Couer d'Alene Police Officer Involved Shooting video

[LockedBreech]

http://www.firecritic.com/2014/01/16...elmet-cameras/

I don't believe this has been posted previously, I didn't locate it when I searched. It seems to have been recently released.

This is a very graphic and very harrowing video, but also incredibly high-definition and high-quality. It is also, in my opinion, a good shoot.

Tactically, there are many lessons here. First, don't go charging into any situation headlong. The officer could have been in real trouble, as the man with the knife was just around the corner. His caution, slow progress inward, and calling for backup was well-advised. Second, knowing when you need to stop a threat is critical. Probably many others I'm not thinking of. It also makes me think about how my preferred weapons all have a safety on them, and I don't know if I would have had the presence of mind to disengage the safety, although I hope I would.

I greatly approve of these cameras. They reduce improper use of force and they reduce false accusations against police.

Again, graphic content warning.

[Westy39]

Thank You for posting that video. I spent 22 years as a street cop in Montana and did have a similar situation, BUT, a child was able to get the drunk dad to put down the knife so I didn't have to fire. God was with me on that call. It was a fight to get him cuffed but it sure beat the hell of having to shoot. I too believe the tactics were solid but the taking of a life no matter how justified is a awful experience. It is one of those situations in which you have NO control over that other person. I believe the shooting was also justified I welcomed the video cams we put in our cars and then the more mobile ones. My prayers are with the officer that was forced to use lethal force in this situation. Just my thoughts from the Big Sky Country.

[OuTcAsT]

LockedBreech Wrote;

It is also, in my opinion, a good shoot.

I cannot say that I agree with your assessment. While anyone armed with a knife certainly poses a threat, the man was not advancing quickly nor,aggressively on the officer in my opinion. The officer was retreating equally slowly and, I am certain there were less than lethal options he (the officer) could have deployed. He entered the house without backup, weapon drawn. I gotta think a more "tempered" response might have had a far better outcome but, alas, it is Monday morning quarterbacking at best.

[LockedBreech]

I can see where you're coming from. In response, I'd say that:

1.) As for going into the house alone without backup, he had been told this man was self-harming and suicidal. At a certain point he needed to go in and make sure the guy wasn't bleeding out on the kitchen floor.

2.) A person walking forward can do so much quicker than a person walking backward who isn't familiar with the location he's in. If he had tripped walking backward, the guy could have been on him.

Some various comments around the 'net criticized his use of a firearm rather than a taser, but that close to a guy who is advancing without heeding commands, armed with a deadly weapon, the gun was the right choice. My brother is a LEO (just to be clear about my own bias) and told me about a few weeks ago when they had Taser deployments fail 3 times consecutively by 3 different officers at the same suspect. Turns out his clothes were a bit too thick to allow the barbs to penetrate.

Don't feel bad for Monday-morning quarterbacking it, that's what we all do, even me supporting him. As far as I know, none of us know what being in that horrible moment is like, and I hope none of us ever will.

[manta49]

I think the officer shouldn't have put himself in that situation, If he had waited and called for backup as there didn't seem to be anybody in immediate danger. The situation might have being resolved without the officer putting his life at risk and someone dying.

[Ricklin]

Way too easy to Monday morning quarterback this. Judging from the video an accident had just occurred, and he needed to speak with this guy.

He was advancing on the officer with knives drawn, and failed to stop. The officer warned him multiple times to halt his advance.

We can't make any sense out of what is apparently suicide by cop. I feel bad for the officer. He did what he had to do.

[manta49]

We can't make any sense out of what is apparently suicide by cop. I feel bad for the officer. He did what he had to do.

I hear this all the time ,what evidence is there that it was a suicide by cop. I think its a term used all the time without much evidence. I think it could be a bad thing and an excuse used by an officer in a bad shooting, as people seem to accept it without much thought.

[dstryr]

I'm with outcast on this one; why not just hole him up, get backup and wait him out, or tear gas him out? When did the rule book change to say a resolution had to be immediate?

[LockedBreech]

Advancing with a knife while repeatedly being forcefully told to stop is strong evidence of hostile intent, and bringing a knife to a gunfight is strong evidence of hostile intent without any particular concern about winning that fight.

