IL - Sonya Massey Shot To Death In Her Own Home by Sangamon County Deputy After Calling to Report a Prowler, Springfield 6 July 2024

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
“We don’t need a fire while we’re here,”

Is this potentially evidence that the boiling water actually posed very little danger to anyone? I mean, it tends to suggest that it was potentially about to boil dry as pans full of water don't often take fire.
 
more about Grayson's prior history with the law, both as defendant and LEO at this link
Although driving under the influence is not a disqualifying misdemeanor under ILETSB rules, Macoupin County court records showed that Grayson was also charged in 2015 and 2016 with DUI.

A 2015 report by the Virden Police Department showed that he had a firearm and marijuana in the vehicle at the time of his DUI arrest.

In the 2015 case, he pleaded guilty, was fined $750 and placed on seven days of court supervision. His firearm was returned in 2017, according to a court record.

Virden hired Grayson as a part-time police officer six years after that arrest.

In 2016, two months after he pleaded guilty on the first charge, Grayson was stopped by Macoupin County Sheriff's deputies and refused a breathalyzer. During the arrest, he told the deputy to "hurry up" because he needed to urinate. He threatened to urinate in a trash can or his pants, according to the report. At one point, he told the arresting officer that he was "too small to make him mad," according to the police report.

ByBETH HUNDSDORFER, Capitol News Illinois
Tuesday, July 23, 2024 8:56PM
 
I’m not very familiar with the story but how did they know that she was mentally unwell, paranoid etc? How many times did the officer tell her to put the pot of boiling water down on the stove?
Its important to note that the officer first orders her to take the pot of water off the stove. He then goes ballistic at a perceived threat when she actually follows his command and picks up the pot.

As to the officers knowing that she was mentally unwell, they probably did not know specifically that she was unwell.

But.... they knew that being an police officer involves responding to a certain number of calls made by a dazzling variety of: attention seekers, bored humans, people whose predicament is their own fault, and..... a certain number of people who are unwell and acting mildly erratically.

In the end, encountering a mentally unwell person should not have been a surprise.
 
Last edited:
Reminded me of this

Groubert, was given credit for 17 months he served after pleading guilty to aggravated assault and battery last year. Dashcam video shows Groubert shot Jones, as he reached into his truck to get his driver's license after Groubert asked to see the license.

The video showed Jones was being polite and was trying to comply with the officer's commands when he was shot. The Highway Patrol fired Groubert shortly after Jones was shot.


 
Its important to note that the officer first orders her to take the pot of water off the stove. He then goes ballistic at a perceived threat when she actually follows his command and picks up the pot.

As to the officers knowing that she was mentally unwell, they probably did not know specifically that she was unwell.

But.... they knew that being an police officer involves responding to a certain number of calls made by a dazzling variety of: attention seekers, bored humans, people whose predicament is their own fault, and..... a certain number of people who are unwell and acting erratically.

In the end, encountering a mentally unwell person should not have been a surprise.
I agree with what you’re saying and he definitely could have chosen a less lethal solution to the situation. And while I am not condoning his actions I think that law enforcement individuals need better training in handling situations as well as requiring them to attend regular psychological counseling sessions throughout the year. The stress, emotions and fear our police officers must face every second of their day absolutely takes a huge toll on them physically, mentally and emotionally and they need relief, support and professional oversight. IMO
 
Possibly, but from a police officers point of view, he could have feared that she had hidden a loaded gun on the floor behind that counter top and shot him. They want to go home to their family too.
She would have needed to remove the potholders first. I think by the time she put down the pot of water, removed the potholders and grabbed the gun he could've found a way to de-escalate. Also, common sense kinda dictates that if she had a gun on the counter next to the stove she would not have been so fearful of an intruder she was willing to call the police in spite of a premonition she was going to die at the hands of police officers.
 
Possibly, but from a police officers point of view, he could have feared that she had hidden a loaded gun on the floor behind that counter top and shot him. They want to go home to their family too.
I'm sorry, Are we willing trying to offer justification for this murder? It doesn't matter how you feel about the police, there was no justification for this. If we are keeping this a victim friendly space as designated by websleuths we certainly don't want Sonya's family members finding this forum and seeing people trying to justify their why a police offer would shoot their family member THREE times.
 
She would have needed to remove the potholders first. I think by the time she put down the pot of water, removed the potholders and grabbed the gun he could've found a way to de-escalate. Also, common sense kinda dictates that if she had a gun on the counter next to the stove she would not have been so fearful of an intruder she was willing to call the police in spite of a premonition she was going to die at the hands of police officers.
There was no gun or weapon so I don't really understand the speculation. Why would they prolong the call and go into the house if they thought she had a gun? Why would they send her over to somewhere not in their line of sight if they feared for their lives? Cops don't have carte blanche to kill whoever they want.

