CO - Jessica Hernandez, 17, killed by police after LEO struck by stolen car

[Yoda]

Apparently she was gay so that's a big thing in my FB feed. Race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, profession... none of this should matter. If you break the law and do not comply with officers orders that is seen as an assault and the officers can use deadly force on anyone. Period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree.
Things police are aware of:

• concerned citizen calls about a suspicious vehicle
• stolen vehicle
• Multiple occupants in vehicle

They do not know the age, race, sex, or sexual orientation before they approach the vehicle. All of those things should be irrelevant in discussing the case. JMO

 

[katydid23]

So this teen was driving a stolen car, was stopped by the cops, who asked her to exit the vehicle, but instead she drove towards an officer who was trapped between the car and a brick wall? So he shot, to stop the car from driving over him. And now the LGBT community is going to say the cop shot because she was gay?

 

[Yoda]

I would like to know more about the stolen car. Could the car have belonged to a member of the family of someone in it that morning? Did they report it stolen knowing who had stolen it? Example: teen Johnny leaves the house without permission and takes the car. Parent/guardian calls police to report stolen vehicle in order to get Johnny back and teach him a lesson.

 

[al66pine]

Some new details are coming out.... It seems the officer was not struck before shots were fired.
"Moments before opening fire on a car full of teenagers, two Denver police officers asked several times for those inside to get out after learning the car had been reported stolen, Police Chief Robert White said Wednesday.....
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27412773/denver-police-id-officers-fatal-shooting-unarmed-teen

. sbm

From same link: "Hernandez and the other occupants of the car did not have weapons, White said." bbm

I wonder if White said that verbatim, or if he said ^above plus, 'except for the vehicle-deadly weapon Hernandez was driving.'
Or maybe said, 'had no firearms.'

Just wondering.

 

[al66pine]

From Yoda's post #38: "Some new details are coming out. Officers reportedly asked the teens to exit vehicle.
officers fired when vehicle moved towards initial officer. It seems the officer was not struck before shots were fired." bbm

"Moments before opening fire on a car full of teenagers, two Denver police officers asked several times for those inside to get out after learning the car had been reported stolen, Police Chief Robert White said Wednesday.
"At some point, the original officer that responded to the scene, the vehicle started driving toward him, which pretty much had him between a car and a brick wall and a fence," White said in an interview with The Denver Post. "Out of fear for his safety, he fired several shots and the other officer also fired several shots.""

In PD Chief's earlier stmt, he was quoted as saying, car hit LEO fist, then LEOs fired.
"Police Chief Robert White said an officer was called to check on a suspicious vehicle and
a colleague arrived after it was determined the car had been reported stolen.In a statement, police said the two officers then "approached the vehicle on foot when the driver drove the car into one of the officers."
White said both officersthen opened fire. The officer hit by the car was taken to a hospital with a leg injury." dtd Jan 26bbm
http://www.stltoday.com/news/nationa...796acbde4.html


18-1-707....
"(2) A peace officer is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person for a purpose specified in subsection (1) of this section only when he reasonably believes that it is necessary:
(a) To defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force; or...". bbm.
http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/colorado/

So, justified or unjustified?

 

[al66pine]

I would like to know more about the stolen car. Could the car have belonged to a member of the family of someone in it that morning? Did they report it stolen knowing who had stolen it? Example: teen Johnny leaves the house without permission and takes the car. Parent/guardian calls police to report stolen vehicle in order to get Johnny back and teach him a lesson.

bbm

For sake of discussion, let's say car was registered to either 1- Jessica's parent(s) or 2- Patty Passenger's parent(s),
neither of whom had given permission to Jessica or Patty to drive it.
Is parent reporting car as stolen, different from John Doe - stranger to Jessica & all in car -reporting vehicle as stolen?

After reporting stolen vehicle to 'get back' or 'teach a lesson' to Jessica or Patty, can parent reasonably expect
LEO stopping car should announce to driver & those in car -
'Before I ask for operator license & registration, if any of you borrowed relative's car without permission, pls be so kind as to speak up now,
because if that's what happened, then we/LE know it's an innocent joyride, or at worst a miscommunication,
and there will be no further questions, no arrests, above all, no shooting. We'll buy ice cream for all, then drop each of you at home.
OTOH, if you are using stranger's vehicle without permission, none of that applies.'

