NV - Police fatally shoot man holding cell phone

[RANCH]

And it was the choice of LE to assume he had a weapon. I hope they can live with their choice.

The police had no choice but to assume Childress had a weapon because he refused to drop the object they saw and show his hands.

I'm sure the officers involved with be deeply affected by the selfish actions of Childress. May God bless them.

 

[pappa rob]

Bad people don't deserve a trial.

Sometimes I'll admit I feel that way, but it's the law for a reason. I sure wouldn't want to be judge, jury, and executioner.

 

[al66pine]

.... But in all honesty. We see 1000 people a day with a phone in hand. And we never thought that they had a gun in hand. Jmo
....

snipped for focus^
Speaking only for myself, seeing 1000 people a day with a phone in hand would be hyperbole; even double digits would be an exaggeration in my typical day.

Nevertheless, when I see someone with a phone in hand, I recognize it as a phone and perceive that it is not a gun. I think as a (hypothetical) LEO, I could depend upon it not being a lethal weapon which the holder could use instantly to cause great bodily injury to or kill people nearby or me. Or to holder.

IIUC, these LEOs did not and could not see what was in his hand (behind his back or in his pocket) so could not conclude that he (w their knowledge of his criminal history, which included stealing guns) did not have a gun or lethal weapon, leaving open the possibility that he had a lethal weapon he could use instantly to cause great bodily injury to or kill people nearby or LEOs. Or to holder.
As others posted, if he wanted LEOs to know that he did not have a weapon, he easily could have dropped phone, coulda, woulda, shoulda, etc. But after multiple lawful reuests, he chose not to. JM2cts.

 

[sonjay]

I don't even think they made an error. I think they were totally justified to shoot under the circumstances.

I totally agree. Based on all the reports, the officers acted exactly as they are expected to and trained to. The dead criminal worked hard for that shooting. He earned it.

 

[trenchmouth]

All Childress had to do was obey the officers commands. Moving towards officers when told to stop is not a very wise move. JMO

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/02/las-vegas-police-shoot-kill-suspect-holding-cellphone

If the reports of the incident are accurate it seems to be a justified shooting. If you're a cop and you think somebody has a gun and they don't drop it aren't you risking your life by not shooting?

Legally is the cop justified ? Seems so

To play devils advocate, what if the suspect was deaf? What it still be justified?

 

[katydid23]

If the reports of the incident are accurate it seems to be a justified shooting. If you're a cop and you think somebody has a gun and they don't drop it aren't you risking your life by not shooting?

Legally is the cop justified ? Seems so

To play devils advocate, what if the suspect was deaf? What it still be justified?

Good question. IF he was a random citizen and he was holding something, partially hidden, and walked towards them, then I don't think it would be a justified shooting. Like you suggested, he could have been deaf or spoken another language or been special needs.

HOWEVER, these officers already knew that he was not deaf, he understood English, and he was willfully jumping bail to avoid incarceration/

 

[katydid23]

IMO it's going to be difficult for them. They mistook a cellphone for a gun and because of that mistake a man is dead. That's a lot for someone to deal with.

After reading the latest update, I doubt it will be that difficult for any of the officers to deal with. They did nothing wrong:

A wanted man who Las Vegas police officers shot and killed on New Year's Eve ignored at least 24 verbal commands to surrender before the gunshots.

snipped….
Undersheriff Kevin McMahill told media members marshals were seeking Childress after he skipped out on sentencing in a home invasion case out of the Phoenix-area.

U.S. marshals were informed of Childress' location in the Las Vegas area four days before the shooting, according to McMahill. Marshals learned he was staying with a relative in the area.

On Dec. 30, marshals performed surveillance on an apartment on West Desert Inn Road where Childress was believed to be staying, but he did not appear. Marshals returned the next day and spotted at 2 p.m. Childress and a friend leaving the apartment. Marshals approached Childress but he ran away on foot.

Marshals requested assistance from Metro, which deployed air and K9 units. The air unit was able to locate Childress in a neighborhood near Desert Inn and Cimarron roads, where he was spotted in several residential backyards.

Officer Robert Bohanon was the first to arrive at Childress' location in the 8300 block of Gilded Crown Court. In body camera footage shown on Monday, Bohanon points his service weapon and commands Childress to "get on the ground". Childress appears to ignore the commands and keep walking away from the officer.

Bohanon was later joined by Officer Blake Walford and two marshals at the scene. Childress was seen with his right hand in his pocket throughout the encounter, and Bohanon commanded him to "drop the gun," believing Childress was holding a firearm.

Childress was also told that he would be shot if he walked closer to the officers, which he did. Bohanon and Walford opened fire on Childress, who was shot five times.



Read more: http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/3088...by-officers-ignored-24-commands#ixzz3wMKAUPRm

 

[katydid23]

So according to this UPDATE, there was Body Cam footage:
Officer Robert Bohanon was the first to arrive at Childress' location in the 8300 block of Gilded Crown Court. In body camera footage shown on Monday, Bohanon points his service weapon and commands Childress to "get on the ground". Childress appears to ignore the commands and keep walking away from the officer.

Bohanon was later joined by Officer Blake Walford and two marshals at the scene. Childress was seen with his right hand in his pocket throughout the encounter, and Bohanon commanded him to "drop the gun," believing Childress was holding a firearm.