In the current political climate, with pervasive social media and 24/7 hype-driven news, I think police shootings are more scrutinized than they've ever been. Hardly accepted without much thought.

The reason he couldn't wait was because one of the reasons he had been called was that there were concerns the man was going to harm himself. How intense would criticism have been if the man had stabbed himself and bled out while the officer waited outside for more people to arrive? It's kind of a can't-win-for-losing scenario.

Keep in mind the officer was fully aware he was wearing an HD camera, also. He made the decision knowing it was reviewable, and I can't see an officer looking for trouble with that knowledge. I think he probably wanted to check on the man's welfare after not getting a response.

[manta49]

The reason he couldn't wait was because one of the reasons he had been called was that there were concerns the man was going to harm himself.

OK will have to think about that one, to protect someone from harming themselves go in and shoot them.

[LockedBreech]

That assumes he knew the future. How could he have known the man would respond with unresponsive aggression?

It is not unheard of for police doing welfare checks saving a life because they were able to summon medical aid in time.

[manta49]

It is not unheard of for police doing welfare checks saving a life because they were able to summon medical aid in time.

True but when he realised that the individual was hostile was backing off and not an option.

[zombietactics]

OK will have to think about that one, to protect someone from harming themselves go in and shoot them.

That statement switches context in the middle, and thus forms a non-sequitur of sorts.

He had a duty-bound responsibility to advance into the structure. Cases like this are often different than they are reported to the police. "He's got a knife and is threatening to kill himself" can easily mean (or become) "he has someone in there and is threatening to kill them as well." A lot of murder-suicides are called in as "he's going to kill himself".

The guy could have already harmed himself or others, and the officer is showing good judgement by advancing into the structure. He may have just as well encountered one or more persons bleeding out and requiring aid.

A decision to "just hole him up and wait him out" does not address either of these concerns, and assumes that the officer is clairvoyant.

The officer showed good restraint by repeatedly warning to "put the knife down!", etc. It's not as though he immediately opened fire upon seeing someone with a knife. Personally, I think he waited too long.

At the point where the decision-to-fire has been reached, you need to keep firing until the threat is no longer a threat. Anything else is a mindset born of fantasy, and good way to get killed. This situation could have easily resulted in a dead cop and a subsequent death by suicide.

Unfortunate circumstance. Good Shoot.

[manta49]

He had a duty-bound responsibility to advance into the structure.

Just checking, are the police in America duty-bound to enter a house is that type of situation without back up, i didn't know that. ?

A lot of murder-suicides are called in as "he's going to kill himself".

Any examples.

[LockedBreech]

I have no moderator or admin authority on any TFL forum, but I'm going to ask that any conversation stay very civil and back out myself, since as OP I want this one to stay open for discussion and I can see how it could get heated.

[ClydeFrog]

I just watched the police camera video & it was intense.
I would have acted differently in the event but overall the uniformed police officer's acts were prudent & professional.
I would have relayed my exact location to the dispatch, requested back-up, waited for LE back-up before making entry into the dwelling.
I would have handcuffed or restrained the female subject if I was still alone & I would have maintained my position by the front door if there were no other access points(doors, patios, basements, etc).
If I had to draw the male subject out, Id stay by the porch area & let him come to me, not entering the house & starting a confrontation.
The officer's approach seemed highly dangerous & risky from a tactical perspective.
In my view(or if I were a supervisor on the use-of-force panel) Id say the police officer was clear to use lethal force as soon as the armed subject started towards him.
The cop yelled commands to stop, backing up & allowing the subject to get into the living room.

The responding police & the main officer should have hooked up the female directly too. They knew she'd wig out & become upset/violent.
LE, security & other first responders needed to aware of the surroundings & other scene occupants.
They can flip out or become combative too.

This event reminds me of the hostage incident in Daytona Beach Florida. A few. DBPD officers had to use lethal force in low light(white lights) against a knife wielding drug addict. They shot the hostage taker but the female hostage was wounded. It was discussed on TFL a few months ago.

[manta49]

I have no moderator or admin authority on any TFL forum, but I'm going to ask that any conversation stay very civil and back out myself, since as OP I want this one to stay open for discussion and I can see how it could get heated.

