Police

Police Chase Ends With Cops Killing Suspect on Live TV

Phoenix police cornered a suspected bank robber and fired at least four shots through the front windshield of the suspect's SUV.

|

A police chase in Phoenix, Arizona, came to an end with officers firing at least four shots through the windshield of an SUV after it had been forced off the road and surrounded.

The driver of the SUV was a suspect in a bank robbery and was pronounced dead at the scene, according to a report from KPNX, a local NBC affiliate.

The chase was being shown live on local television when police in three unmarked vehicles successfully cornered the fleeing SUV. As local newscasters described the scene, a police officer lept from an unmarked silver pickup truck and fired several rounds through the front windshield of the suspect's vehicle. The overhead view of the shooting made it impossible to see whether the driver or any passengers in the SUV were armed or threatening the officers.

On FOX 10's live coverage, anchors were in the middle of praising the cops for a "nice pit manuever" when the shots were fired. A producer in the background of the video can be heard shouting "get off, get off" as the station quickly cut to a news conference with Rudy Guiliani (supply your own gallows humor about that) and then to a weather forecast.

Here's a video of the incident from another Phoenix TV station—if the first four paragraphs of this post didn't make it clear, it's a bit graphic:

It's not the first time a police chase in Phoenix has ended with a shooting broadcast on live TV. In 2014, police opened fire on a man wielding a machete after they forced him off the road in a pursuit (again, it's graphic).

NEXT: Of COURSE Donald Trump Hates Jeff Flake: The Senator Preferences Fiscal Conservatism Over Party Politics

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. Why are 3 out of 4 of these cops driving his wife’s car while on duty?

    1. If you have to ask. ..

  2. Unmarked vehicles pursuing? That’s a big no-no. This is going to be a 7 figure payout.

    1. That was a lot of unmarked. Wonder if they had known about robbery in advance.

      1. They wanted the money for themselves.

    2. That was a lot of unmarked. Wonder if they had known about robbery in advance.

        1. Somebody’s shoved a red-hot poker up our ass, and I want to know whose name is on the handle!

          1. and I want to know whose name is on the handle!

            Mr. Black.

          2. You two are acting like first year thieves! I’m the only one acting like a fuckin’ professional here!

    3. All of the new vehicles for the local sheriffs office have been unmarked for several years now and they use them just like their old cruisers.

      1. Can’t do that in CA. If you run from an unmarked vehicle here, you’ll skate. You can buy lights and a siren on the internet.

        If you’re a cop trying to pull someone over, it had better say so on the vehicle.

        1. He originally fled from (and supposedly shot at) marked police cars at the crime scene in Avondale, so those niceties would presumably be over with even in CA.

          If you’re saying that the rest of the nation should emulate California’s laws, have fun making that argument.

          1. California! Tumbles into the sea!
            That’s the day I’ll go back to Avondale.

            I’ll bet the fugitives were singing that song as they drove away from police.

    4. Right, they should just let heavily armed violent bank robbers go because they didn’t have the right paint job.

      1. 1. One bank *robber*.
        2. Not ‘heavily armed’.
        3. No evidence he was especially violent.

        1. Right, the bank robber probably just asked nicely for the money.

          I thought libertarians were against coercion, not just against government.

          1. More than a few bank robberies have been accomplished simply by a dude walking up and handing the teller a note demanding the cash.

            And being against coercion doesn’t mean I’m for executing a guy just ’cause.

            1. More than a few bank robberies have been accomplished simply by a dude walking up and handing the teller a note demanding the cash.

              Along with a threat of force. Just handing a note asking for money won’t do the trick.

      2. If a pickup truck runs me off the road and boxes me in, they’re going to have a gun pointed at them.

        1. Do you rob banks and lead the police on 29 mile chases too?

        2. That’s over and above the question of whether even an innocent person would be justified in pointing a gun at someone in that situation. Your comment reeks of Internet Tough Guy.

          1. So you’re saying that if someone ran me off the road I would not be justified in pulling a gun?

            Does that mean that the person who ran me off the road would be justified in jumping out of their vehicle and then immediately – without a pause to assess the situation, open fire on me, just in case?

            1. For the first question, I don’t think so. There would need to be further evidence of a threat. As an innocent person, I would certainly be on super high alert, half a heartbeat from drawing my gun on further evidence of a deadly threat, but not actually drawn already.

              For the second question, in this hypothetical did you just rob a bank, shoot at police (in marked cars since that’s SO important to you), and lead the cops on a 29 mile chase? Context matters.