Yoda or anyone,
Sometimes I'm dense but do not think that's what Yoda's implying - re teen using car without permission.
Pls, explain significance of parent/owner - vs stranger - reporting car as stolen.

 

[katydid23]

From Yoda's post #38: "Some new details are coming out. Officers reportedly asked the teens to exit vehicle.
officers fired when vehicle moved towards initial officer. It seems the officer was not struck before shots were fired." bbm

"Moments before opening fire on a car full of teenagers, two Denver police officers asked several times for those inside to get out after learning the car had been reported stolen, Police Chief Robert White said Wednesday.
"At some point, the original officer that responded to the scene, the vehicle started driving toward him, which pretty much had him between a car and a brick wall and a fence," White said in an interview with The Denver Post. "Out of fear for his safety, he fired several shots and the other officer also fired several shots.""

In PD Chief's earlier stmt, he was quoted as saying, car hit LEO fist, then LEOs fired.
"Police Chief Robert White said an officer was called to check on a suspicious vehicle and
a colleague arrived after it was determined the car had been reported stolen.In a statement, police said the two officers then "approached the vehicle on foot when the driver drove the car into one of the officers."
White said both officersthen opened fire. The officer hit by the car was taken to a hospital with a leg injury." dtd Jan 26bbm
http://www.stltoday.com/news/nationa...796acbde4.html


18-1-707....
"(2) A peace officer is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person for a purpose specified in subsection (1) of this section only when he reasonably believes that it is necessary:
(a) To defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force; or...". bbm.
http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/colorado/

So, justified or unjustified?

I think it is even MORE justified if the car is coming at you , even if had not hit anyone yet, to shoot to try and stop the driver.

If the cop had his leg run over before shooting, it can be argued there is less urgency, UNLESS he thought the driver was going to slam into reverse and roll back over him on way out.

One thing people need to realize: Cops routinely get sent recent dash cams and video cams showing first responders getting run over on purpose by civilians. They are very aware of the scary possibility. It happens a lot. Drunk drivers, car thief's, whack jobs, Jihadists, lots of possibilities.

 

[TGIRecovered]

I wonder if the people who are idiots realize that we all can clearly see what idiots they are. This post is in response to the whole situation, not any particular post here on Websleuths. There is a disturbing lack of common sense and responsibility for ones actions. I have zero fear of being killed by police because even if I am ever stopped or detained by mistake, I will behave like a reasonable civilized person and cooperate with police. MOO

 

[Woodland]

From the article originally linked in post #38 - Denver Police have a policy not to shoot at a moving vehicle. Everything can and will go wrong, including officers getting hurt -

The Denver Police Department use-of-force policy for moving vehicles

Moving vehicles

a. Firing at moving vehicles: Firing at a moving vehicle may have very little impact on stopping the vehicle. Disabling the driver may result in an uncontrolled vehicle, and the likelihood of injury to occupants of the vehicle (who may not be involved in the crime) may be increased when the vehicle is either out of control or shots are fired into the passenger compartment. An officer threatened by an oncoming vehicle shall, if feasible, move out of the way rather than discharging a firearm. Officer(s) shall not discharge a firearm at a moving vehicle or its occupant(s) in response to a threat posed solely by the vehicle unless the officer has an objectively reasonable belief that:

1. The vehicle or suspect poses an immediate threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or another person and

2. The officer has no reasonable alternative course of action to prevent death or serious physical injury.


http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27412773/denver-police-id-officers-fatal-shooting-unarmed-teen

Imo, the teen driver was not driving 'at the officer'. She wanted out of the alley - she was wrong in her actions, which would likely have resulted in jail time for failing to stop among other charges.

An independent autopsy by the family is smart in this case imo (from the same article) - the bullet trajectory will pinpoint where the officers were standing when they fired. If they fired through the drivers side window, then she was attempting to drive past them, not at them. Jmo.

To me, the vehicle appears to be 'just kissing' the fence - having rolled to a stop there, it does not appear to have been driven at it. I don't believe, at the moment, that the officer was standing where the vehicle impacted the fence with the vehicle coming 'at him'. I believe the teen in the car (from the same article), based on the pics, who has said that the officer was hit with the vehicle after both officers shot the driver. Makes more sense. Jmo.

 

[bwt42]

http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Mother-of-girl-shot-by-Denver-police-seeks-6047912.php

The "spin" has started. Her mother says she "grabbed" a car. How long before MSM uses "borrowed" a car?

