child in front of her with the gun extended beyond the child (assuming she was holding the firearm in a normal manner).

    2. “Police fired back, killing Gaines. The five-year-old was also hit by a bullet, but authorities say it is unclear whether he was shot by police or Gaines?he is expected to survive.”

      The five-year-old was almost certainly hit by the cops, as the mother was holding the child in front of her with the gun extended beyond the child (assuming she was holding the firearm in a normal manner).

      1. If the kid was “hit by a bullet”, as the article says, it was most definitely a cop’s bullet.

        The bitch had a shotgun, which doesn’t shoot bullets.

        1. That’s crazy talk. All guns fire bullets.

          1. Shotguns are worse because they fire hundreds of bullets all at once.

            1. And, they are statistically a lot more lethal. Plus, they minimize the risk of ricochet.

    3. “She was holding her child in front of her holding a firearm and threatening to use it against police.” Why dehumanize the child by reducing him to an it if you care so much. I would agree with you if this were not police bullets we are talking about. Unless you consider them to be as dangerous as any other home invader with no regard for human life and incapable of restraint.

  16. The Freddie Gray, Jr. killers escaped justice and, now, no longer content with killing Black children, they’re killing the Mothers of the Movement.

    hashtag blacklivesmatter hashtag hillary2016

    1. #SFedTheLink

  17. The police do plenty of heinous things but this doesn’t appear to be one of them. It’s a shame that woman was killed but she doesn’t appear to be blameless here. There are plenty of clear instances of bad police behavior including shootings and those should be highlighted and pursued. When cases like this one are held up as an example it makes those who desire police reform lose credibility because it makes it seem we’ll blame the police regardless of the circumstances.

    1. this doesn’t appear to be one of them

      Well, except for winging the kid.

      1. I’m sure that five-year-old was reaching for his waistband.

        1. “Baltimore County cops slay future terrorist, medals and commendations proposed.”

        2. “I’m sure that five-year-old was reaching for his waistband.”

          I want to know how long the 5 year-old was handcuffed. He will be a show and tell legend.

      2. Holding them accountable for accidentally shooting a kid during the course of shooting someone else should be looked into but the primary focus of the article is this woman being killed. Her getting shot seems to be justified. The kid, not so much.

        1. I’m at about 75% on it being justified. Had she shot first I’d be at 100%. The cops have cars and vests, while she a crazy lady with a kid. Let her shoot first.

  18. Am I the only one who doesn’t give a single shit about the woman’s racial background? Why is it relevant in any way that she was black?

    “Woman shot by cops, circumstances are: …”

    Does her ethnicity mitigate the fact of her death somehow? Would fatally shooting a white lady in an identical event have been a more acceptable act on the part of police than this one?

  19. This is not a “War on cops” it’s a generational struggle within the Black community, which is highly dependent on the law enforcement industries for sustenance, yet the younger generation is no longer willing to lay itself down upon the altar of their parents’ career ambitions. At the same time, the police are trigger happy, needing a few ‘kills’ to justify their existence. They work hand-in-hand to simulate war.

    Have a little faith, people. Remember: “From Capital Hill, the Government will provide.”

  20. Yet another black person who hasn’t got the BLM’s advice for dealing with a cop: Put your hands up and say “don’t shoot.” Probably not foolproof but better than coping an attitude and waving a weapon around.

    1. Or aiming it at them. If I had a gun in my possession and a cop was at my door, I would expect to be shot if I did not put it down, or at least holster it. Sounds to me like she wanted to be a martyr, and take one of her kids with her.

      1. Well, you go ahead and bow down to your masters. Better to live on your knees than die on your feet, right?

        1. Better to live to fight another day than to die over a trivial matter like this.

  21. Assange continues to tweak the noses of his erstwhile supporters.

    Interesting how much the media now questions Assange’s personal motives. Who cares what the emails say, WHYCOME YOU SO MEAN TO HILLARYCLINTONS?!!

    “That’s when we knew there would be maximum interest by readers, but also, we have a responsibility to,” Assange said. “If we published after, you can just imagine how outraged the Democratic voting population would have been. It had to had to have been before (the convention).”
    Cooper asked Assange if the hack was connected to his “personal animus” toward Clinton.
    “There is a question whether you have a personal animus toward Hillary Clinton. You criticized her on a number of issues. You gave an interview to the British network back in June, suggesting you are more concerned about Clinton at least in terms of press freedom than Donald Trump,” Cooper said. “Do you stand by that? Is this based on a personal animus?”
    But Assange pushed back on the idea that he wanted to “harm” Clinton.
    “You can go back and look at that interview. I never said I wanted to do harm to Hillary Clinton, anything like that,” he said. “It was the presenter that used that term.”