  3. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,
    ——————>>> http://www.works76.com

  4. Yeah… that does not look good.

    Somewhat related, Hell or High Water is really good.

    1. I still haven’t made it out to see it yet. Good to hear it’s good.

  5. Before I watch, is the video graphic?

    1. If seeing a windshield pockmarked is too graphic then yes, otherwise there are no brains or spleens splattered across the screen.

      1. So, not graphic enough.

    2. If seeing a dude straight up murdered is too graphic. . . But there’s no gore.

      1. The poor baby…. he had so many banks left to rob.

        1. As I said earlier – if you’re supporting the summary execution of a felon in this case, what’s the point in bothering to have courts?

          1. As you’re supporting the summary acquittal of a felon, I could ask the same question.

  6. Just curious, if the guy is dead now, and beyond the presumption of innocence, can we say whether he’s the robber or not?

    1. Doesn’t matter, if you look closely you’ll no doubt find drugs or a weapon somewhere near the body.

      1. Robbers have rights as well as anyone else, my point as a matter of sociological analysis is that robbers are more likely to knowingly endanger police than people who are not robbers.

      2. Did I wake up in the Crazyland where libertarians consider bank robbery a victimless crime or something?

        1. Well, the first part is accurate.

    2. Presumption of innocence is only required among the jury in a courtroom. The rest of us are allowed to acknowledge reality.

      1. Then what’s the point of the jury and courtroom if the cops are able to ‘acknowledge reality’ with a half dozen rounds?

        Let’s just streamline the system and invest investigation, arrest, and sentencing powers with the police departments.

        1. Holy false dichotomy.

          If the guy wasn’t threatening the cops then this would be a bad shoot. We don’t know whether that’s the case.

          But there are people on this thread saying that they shouldn’t have chased him and shouldn’t have stopped him because he was “just a suspect”. That’s insanity.

          1. Ain’t nobody in this thread said any such thing.

            What they have said is its pretty suspicious that the police are running around in so many unmarked vehicles and they really shouldn’t do that.

            1. PM specifically said that the officers in unmarked vehicles should not have chased, and predicted a settlement in the millions based on the laws of a different state from where this occurred (cause he’s like an expert in law).

              3-4 unmarkeds in a city the size of Phoenix is hardly suspicious. What I do suspect is that those commenters who were conspiracy theorizing about the cops knowing about the robbery in advance didn’t bother actually reading the linked news article and seeing how long the chase was. (Why bother reading source material when Reason filters out any information that doesn’t align with the commentariat’s anti-cop worldview?)

  7. We sort of assumed that having video of cops blowing people away would be a good thing. Seems like the real lesson for them is that they can blow away who they want even on video wirh zero consequence. So did that lesson make them bolder?

    1. The guy giving a thumbs up at 0:53 doesn’t seemed too concerned about public opinion just then.

    2. Seems like the real lesson for them is that they can blow away who they want even on video wirh zero consequence.

      Right, that could have easily been you or me in that car…. well, if we were bank robbers who shot at police and led them on a 29 mile chase.

  8. So what is Nice Guy Eddie gonna say to Mr Blonde and Mr Pink when he gets to the hideout?

    1. Here I am…

      1. You gonna bark all day, little doggy? Or are you gonna bite?

    2. That he was out of his mind taking on someone he wasn’t 100% about?

    3. Maybe something about Scagnetti, that fuck?

    4. “It looks like Sam’s Hot Car Lot out there!”

    5. What, this cop? *shoots the cop*

  9. RE: Police Chase Ends With Cops Killing Suspect on Live TV

    Well of course the police killed a suspect on live TV.
    How else are they going to get an audition in Hollywood?
    These cops have hopes and dreams just like everyone else.

  10. Is there anybody with the entire video? Because the odds of that many heavily-armed (rifles rather than service pistols) rolling around and getting in this chase with zero marked cruisers involved are remote to nonexistent.

    This almost certainly looks like either a sting or a tipoff of a robbery that the cops couldn’t very well sit around in marked cars waiting for.

    Plus I can’t see what’s behind the guy’s vehicle but it looks like an open space. So this is looking like the cops actually did well at first blush. But I’d like more information before I make a judgement.

    But seriously, the chances of that many cops in unmarked cars and no marked cruisers in a chase? No fucking way that ever happens.

    1. Well, good in that they seem to have had a clear field of fire before they proceeded to *execute* a fleeing suspect.

      I guess, nowadays, all felonies are capital offenses.