 

[Woodland]

From the article linked in post #50 -

The passenger said officers came up to the car from behind and fired four times into the driver's side window as they stood at the side of the car, narrowly missing others inside.


http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Mother-of-girl-shot-by-Denver-police-seeks-6047912.php

Hopefully the above quoted statement will be cleared up soon - what else happened? Did the officers speak? Order them out of the car?
Let's hope so, imo.

 

[Woodland]

Whether the mother of the deceased teen in this case used the term 'grabbing', 'taking', 'borrowing' or 'stealing', in reference to her daughter being in a stolen car, she also acknowledged, in the same sentence, that her daughter made a mistake by being in possession of it.

Fwiw, when I read the word 'grabbing' I understood it was slang for stealing the vehicle.

Both sides have and will continue to 'downplay' the actions on both sides of this incident - both of which are wrong. Jmo.

 

[jjenny]

From the article linked in post #50 -

The passenger said officers came up to the car from behind and fired four times into the driver's side window as they stood at the side of the car, narrowly missing others inside.


http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Mother-of-girl-shot-by-Denver-police-seeks-6047912.php

Hopefully the above quoted statement will be cleared up soon - what else happened? Did the officers speak? Order them out of the car?
Let's hope so, imo.

If that was the case, the car would have run forward and not run over the officer's foot. I don't see how the car could have gone sideways.

 

[Yoda]

From the article posted above.

The U.S. Supreme Court has said that officers may not use deadly force to stop a fleeing suspect unless the person is believed to pose significant physical harm. Still, policies vary among agencies, and some departments have banned or discouraged the practice.

When looking at the scene photos, there are two police vehicles inside the crime scene tape. Assuming the vehicles were not moved after the incident, the distance between the three vehicles was about 30-40 yards. Instead of exiting the vehicle, she began driving. There was very little room for her to make an exit. The officer in front of the car became a sitting duck. According to the Supreme Court ruling deadly force would be justified.

 

[jjenny]

From the article posted above.



When looking at the scene photos, there are two police vehicles inside the crime scene tape. Assuming the vehicles were not moved after the incident, the distance between the three vehicles was about 30-40 yards. Instead of exiting the vehicle, she began driving. There was very little room for her to make an exit. The officer in front of the car became a sitting duck. According to the Supreme Court ruling deadly force would be justified.

Not only that, there appears to be no room for him to jump out of the way. The car was very close to the fence and the building.

 

[Yoda]

A view of of the scene. I am assuming the two closest vehicles are the reponding officers' vehicles.

closer view

 

[Woodland]

You touch on something I have been wondering about Yoda - a few minutes elapsed between the time the first officer arrived and determined that the vehicle was stolen, then another minute or so for the second officer to arrive (it's my understanding from reading the articles that the first officer called for back-up). The driver made no attempt to leave, so no one inside the vehicle seems to have realized LE was present - including not seeing any police vehicles.

Seems that only when she realized LE was present, on foot, did she attempt to flee. Not the right thing imo, btw.
Have not seen anywhere that more than two officers were present when the shooting occurred. So if their vehicles were out of view of the occupants of the car, then the driver would in fact have had a clear path to drive forward.

I'm assuming the police vehicles inside the tape were not there when the driver attempted to drive away.

How do we know there was an officer in front of the vehicle? There are two or more versions of where the officers were standing at the moment. How do we know the officers foot was run over? Without a driver in control, a vehicle will go which ever way the tires are pointing. All jmo.

 

[Woodland]

Not only that, there appears to be no room for him to jump out of the way. The car was very close to the fence and the building.

Fwiw, how do we know where the car was when LE approached it?

 

[Yoda]

In the news video, there is a clip of a video a neighbor shot. I wonder where we can see a full copy of that.
Also, the friend talking said she wanted police to know that JH "was not just a person who stole cars." Plural- cars.


http://www.9news.com/story/news/loc...ess-to-cop-shooting-tells-her-story/22449579/

 

[Yoda]

In this raw news video the day of the shooting, A reporter asks the chief if the officer was struck before shots were fired. The chief reponds he doesn't know and the investigation will determine that.

So media put out an original story that is misleading, knowing full well that the chief clarified it would be determined when the shots were fired. SMH

http://youtu.be/WrNi8GreqZQ