Officer kills woman inside her Texas home after welfare call

[TU Curmudgeon]

Hopefully at least some justice for the victim.

Aaron Dean, the former Fort Worth police officer who killed a woman in her own home, charged with murder - CNN

The next announcement you can expect to hear will be the lawyer for "ASPL 2019-10-11" arguing that their client cannot get a fair trial anywhere in the United States of America due to the public statements of their former employer, statement which have been carried on all the major media outlets and which have been widely broadcast on the Internet.

 

[AGENT J]

Heres the horrendous Body Cam I was talking about earlier that shows all the many wrong steps and piss poor execution



Can anybody tell me what the partner whispers right after the 1:20 mark???

 

[Aberration]

Killing on the battlefield. Self-defense.

Both war and self defense require an affirmative defense.

 

[Aberration]

The fact that it isn't a homicide just might have something to do with that.

Homicide is the act of one human killing another.

 

[TheParser]

Some people (including me) feel that (based on what has been reported so far):

1. The officer did wrong.

2. The officer should be punished appropriately (and he WILL BE).

3. The officer was scared.

a. Many cops expect the worst when they are called to certain areas.


4. There should be more careful selection of people applying to be cops. If an applicant is terrified of being killed in the line of duty, s/he should find another occupation.

 

[marke]

Heres the horrendous Body Cam I was talking about earlier that shows all the many wrong steps and piss poor execution



Can anybody tell me what the partner whispers right after the 1:20 mark???

How can we insure the safety of our officers if they are sent on calls involving unknown threats and possible deadly responses from quick-acting perps with guns? We can tell them to stand down and not go investigate any calls at night or where there is a possibility that someone might point a gun at them without giving them warning or time to assess the threat. That is being done more that we might realize and neighborhoods are becoming more like killing fields of lawless gangs because of it.

 

[tres borrachos]

Both war and self defense require an affirmative defense.

I didn't say they didn't. They are both legal homicides.

 

[Thoreau72]

Watching the body cam is horrendous . . this dude had no business being a cop . . and nether does his partner for that matter . ..

Ive said it before and ive said it again, i have local cops and troopers in my circle of friends and when we talk about these things they all say the same thing. While bigotry is a definite factor polluting the police departments along with people actually absorbing their training . . the biggest issue is the type of person, the quality of person, the character of person is way lesser than what it used to be. To many individuals scared of their own shadow and dont care about nothign else.

AMEN!

Just from the accounts on TV, including the incidents themselves and the random trial that results, it is easy to see that many of those police officers are simply unfit for the job.

And it is a special job, requiring special skills in dealing with people.

The gal just convicted for shooting her neighbor in his own apartment was not fit for the job.

 

[trouble13]

Even if she had a gun...she was in her home with a stranger peering in her window who apparently hadnt identified himself as a cop.

Yeah...this one sounds like a cop should be going to jail. Its early yet...but it doesnt look good.

I agree with you. The cop had no buisiness pulling the trigger before knowing what the situtation was. The woman was within her rights to defend yourself from a stranger. If she did not shoot at the cop he has no defense for shooting at her that quickly.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[MauiMan]

FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) — A black woman was fatally shot by a white Fort Worth, Texas, officer inside her home early Saturday after police were called to the residence for a welfare check, authorities said.

Officer kills woman inside her Texas home after welfare call

I dont even know what to say anymore...

Terrible. Another police officer murdering the people they’re supposed to protect. I want to see those cam videos.

 

[AGENT J]

How can we insure the safety of our officers if they are sent on calls involving unknown threats and possible deadly responses from quick-acting perps with guns? We can tell them to stand down and not go investigate any calls at night or where there is a possibility that someone might point a gun at them without giving them warning or time to assess the threat. That is being done more that we might realize and neighborhoods are becoming more like killing fields of lawless gangs because of it.

WTH? lol

what does this nonsensical random rant have to do with this topic? again please keep the triggered meltdowns to a minimum

 

[dirtpoorchris]

How can we insure the safety of our officers if they are sent on calls involving unknown threats and possible deadly responses from quick-acting perps with guns? We can tell them to stand down and not go investigate any calls at night or where there is a possibility that someone might point a gun at them without giving them warning or time to assess the threat. That is being done more that we might realize and neighborhoods are becoming more like killing fields of lawless gangs because of it.

Her front door was wide open.... He coulda shouted through the door that the police were here. Instead of sneaking around her properties and peeping through her windows and issuing her a deadly command illegally.

 

[dirtpoorchris]

Watching the body cam is horrendous . . this dude had no business being a cop . . and nether does his partner for that matter . ..