Speculation about what COULD have happened IF the victim was violent doesn't matter. She didn't have a weapon. She shouldn't be dead after calling the police for help.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry, Are we willing trying to offer justification for this murder? It doesn't matter how you feel about the police, there was no justification for this. If we are keeping this a victim friendly space as designated by websleuths we certainly don't want Sonya's family members finding this forum and seeing people trying to justify their why a police offer would shoot their family member THREE times.
Holy moly, thank you for reminding me of the rules. Honestly, sometimes I get too emotionally involved and speak from my heart. I am in no way, shape or form “victim blaming” here. This woman did not deserve to die and she did nothing wrong imo. I am only speaking about the officers’s point of view, which I have no knowledge of naturally. Again, I apologize to Tricia and the Moderators and this board. I need to learn how to converse properly in here as I tend to discuss all sides of a story.
Thank you.
 
I'll never understand why a taser isn't a primary weapon in situations like this, and lethal force a last resort. :/

After watching the awful body cam footage, I can’t stop thinking about how EVEN IF she was about to throw hot water at him, and even if he did believe she was about to, his use of force (shooting her) was absolutely excessive and unjustified. A pot of hot water will not kill. A bullet to the head will and did.
 
<modsnip - off topic>

Also...every newly licensed doctor wants to face off against cases of Ebola and rabies and weird diseases no one has heard of yet. But the days are filled with kids with flu and constipated grandmas, made only somewhat more exciting by being on call at the ER to see bleeding accident victims and catastrophic strokes. I suspect many LEOs sign up for the job because they're adventurers and drama addicts at heart wanting excitement and instead they find themselves with a lot of pent-up adrenaline when even a potential intruder turns out to be a false alarm, but they're not being adequately trained to stand themselves down.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
<modsnip - quoted post was removed>


I was thinking about the neighborhood where this occurred, and thinking about how the officers responded to this situation. They arrive, search the place, from what we see they never announce themselves, just start knocking on the door. No "Sherrif's department, we're here to help." Ask dispatch to call her to let her know they are outside.

I am reminded of active school shootings, where kids and staff are trained to not open the doors for anyone, even if they claim to be LE. Ask for them to show their badge, or give them some evidence. They didn't let her know who they were, just assumed she would know they were the answer to her 911 call. To me, that could speak of their opinion of people who lived in that neighborhood, whether that be about poverty, race, substance use or combination of factors.

I do not know if these two officers were partners, or if they met up at the scene after being separately dispatched there. I remember listening to the dispatch audio about the incident, but don't remember if the two LE were together or separate. Either way, it is clear, at the end of the officer camera footage, how much this incident impacted the officer who tried to help her. He kept saying he was okay on his radio, as his hands are shaking and his breathing is still racing. Finally another officer comes up to him, gives him some comfort and tells him to turn his camera off, go off duty, take care of yourself. I hope they force him to take a leave and get ongoing support. What a horrific incident to be a part of.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I haven't watched it. But based on the descriptions, it's horrifying. And LE were the ones who directed her to the boiling pot in the first place, right?

If they were concerned about the pot/stove, why didn't one of them turn it off?

Don't watch it, and if you do have the volume off because hearing Sonya's breathing after she was shot was heartbreaking.
Seeing and hearing the impatience of the deputy with her from the outset was alarming. He was cold, unsympathetic, lacked remorse, demoralising to her when he spoke about her, insulting her after she was shot, wouldn't render first aid. She could have heard everything he said about what happened after he shot her and she was lying on the floor, bleeding and gasping for breath and he was standing there swearing and didn't go over to her. Heard him say "that's a head shot". Heard him say to get the medical kit but there's no point.
Oh geez, I just can't - no one should ever go through that.
Will happily watch this guy rot behind bars for that despicable and senseless act however

Moo
 
I think when she said to him, “I rebuke you in the name of Jesus Christ”, that seemed to really trigger him. IMO Damn, couldn’t he have just maced her if he was so angry!
I think you have an interesting point- he did appear to become very angered upon hearing the scriptural rebuke.

It would be interesting to know the religious back ground of the officer. The victim, in effect, called him a demon. Likewise, the rebuke in the scriptural context is not mild, rather it is complete, absolute and total.

From the officer's point of view (and no justification for murder), he was called there by the victim. In good faith, they show up and look for the non existent prowler. She then calls the officer a "demon" and gives an absolute and total rebuke of everything he is.

A secular person, whether atheist, agnostic, or nominal believer would probably respond to the rebuke comment via: "Uhmm... yeah, whatever." and then move on, with out even thinking about it.

