Video shows off-duty cop use attacker as human shield during intense gunfight

[BehindBlueI's]

https://www.policeone.com/off-duty/...campaign=P1Member&cub_id=usr_ZxONRHFdfsQ1c8gU

[video=youtube;xsy2_oQEmEw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsy2_oQEmEw[/video]

Some things to think about:

As LE off duty...do you REALLY need to get involved? Is someone going to die or be seriously hurt if you don't? If you do get involved, are you readily identifiable to the suspect, to witnesses, and to responding officers? If not, how will you deal with that? The time to think it over is now, not at 4am after you shot someone.

For everyone...if you had no more information other than what you saw on camera once you walked up to the off duty cop holding the first attacker, seemingly as a hostage, what would you do? This is always a concern of involving yourself in other people's problems. Do you really have the correct info you need?

Note how evidence disappeared. Mope #2 picked up the gun and it left the scene. He appears to pick up a fired casing as well. Absent cameras, "you shot an unarmed man..." How's that play out with the "don't say nothing to the police ever" advice Internet gurus are fond of espousing as well? This is why you need to articulate where evidence is before evidence has a chance to disappear when possible.

Note the repetition of the officer pointing the gun, the hurt suspect swatting at it, and they go through the little dance over and over. That's a type of freezing, a mental stutter. What you're doing isn't working but it isn't getting you killed. You need to be able to recognize you're in that mental stutter and break it...which can be very difficult if you're not aware of and prepared for the possibility. Actually, even if you are.

Do not assume others think or act like you do. Holding mope #1 hostage may not influence mope #2 in the way you think it will.

Perhaps there's a time to leave the wounded guy, move to cover, deal with the other threat. Easy to say in hindsight, of course, but we're analyzing in the hopes of doing it even better next time. Especially after mope #2 shoots at you, it's probably time to take the fight to him.

 

[Spear Dane]

So who went to prison? Hope not the deputy. Personally I think he was probably scared to death and showed great restraint, especially with that dumbass that kept walking right up to him.

 

[rhino]

Should I be surprised that people in Chicago so casually approach a scene like that?

 

[Spear Dane]

Answer to my own question. The deputy is not the one in prison and in fact died of an overdose almost a year later. He was STILL on leave awaiting the shooting investigation results? Why was it not done yet? Just another thing to hate about Cook County/Chicago. Even the flipping WARREN COMMISSION moved faster.

 

[rhino]

Answer to my own question. The deputy is not the one in prison and in fact died of an overdose almost a year later. He was STILL on leave awaiting the shooting investigation results? Why was it not done yet? Just another thing to hate about Cook County/Chicago. Even the flipping WARREN COMMISSION moved faster.

The deputy died from an overdose???

 

[chezuki]

Potato.

 

[T.Lex]

Wow. That's a messed up situation.

 

[churchmouse]

He spent way to much time allowing his shield to grab his gun....way to much time.

 

[GNRPowdeR]

The deputy died from an overdose???

YouTube video info said "[FONT=&quot]His cause of death was fentanyl toxicity and his death was ruled an accident..." and "[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The records show that in addition to alcohol and heroin abuse, Raines suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, insomnia and neuropathy. At the time of his death, Raines was still relieved of his sheriff's duties pending the outcome of the shooting investigation, records show."[/FONT]

 

[Alamo]

Yikes. According to the article below, the deputy had a six-round Ruger LCP, apparently expended all rounds shooting at the "hostage" guy, and had no spare magazine. The "hostage" ended up with 10 bullet wounds, so some of them seemed to come from his "buddy" who picked up "hostage's" gun and fired at the deputy. The part where you see the deputy holding the "hostage" and pointing his gun back and forth -- empty.

"Hostage" is out on bail awaiting trial on various charges -- and also suing the deputy's estate and the Sheriff's office. "Buddy" (according to BBI's link to Policeone.com) just pled guilty to agg assault and got 10 years. A third guy was also charged with some firearms-related charges, pled guilty, and got four years. The deputy was commended for heroism, reprimanded for using a handgun he hadn't qualified with, and while being treated for back pain and maybe other issues used prescribed pain killers, heroin, and ultimately died of an overdose the same day he left rehab from using heroin laced with fentanyl.

571 dead in Chicago since 2014 from fentanyl, hero officer one of them | Chicago Sun-Times

Yeah, pick your battles wisely.

 

[Beowulf]

Now, I'm obviously not a police officer, but when exactly is it approved procedure to use another human being as a living meat shield (even if that said human being is a suspect or confirmed criminal)?

 

[JettaKnight]

Now, I'm obviously not a police officer, but when exactly is it approved procedure to use another human being as a living meat shield (even if that said human being is a suspect or confirmed criminal)?

The question should not be "when", but "where".

And the answer is Brazil, and now possibly Chicago.

 

[Beowulf]

The question should not be "when", but "where".

And the answer is Brazil, and now possibly Chicago.

I'm not sure how this applies to police, but the Geneva Convention explicitly bans the use of human shields and doing so is considered a war crime.

Now, I'm not saying the cop should have just stood there and and let the other scumbag shoot him, but I'm not super comfortable with labeling someone as "hero cop" that did something that would be considered a war crime if done on a battlefield.

 

[bwframe]

That is totally messed up. Good reason to NEVER go to Chicago.