Ive said it before and ive said it again, i have local cops and troopers in my circle of friends and when we talk about these things they all say the same thing. While bigotry is a definite factor polluting the police departments along with people actually absorbing their training . . the biggest issue is the type of person, the quality of person, the character of person is way lesser than what it used to be. To many individuals scared of their own shadow and dont care about nothign else.

Well alot of these cops have to act scared. Their volenteer for-hire job gets them 5,000-10,000$ pension a month FOR LIFE. Accidentally shooting an innocent person is probably more important than losing that free 5-10k a month off taxpayers backs after retiring after 20 years. They arent scared for their life they are scared of losing their pension.

 

[marke]

Her front door was wide open.... He coulda shouted through the door that the police were here. Instead of sneaking around her properties and peeping through her windows and issuing her a deadly command illegally.

I believe you are right. Officers are human and humans make mistakes. This officer will likely have to go to prison for his mistakes. But what should we do to insure police officers do not make mistakes? Disarm them? Send them into unknown dangers where they might get shot (and many do get shot and killed in the line of duty) to conduct lengthy interviews to determine dangers while the unknown person with the gun stands there pointing it at his head?

 

[dirtpoorchris]

I believe you are right. Officers are human and humans make mistakes. This officer will likely have to go to prison for his mistakes. But what should we do to insure police officers do not make mistakes? Disarm them? Send them into unknown dangers where they might get shot (and many do get shot and killed in the line of duty) to conduct lengthy interviews to determine dangers while the unknown person with the gun stands there pointing it at his head?

Hire people who follow the rules no matter what. Meanwhile Officer Doofies will keep getting sent to prison chasing a paycheck.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

How can we insure the safety of our officers if they are sent on calls involving unknown threats and possible deadly responses from quick-acting perps with guns? We can tell them to stand down and not go investigate any calls at night or where there is a possibility that someone might point a gun at them without giving them warning or time to assess the threat. That is being done more that we might realize and neighborhoods are becoming more like killing fields of lawless gangs because of it.

<SARC>Absolutely correct.

The law MUST be changed so that "self-defence" is expanded to include "person doing the killing was a police officer".

That will completely solve any potential issues over police "murdering people" - won't it?</SARC>

PS - Possibly you could explain how your comment actually relates to what happened in this case - would you like to take a stab at doing so?

 

[marke]

<SARC>Absolutely correct.

The law MUST be changed so that "self-defence" is expanded to include "person doing the killing was a police officer".

That will completely solve any potential issues over police "murdering people" - won't it?</SARC>

PS - Possibly you could explain how your comment actually relates to what happened in this case - would you like to take a stab at doing so?

My intention is to push back on foolish hateful rush to judgments that show a typical unreasonable hatred for the officer based upon biases against police officers which are misguided, unhealthy and damaging. Police officers make mistakes and sometimes the mistake is to refrain from drawing their weapons before they are shot and killed by an assailant. Police officers are trained to draw their weapons in dangerous situations with potential hazards which put them in deadly danger of being assaulted or killed.

Sadly, officers have made bad snap judgments in such cases and innocent people have been killed. Thankfully, some officers responded with deadly force and were saved from being killed by a suspect. Sadly, some officers do not react quickly enough to potential dangers and end up being killed.

This officer saw a gun. That gun was pointed at him. He has less than a second to respond. I give the officer some leeway for not having time to fully assess the danger before firing,

 

[dirtpoorchris]

My intention is to push back on foolish hateful rush to judgments that show a typical unreasonable hatred for the officer based upon biases against police officers which are misguided, unhealthy and damaging. Police officers make mistakes and sometimes the mistake is to refrain from drawing their weapons before they are shot and killed by an assailant. Police officers are trained to draw their weapons in dangerous situations with potential hazards which put them in deadly danger of being assaulted or killed.

Sadly, officers have made bad snap judgments in such cases and innocent people have been killed. Thankfully, some officers responded with deadly force and were saved from being killed by a suspect. Sadly, some officers do not react quickly enough to potential dangers and end up being killed.

This officer saw a gun. That gun was pointed at him. He has less than a second to respond. I give the officer some leeway for not having time to fully assess the danger before firing,

The gun was never in her hands. The officers found a gun after searching the dead victims house without her permission. Or so I thought. The police officer was snoopping around her house, never identified himself, and shot her out of his banked sense of paranoia and indifference. Hes a murderer. He snooped around her house and gave her an illegal command and then killed her.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I believe you are right. Officers are human and humans make mistakes. This officer will likely have to go to prison for his mistakes. But what should we do to insure police officers do not make mistakes?