      1. Duterte says “good job!”

      2. You mammals truly lack the fortitude to put down the savages in your midst. It will be your downfall.

      3. It’s just as bad to assume that the driver was not a threat as it is to assume he was.

        1. No, its nowhere near as bad to assume the driver was not a *lethal* threat as it is to assume he was.

          1. You can stop feeding the troll anytime now.

      4. I guess, nowadays, all felonies are capital offenses.

        As well as misdemeanors. And civil tickets. And things the cops think are felonies. And looking like a guy who committed a felony. And catching the eye of the cops, and…

    2. The link is there for you to read the full story.

      Chase began in Avondale, a western suburb of Phoenix, and supposedly the car occupants fired shots at Avondale police there. Vehicle was stopped in Tempe, 29 miles from the beginning of the chase, by Phoenix cops. So there was plenty of time for unmarked cars to join the chase.

      1. Why would the police department need so many unmarked cars – with *uniformed officers*, not plainclothe detectives or undercover?

        1. There were 3-4 unmarked cars, not many for a city the size of Phoenix. They were apparently used to make the bank robber slow down because he thought he had escaped, a strategy which worked.

  11. for Warty,

    Since you doubt I can C&J 300 … and I don’t lie

    I have a video of me IN CONTEST (thus, you can see the weights due to colored plates) doing 142 kilos

    well over 300 lbs.

    close to 315 actually.

    I can do a snapshot of the video

    (and X out my face)

    and take a picture of me in the same UNIQUE singlet . (USA masters weightlifting)

    you can compare the same waxed hairless forearms and bufftitude and see it’s me and I’ll hold a sign over my face saying “Smooches, Warty”

    what’s in it for me?

    over to you, tuff guy!

    1. I’m gonna go out on a limb and ask; Do you actually think Warty gives a shit what you do?

      Maybe he does. Still, doesn’t sound like the guy who posts here.

    2. If that were 315 kilos that would be impressive. 315 pounds not so much, unless it’s with your dick.

      1. it’s impressive enough for a guy in his late 40’s (at the time) and in my weight class to win Master contests.

        for an open competitor, it would suck

        but I’m old as fuck and I compete against those that are old as fuck

        sadly, I didbn’t even know what WLing was when I was in my mid 20’s

        I surfed mostly.

        wasn’t very good at contest surfing but I loved it

        I just don’t like being accused of being a liar.

        btw, when I was in my mid 30’s, I did do some pretty impressive POWERLIFTs but that was a loooong time ago. i did do close to 600 lbs at under 200lbs which I was pretty proud of. triple bw DEADLIFT is a good goal imo

        1. Amazing that you loved contest surfing. It’s like you have a compulsive need to confess your defective personality.

    3. This is amazing. Please do.

    4. By the way, what is it about me that attracts such grudges from insecure lunatics like you?

    5. Also, let me get this straight…I said you probably can’t even clean and jerk 300, so your reply is that you once did more than that, and it was years ago?

      Do you even stop to think what you’re saying?

      1. Warty/Dunphy pose-off at the next HyR gathering or GTFO

      2. I said you probably can’t even clean and jerk 300

        But what does Gerard Butler have to do with anything?

  12. Shoot first, cover-up later.

  13. 3 seconds to shoot??!

    CLE cops will out draw them every time.

  14. No trigger warning?

  15. Phoenix is in Maricopa County. Hmm, I’ve heard about the shenanigans that sheriff’s department has participated in in the past.

    1. Where they sheriffs deputy or city cop? Is there anything in the article suggesting an answer?

      There’s a shit ton of speculation going on here based upon very little information. There are circumstances where the actions we see would be appropriate. There are also circumstances where they would not be appropriate. Don’t be like the sheeple masses, do some homework, find some facts and discuss from an educated point of view. Cause frankly, this thoughtless drivel is beneath a group of supposed libertarians.

      1. You saw the video. I saw the video. If the guy had done something justifying lethal force 15 minutes prior – that was 15 minutes prior and should have no bearing on what happened *at the end of the 29 mile chase*.

        1. Fine, provide facts to support your assertion. Everything you just said is based upon an extrapolation of assumptions.

        2. You have no evidence he wasn’t doing something justifying lethal force at the time of the shooting, only the cops who were there know. Given his previous actions it’s plausible.

          Robbing banks, shooting at cops, and leading them on a 29 mile chase is pretty dangerous, because you’re NOT going to get the benefit of the doubt at the end. As it should be.

          1. I was with you until your last sentence. Cops should *always* give the benefit of the doubt before using lethal force. That’s their job. Well, OK, not according to them, or the courts…but it oughta be. No matter what someone did 29 miles away, or 20 minutes ago, if that someone is not an immediate threat, any cop shooting that someone is a murderer.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.