 

[Twangbanger]

Yikes. According to the article below, the deputy had a six-round Ruger LCP, apparently expended all rounds shooting at the "hostage" guy, and had no spare magazine. The "hostage" ended up with 10 bullet wounds, so some of them seemed to come from his "buddy" who picked up "hostage's" gun and fired at the deputy. The part where you see the deputy holding the "hostage" and pointing his gun back and forth -- empty...

So - it turns out there was a reason the GG needed a Shield (no pun intended). It's interesting you point that out, because in addition to not getting involved in situations where you don't have a dog in the fight and don't understand what's going on, it's also reinforced for me why I want to be carrying a spare mag (and a weapon capable of accepting one). After you've defended yourself, who's going to defend _you_ from a Rambo Good Samaritan who doesn't understand what he just saw, and doesn't realize you're the good guy?

That was exactly the thought which occurred to me after watching the video in the Big Box Store a year or two back, in which the mentally ill white guy tackles the black guy who is legally carrying a concealed handgun. That one ended well enough, but what if the victim had managed to employ his handgun and shot it empty into the guy to stop the attack? What will "store patrons" think, when they see an "armed man" pumping shots into an "unarmed man?" Will they properly discern who was the "good guy?" And when bystanders make the "wrong call," are you going to survive one encounter, only to have to defend yourself against "good samaritans" who wrongly interpreted the situation?

I know you can work hypotheticals ad infinitum, and can't win them all, and yeah, maybe so-and-so's data has never shown such an occurrence. But when things get complicated, with multiple participants who don't all necessarily turn into track-stars after the first shot is fired, and life fails to follow the 3-3-3 rule, it would be a heckuva time to have an empty snub-nose and few options.

Which is what this fellow apparently found out. As Yeager has said...he lost the fight that night. It apparently just took a while to realize it.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Now, I'm obviously not a police officer, but when exactly is it approved procedure to use another human being as a living meat shield (even if that said human being is a suspect or confirmed criminal)?

Solid question. More when I'm on a real keyboard.

 

[Alamo]

I'm not sure how this applies to police, but the Geneva Convention explicitly bans the use of human shields and doing so is considered a war crime.

Now, I'm not saying the cop should have just stood there and and let the other scumbag shoot him, but I'm not super comfortable with labeling someone as "hero cop" that did something that would be considered a war crime if done on a battlefield.

Shooting bad guys with hollowpoints is also a war crime on the battlefield (altho, I think technically only if both belligerent parties have signed up to that part of the accords) but that in itself does not make it a crime or even a bad idea for cops (or civilians) to use them against bad guys. Comparing civil actions with the various treaties and accords of war is basketball versus volleyball. Yeah they are both played on a court with a large round ball but...

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I'm not sure how this applies to police, but the Geneva Convention explicitly bans the use of human shields and doing so is considered a war crime.

Now, I'm not saying the cop should have just stood there and and let the other scumbag shoot him, but I'm not super comfortable with labeling someone as "hero cop" that did something that would be considered a war crime if done on a battlefield.

So we are taught once you arrest someone, you are responsible for their safety. I don't see how you square this with using someone as cover if you actually expect the other person to shoot. I suspect what the officer believed is that the suspect would think like he did. That he would be unwilling to risk hitting his companion in order to shoot the officer, that if he upped the risk the second suspect would not engage." Do not assume others think or act like you do. Holding mope #1 hostage may not influence mope #2 in the way you think it will. " as I put it up thread.

So, in hindsight (without the adrenaline dump, time distortion, extreme stress, etc. that the person would be experiencing in real time) I don't think that's the best practice. One thing that's very tough to break is the notion you caught him and now it's time to give him up. The guy shooting is HIS friend. If you leave the downed suspect, the other bad guy isn't going to shoot him. You aren't leaving him in danger, you're actually increasing his safety by getting away from him. Even if he gets up and flees...so what? He's shot multiple times. He'll collapse or he'll show up at an ER, you can get him then. I want to stress that's not the instinctive reaction and one that will take conscious thought to make the decision to do, so the time to think about it is now.

The fact the officer shot his gun dry limited his options. GTFO might be the best option at that point. Drag the guy who's injured into the bar where there are plenty of witnesses if possible, leave him and observe if there isn't.

Now, I've never been in that situation. It's good to gain the vicarious experience and think it through now. I *have* been in the position of restraining one suspect and keeping another at bay with a handgun, though. It sucks. In that instance I took the first suspect down with an arm bar then held her (yes, her) to the ground with a knee in her upper back and maintaining the arm bar while holding her boyfriend at gun point when he approached. This stemmed from an argument over a dryer in an apartment laundry room where the female had pulled a gun on another resident for a violation of laundry room ettiquette...which goes back to don't assume people will respond to something the way you would.

 

[mcjon77]

Now, I'm obviously not a police officer, but when exactly is it approved procedure to use another human being as a living meat shield (even if that said human being is a suspect or confirmed criminal)?

That will be taught by BBI and Coach in Defensive Concepts 3.

 

[mcjon77]

That is totally messed up. Good reason to NEVER go to Chicago.

Nah. Just don't get involved in other people's bull**** while in Chicago. Where this happened is actually one of the nicer trendy club areas of the city.