But, a religious person, who knows the full context of the reference and, who either believed it in the past, or perhaps still believes it, may be deeply offended. On this occasion, such a person flies into a rage?
 
Last edited:
I think you have an interesting point- he did appear to become very angered upon hearing the scriptural rebuke.

It would be interesting to know the religious back ground of the officer. The victim, in effect, called him a demon. Likewise, the rebuke in the scriptural context is not mild, rather it is complete, absolute and total.

From the officer's point of view (and no justification for murder), he was called there by the victim. In good faith, they show up and look for the non existent prowler. She then calls the officer a "demon" and gives an absolute and total rebuke of everything he is.

A secular person, whether atheist, agnostic, or nominal believer would probably take the rebuke comment as: "Uhmm... yeah, whatever- next?"

But, a religious person, who knows the full context of the reference and, who either believed it in the past, or perhaps still believes it, may be deeply offended. On this occasion, he flies into a rage?
Yeah, I agree - the "rebuke you in the name of jesus" comment is what sent him into a rage/panic.

MOO - if he just thought she was a "f*cking cr*zy b*tch", why did he stay so long so that he escalated to shooting her? Why would he not take her comment in the context of mental illness if that's what he decided she was dealing with? This shows intent IMO.
 
I think you have an interesting point- he did appear to become very angered upon hearing the scriptural rebuke.

It would be interesting to know the religious back ground of the officer. The victim, in effect, called him a demon. Likewise, the rebuke in the scriptural context is not mild, rather it is complete, absolute and total.

From the officer's point of view (and no justification for murder), he was called there by the victim. In good faith, they show up and look for the non existent prowler. She then calls the officer a "demon" and gives an absolute and total rebuke of everything he is.

A secular person, whether atheist, agnostic, or nominal believer would probably respond to the rebuke comment via: "Uhmm... yeah, whatever." and then move on, with out even thinking about it.

But, a religious person, who knows the full context of the reference and, who either believed it in the past, or perhaps still believes it, may be deeply offended. On this occasion, such a person flies into a rage?
Amen to that! :cool:
 
Why would he not take her comment in the context of mental illness if that's what he decided she was dealing with? This shows intent IMO.
I might also show that the scriptural "rebuke comment" had a deep effect on the officer. This could give a hint about his former, or current religious background.
 
It would be interesting to know the religious back ground of the officer. The victim, in effect, called him a demon. Likewise, the rebuke in the scriptural context is not mild, rather it is complete, absolute and total.
That's why I suspect Tourette Syndrome. She said what was apparently the worst thing she could think of to say. I am related to someone with Tourette, and that's just how it works.

"Tourette's can also involve an oppositional impulse to do the worst thing possible in a given situation. The intensity of this impulse can vary from person to person."
Oppositional Me
(NOT SAFE FOR WORK)
 
@Phil_Lewis_

Sean Grayson, now charged with murder in the killing of Sonya Massey, was previously discharged from the Army for serious misconduct — and still hired at six police departments in Central Illinois:

Documents obtained from the Kincaid Police Department, where Grayson previously worked, note that he was discharged in 2016 for “Misconduct (Serious Offense)” at the Fort Riley Army installation in Kansas. Army officials confirmed Grayson was a wheeled vehicle mechanic from May 2014 to February 2016, but declined to provide further details about his discharge.

“The Privacy Act and (Department of Defense) policy prevent us from releasing information relating to the misconduct of low-level employees or characterization of service at discharge,” Army spokesman Bryce S. Dubee wrote in an email. Officials at Fort Riley did not return voicemails seeking comment.

Anthony Ghiotto, a former Air Force prosecutor who now teaches law at the University of Illinois, said there are several reasons why a service member could receive this type of discharge, including as a potential result of a court-martial conviction, in lieu of a court-martial proceeding, or if they commit a civilian infraction that can’t be disciplined through the military justice system. He said this kind of discharge suggests that Grayson committed an offense equivalent to something that would have led to at least a year of incarceration for a civilian.

“A good way of looking at it is, if it would be a misdemeanor in the civilian world, it’s not going to be a ‘serious offense,’” he said.

“I watched the video today actually,” said Mike Lawrence, a member of the Village of Kincaid’s Board of Trustees. “It was disgusting [and] it was shocking because it was so wrong.”

Lawrence confirmed he was unaware of Grayson’s discharge from the Army for serious misconduct. The news of Grayson’s killing of Massey wasn’t a surprise, he said, because of the impression he made while he was at the Kincaid Police Department.

“I thought he was a loose cannon,” Lawrence said. “He was just arrogant and cocky.”




 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
119
Guests online
175
Total visitors
294

Forum statistics

Threads
608,559
Messages
18,241,222
Members
234,401
Latest member
CRIM1959
Back
Top