Possibly the answer is "Train them properly.".

The shortest length of time that I have been able to track down (without actually spending a lot of time looking) that it takes to "train" a "fully qualified" police officer (in the US) is NINE (9) WEEKS. ("States require more training time to become a barber than a police officer")

• Army Basic Combat Training (BCT) lasts nine weeks. This length of time doesn't count time spent in reception, nor does it count the time spent for job training if you attend an OSUT unit, which combines basic training and job training into one combined course. (At the end of that period the new recruit is NOT considered trained for duty [although they do know how to wear their uniforms, tie their boots, and whom to salute].
  *
• Air Force basic training at Lackland AFB in Texas is eight weeks, plus one week of in-processing, called zero week. (At the end of that period the new recruit is NOT considered trained for duty [although they do know how to wear their uniforms, tie their boots, and whom to salute].
  *
• Navy basic training is seven weeks, plus one week at the beginning called processing week. (At the end of that period the new recruit is NOT considered trained for duty [although they do know how to wear their uniforms, tie their boots, and whom to salute].
  *
• The Marine Corps has the longest basic training — 12 weeks, not including 4 days of in-processing time. (At the end of that period the new recruit is NOT considered trained for duty [although they do know how to wear their uniforms, tie their boots, and whom to salute].
  *
• Counting the half week you spend in forming (in-processing), you'll spend a total of seven and a half weeks in Coast Guard basic training at Cape May, the shortest basic training of all the services. (At the end of that period the new recruit is NOT considered trained for duty [although they do know how to wear their uniforms, tie their boots, and whom to salute].
  *
• Canadian RCMP officers undergo 26 weeks of training.
  *
• Ontario police officers undergo 24 weeks of training.
  *
• British Columbia police officers undergo between 34 and 42 weeks of training (21 at the Justice Institute (read as "Police Academy") in two blocks ("Block 1" is 13 weeks and "Block 3" is 8 weeks and between 13 and 17 weeks ("Block 2") of mentored field training under the CLOSE supervision of an EXPERIENCED police officer between the two blocks at the JI.

Disarm them? Send them into unknown dangers where they might get shot (and many do get shot and killed in the line of duty) to conduct lengthy interviews to determine dangers while the unknown person with the gun stands there pointing it at his head?

See above.

 

[marke]

The gun was never in her hands. The officers found a gun after searching the dead victims house without her permission. Or so I thought. The police officer was snoopping around her house, never identified himself, and shot her out of his banked sense of paranoia and indifference. Hes a murderer. He snooped around her house and gave her an illegal command and then killed her.

You present the pre-judgmental narrative, and that narrative may actually be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, but we don't know that. All defendants in the US have the right of presumption of innocence until guilt is established at the conclusion of legal court proceedings.
Let's give the defense some time to present their case also before rushing to judgment.

 

[marke]

Possibly the answer is "Train them properly.".

The shortest length of time that I have been able to track down (without actually spending a lot of time looking) that it takes to "train" a "fully qualified" police officer (in the US) is NINE (9) WEEKS. ("States require more training time to become a barber than a police officer")

• Army Basic Combat Training (BCT) lasts nine weeks. This length of time doesn't count time spent in reception, nor does it count the time spent for job training if you attend an OSUT unit, which combines basic training and job training into one combined course. (At the end of that period the new recruit is NOT considered trained for duty [although they do know how to wear their uniforms, tie their boots, and whom to salute].
  *
• Air Force basic training at Lackland AFB in Texas is eight weeks, plus one week of in-processing, called zero week. (At the end of that period the new recruit is NOT considered trained for duty [although they do know how to wear their uniforms, tie their boots, and whom to salute].
  *
• Navy basic training is seven weeks, plus one week at the beginning called processing week. (At the end of that period the new recruit is NOT considered trained for duty [although they do know how to wear their uniforms, tie their boots, and whom to salute].
  *
• The Marine Corps has the longest basic training — 12 weeks, not including 4 days of in-processing time. (At the end of that period the new recruit is NOT considered trained for duty [although they do know how to wear their uniforms, tie their boots, and whom to salute].
  *
• Counting the half week you spend in forming (in-processing), you'll spend a total of seven and a half weeks in Coast Guard basic training at Cape May, the shortest basic training of all the services. (At the end of that period the new recruit is NOT considered trained for duty [although they do know how to wear their uniforms, tie their boots, and whom to salute].
  *
• Canadian RCMP officers undergo 26 weeks of training.
  *
• Ontario police officers undergo 24 weeks of training.
  *
• British Columbia police officers undergo between 34 and 42 weeks of training (21 at the Justice Institute (read as "Police Academy") in two blocks ("Block 1" is 13 weeks and "Block 3" is 8 weeks and between 13 and 17 weeks ("Block 2") of mentored field training under the CLOSE supervision of an EXPERIENCED police officer between the two blocks at the JI.