    1. The left has been treating Assange as toxic since the dubious rape charges that came up after he offended the Obama administration.

      1. I recall a brief period of questioning (Btw, there’s an excellent doc on the whole affair, and it looks like Assange was seriously set up) but it feels to me like he’s simply gone ‘too far’ by attacking hillary.

        1. I agree there is a fresh sense of betrayal, but only in the sense that they want to make it look so, I think.

            1. HASN’T SHE SUFFERED ENOUGH?!?

    2. Assange needs to never answer any questions about his motives. His stock reply should be something like:

      “Isn’t the important thing here the proof of misconduct in these emails? Why are you trying to distract from the actual content of the emails themselves?”

      1. The media wants to play “McGuffin-style” reporting.

        Who cares what the thing is. The good guys don’t want the thing to get into the wrong hands, the bad guys want the thing for their own power and glory… that’s the story.

    3. You gave an interview to the British network back in June, suggesting you are more concerned about Clinton at least in terms of press freedom than Donald Trump. Do you stand by that? Is this based on a personal animus?

      Fuck you, Anderson Cooper.

      1. Assange has repeatedly asserted that Hillary has an actual track record in public service where The Donald does not, and by example, is incredibly unpredictable. But I get it, Anderson, you, like so many others are blinded by the prospect of the Vagina in Chief.

        1. He thinks Clinton might be worse on a position than Trump. Clearly it’s because he hates Hillary.

  22. What are the chances that there were drugs involved, either on the premises or in the bloodstream of the woman in question? I’d say about 100%.

    Wish our police were more like “Ok, I’ll serve this warrent when you come down. Just chill out for a few hours. Here, have some orange juice.”

    1. Broken clocks and all that.

    2. I’m afraid I’ve got a smidgen of sympathy for the cops here. After all, she was pointing a gun at them.

      Though I still think they should have waited for her to shoot first, and then returned fire, rather than taking the first shots.

      They’ve got cars and vests, while she’s got a kid.

      1. You have a smidgen of sympathy for the porkies?

        sarc, say it ain’t so!

    3. If the punishment for minor infractions like whatever “disorderly conduct” was in this case weren’t a nightmarish bureaucracy of inhumanity, maybe people wouldn’t be so desperate to avoid it.

      1. Will wonders never cease? I actually agree with Tony.

  23. I i get paid over $87 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless.

    Heres what I’ve been doing:==>==>==> http://www.CareerPlus90.com

  24. The five-year-old was also hit by a bullet, but authorities say it is unclear whether he was shot by police or Gaines?he is expected to survive.

    My money’s on it being one of the wannabe Gomer Piles (the cops).

    1. If she had a shotgun, there’s no question at all the kid was shot by cops.

      Unless there was a random drive-by that nobody noticed, and a stray bullet hit the kid.

  25. Broken clocks and all that.

  26. Well, seriously – someone comes by and opens your front door all on their own, aren’t you going to pull a gun on them?

    TBH – the cops, at least initially, seem to have acted responsibly. While they probably shouldn’t have gotten the landlord to let them in, this is something they’ll do because a) there’s no personal penalty and b) the courts don’t really care what trickery you use to affect an arrest. Its not like the judge is going to rule the arrest improper and even if he does there’s nothing to be done about it – there’s no ‘let them go and try again later’ remedy for this sort of thing.

    They open the door and find a resident pointing a gun at them, instead of freaking out over what is really a very normal reaction to what they just did, they retreat and try to talk the suspects down.

    But the shooting after 5 hours – its the same ‘this shit is taking too long, let’s end this’ thinking that got that murderer in Dallas bombed.

    1. Hmm…………I was thinking Waco.

      The epitome of where waiting him out would have paid off in spades. A simple, street side arrest rather than a full on, military style assault.

  27. That probably won’t be the last time that kid gets shot by the cops.

    1. If the cops would have just shot her the first time she got pulled over for one of her NUMEROUS traffic violations, the kid would have never got shot. Why weren’t they thinking of the children?

  28. I really have to say… You guys are the most respectful and logical group of folks I have ever had the pleasure of trolling. You gave me so much to consider. Thank you for being human.

    XOXO

    1. No sarcasm intended, btw. Thanks so much.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.