OK I think they are fair questions. But if you won't or can't answer that's fair enough, I have no intention of arguing just curious to know how police procedures in America compared with this part of the UK, were I know police would not enter a house in a similar situation without back up. They are not duty bound.

[zombietactics]

Just checking, are the police in America duty-bound to enter a house is that type of situation without back up ...?

In a legal sense, probably not, depending upon department/city/state. In terms of what is expected of them by their peers and upper management (as well as the public at large) ... definitely. I'm not sure how "calling in backup" in that case would have necessarily resulted in a different outcome. Do you?

Think of how the woman screaming "tell me you didn't SHOOT him!" ... having seen nothing of what had transpired would be screaming "they didn't do nuthin', they just let my baby kill himself!" I'm expecting the suggestion that the officer should have "just shot the knife from his hand" at any moment.

If we knew in advance that someone wouldn't harm themselves, but was simply in temporary psychological distress ... we might proceed differently.

If we knew in advance with 100% certainty that nobody else was in danger, we might proceed differently, right?

If we knew with 100% certainty that he wasn't already lying in a pool of blood ... or a long list of other possibilities ...

... sure, we'd all just grab a sammich and wait, right?

People assume that there is some perfect solution to every problem, known with 100% certainty ahead of time ... there seldom is.

[ClydeFrog]

ZT is right.
You(as the armed professional, first responder or in some situations; armed citizen) can not assume anything or be complacent.
Some bystanders or crowd members may later hue & cry about a "victim's" medical problems or state but a first responder doesn't have psychic powers & can't risk their safety on the hope that a subject will become compliant or non-threatening.
You, as a trained officer or first responder can control your actions/statements but you can't be expected to let someone wander around with a edged knife or weapon.

There are no quick or easy answers when dealing with these types of events.

[LockedBreech]

I had no problem with anything you said, manta. It's mostly just a precaution of taking myself out of the discussion since I have a ton of police in the family. It's hard for me to stay neutral in police-based discussions.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by manta49

I know police would not enter a house in a similar situation without back up. And are not duty bound to .

Frankly, I fail to see how back-up would have reasonably been expected to change the outcome, except having two officers shooting at the guy instead of one. Waiting presents several possible problems which have already been addressed. Knowing the outcome, it's easy to second guess. Not knowing, it seems natural to want to make sure the guy isn't slitting his own wrists while you wait for backup.

[Pond, James Pond]

My feeling is that was avoidable. With the speed of the man's approach a shot to the leg would have been an option, instead of some 5 shots to CoM.

People will disagree and I wasn't there, but that is my view.
That guy didn't need to wind up dead.

[Nanuk]

He was absolutely justified. The officer did what he needed to do, he gave the guy every opportunity.

There are times when you just can't wait for the Calvary, knowing that they are around the corner is good enough.

[OuTcAsT]

Judging from the video an accident had just occurred, and he needed to speak with this guy.

That seems to be the case, and it is possible that, due to the accident, the subject was suffering from shock.

1.) As for going into the house alone without backup, he had been told this man was self-harming and suicidal. At a certain point he needed to go in and make sure the guy wasn't bleeding out on the kitchen floor.

I agree however, you do not typically "talk someone out of suicide" at gunpoint. The officer knew the man was alone inside the house, so he was a danger only to himself at that point.

If I had to draw the male subject out, Id stay by the porch area & let him come to me, not entering the house & starting a confrontation.
The officer's approach seemed highly dangerous & risky from a tactical perspective.

I agree. The officer's decision to confront the man with heavy handed commands escalated the situation, it seems to me that the point would be to de-escalate a subject in that frame of mind, back out and let him cool off.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by Pond, James Pond

My feeling is that was avoidable. With the speed of the man's approach a shot to the leg would have been an option, instead of some 5 shots to CoM.

People will disagree and I wasn't there, but that is my view.
That guy didn't need to wind up dead.

I'm sorry but that's Hollywood fantasy land. No use of force training or reputable instructors any where teach that sort of method.

A firearm is deadly force and is employed only when deadly force is believed to be necessary. Besides that, there's no reason to believe that a shot in the leg would not have been deadly.

The guy CERTAINLY didn't need to end up dead and he could have NOT been dead by putting down the knife and complying. As cold as it sounds, the old saying of "Don't play with bull unless you're ready to deal with the horns." is absolutely true.