See above.

I don't agree. You cannot train fallibility out of humans by increasing the length of time invested in training.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

My intention is to push back on foolish hateful rush to judgments that show a typical unreasonable hatred for the officer based upon biases against police officers which are misguided, unhealthy and damaging. Police officers make mistakes and sometimes the mistake is to refrain from drawing their weapons before they are shot and killed by an assailant. Police officers are trained to draw their weapons in dangerous situations with potential hazards which put them in deadly danger of being assaulted or killed.

Sadly, officers have made bad snap judgments in such cases and innocent people have been killed. Thankfully, some officers responded with deadly force and were saved from being killed by a suspect. Sadly, some officers do not react quickly enough to potential dangers and end up being killed.

This officer saw a gun. That gun was pointed at him. He has less than a second to respond. I give the officer some leeway for not having time to fully assess the danger before firing,

If it were not for the fact that police officers are taught that ALL situations are ones in which they are in immediate danger of being killed, your position would make a lot more sense.

You say "This officer saw a gun." - what you do NOT say is "The officer saw a legally possessed gun in the hands of a person legally entitled to be where they were and not doing anything illegal.".

You say "That gun was pointed at him." - what you do NOT say is "The officer believed that the gun was pointed at him even though he had absolutely no evidence to support that belief and also because he was taught that everyone with a gun would try to kill him without warning.".

You say "He has less than a second to respond." - what you do NOT say is "The officer took less than a second to act on his training which was that everyone with a gun would try to kill him without warning.".

You say "I give the officer some leeway for not having time to fully assess the danger before firing," - what you do NOT say is "I do NOT give the officer some leeway for failing to take the time available to fully assess the danger before firing.".

What you are IMPLYING is

"Any police officer is justified in killing anyone who even looks like they might potentially have a weapon if that person does not instantly comply with every demand (regardless of legality) made by the police officer - even if that person does not hear and/or understand the command and this is so because the police officer MIGHT be in danger.".
​

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The gun was never in her hands.

Picky, picky, picky.

There WAS a gun (at least the police said that they found one).

That gun MIGHT have been available to the dead woman.

The dead woman MIGHT have known what to do with that gun.

If she had known what to do with that gun the dead woman MIGHT have shot the gun at the police officers that she couldn't see.

If the dead woman had shot the gun at the police officers that she couldn't see she MIGHT have hit one of them.

If the dead woman had shot one of the police officers that she couldn't see she MIGHT have killed that police officer.

On balance, the only possible responsible action that was available to the police officer was to kill the dead woman immediately.

[The above legal opinion, has been provided by the law firm of Wieselwort, du Plicité, Poco-Escrupuloso, Flerd, and Corrotto LLP, was paid for and has been officially approved and endorsed by "Devoted Online Lovers of Trump" Inc. (a non-partisan, independent, research and analysis organization exempt from federal taxation that is dedicated to bringing you the true truth and not the false truth that anyone who doesn't believe 100% of what Donald Trump says tries to tell you the so-called "facts" are), "Pro-Life United Gun Enthusiasts and Manufacturers for Jesus", and “"The ‘First Amendment Rights Trust’ Foundation”.]

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

You present the pre-judgmental narrative, and that narrative may actually be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, but we don't know that. All defendants in the US have the right of presumption of innocence until guilt is established at the conclusion of legal court proceedings.
Let's give the defense some time to present their case also before rushing to judgment.

I see that the usual note

"The 'Presumption of Innocence' rule only applies to OUR Guys if an allegation is made against one of THEIR Guys then that is sufficient proof that they are **G*U*I*L*T*Y** (even if there is absolutely no evidence to support the allegation or if the allegation has been raised [and disproved] previously) to justify locking them up without wasting time, effort and/or money on stupid things like trials."
​

is missing from your post.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I don't agree. You cannot train fallibility out of humans by increasing the length of time invested in training.

True, but you CAN reduce the chances of that fallibility occurring if you train them sufficiently so that they can make accurate judgments as to when there is "a NEED to apply deadly force as a last option" (as opposed to "a CHANCE to apply deadly force as a first option").

However, if you prefer to live in a society where the police are poorly trained and then use that poor training as an excuse for stupidly killing people that didn't need to be killed, that IS your choice and I wish you the joy of it.

I don't chose to do so.