Childress was also told that he would be shot if he walked closer to the officers, which he did. Bohanon and Walford opened fire on Childress, who was shot five times.



Read more: http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/30883...#ixzz3wMKAUPRm

 

[Woodland]

McMahill also noted marshals told officers Childress was armed and dangerous and wanted for attempted murder. The charge, though, turned out to be false, according to McMahill

Officer Robert Bohanon was the first to arrive at Childress' location in the 8300 block of Gilded Crown Court. In body camera footage shown on Monday, Bohanon points his service weapon and commands Childress to "get on the ground". Childress appears to ignore the commands and keep walking away from the officer.

Childress was also told that he would be shot if he walked closer to the officers, which he did. Bohanon and Walford opened fire on Childress, who was shot five times.

http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/3088...by-officers-ignored-24-commands#ixzz3wMKAUPRm

Wanted for attempted murder turns out to be false information fed to the media.

LE refuses to show the entire body cam footage - at no time in the few seconds that are shown in this video is Childress advancing towards officers.

Unable to believe the story being told by LE - if they have video showing the entire encounter then why not show it?

Not a 'good' shoot imo.

 

[K_Z]

Keith Childress was facing sentencing for NINE FELONY counts.

1. Burglary, first degree (F2)
2. Armed Robbery (F2)
3. Kidnap (F2)
4. Aggravated Assault (F3)
5. Armed Robbery (F2)
6. Kidnap (F2)
7. Aggravated Assault (F3)
8. Theft (F6)
9. Theft (F6)

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-of-multiple-crimes-but-family-wants-answers/

Those nine felony convictions are all the "answers" the family and friends need to "understand" why he acted the way he did, fleeing and resisting apprehension, and getting himself killed.

Now, a simple review of sentencing guidelines says he was facing in excess of 30 years in prison. He was 23. He fled. He was desperate. He has a history of very violent behavior, including kidnapping-- so hostage taking was a concern. He had stolen guns previously. He was under surveillance for days to make sure he was the "right" suspect, and the arrest was planned carefully so that other innocents were shielded as much as possible during his arrest. He may have been despondent and planning suicide by cop. He refused TWENTY FOUR commands to cooperate with his arrest, and continued to come at police, while hiding his hands. There is body cam video.

These officers will not be charged with anything. The family of this criminal deserves nothing if they try to file for "damages." Anyone can see that this was a well organized, legally carried out surveillance and apprehension of a violent convicted criminal, that ended badly for the suspect by his own choices. He had many chances to be taken back into custody alive-- he intentionally provoked officers, IMO.

It simply didn't matter whether he had a cell phone, a lollipop, or a gun in his pocket, since he wouldn't cooperate or show his hands. He wasn't an innocent citizen sitting in a coffee shop sipping a latte-- he was a fleeing fugitive, convicted of 9 very violent felonies. Police did exactly the right thing, IMO.

Interestingly, posters elsewhere claiming to be family members were on various social media making all sorts of complaints and comments that don't line up at all with official police statements. Such as police fired "dozens" of rounds, and "about 10" hit Keith.

Family has raised a little over $1000 in their online fund. It will be less than $1000 by the time the fund hosts take their cut. Not even enough for a spartan funeral, so not many supporters (23 last time I looked).

I also find it quite telling that there is no groundswell of activist support for Keith Childress. Various reasons for that. But IMO, one reason for that is that this is a pretty clear cut situation where police acted appropriately and lawfully when they had to shoot this perp. Only the news media and a few outliers seem to think that there is a problem with how this unfolded. Police kept a lot of people in that neighborhood safe from the desperation of a fleeing fugitive, and for that, I'm thankful.

It's too bad such a handsome young man with a big smile chose a criminal lifestyle of violence and crime, and fleeing responsibility. The end for him was quite predictable, IMO. His life could have been much different, but he made his choices.

 

[Tawny]

McMahill also noted marshals told officers Childress was armed and dangerous and wanted for attempted murder. The charge, though, turned out to be false, according to McMahill

Officer Robert Bohanon was the first to arrive at Childress' location in the 8300 block of Gilded Crown Court. In body camera footage shown on Monday, Bohanon points his service weapon and commands Childress to "get on the ground". Childress appears to ignore the commands and keep walking away from the officer.

Childress was also told that he would be shot if he walked closer to the officers, which he did. Bohanon and Walford opened fire on Childress, who was shot five times.

http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/3088...by-officers-ignored-24-commands#ixzz3wMKAUPRm

Wanted for attempted murder turns out to be false information fed to the media.

LE refuses to show the entire body cam footage - at no time in the few seconds that are shown in this video is Childress advancing towards officers.

Unable to believe the story being told by LE - if they have video showing the entire encounter then why not show it?

Not a 'good' shoot imo.

It's not looking good. Also, wishing people would stop parroting the attempted murder thing since it's been shown to be false.

 

[Archangel7]

The laws are clear and support the actions of the officers based on information that is known to date based on the MSM media reports.

One can research Graham v Connor, Tenn. v Garner, Terry v Ohio, and the US Constitution 4th amendment for the facts around public/police interaction and Use of Force.

 

[Woodland]

But MSM media reports are incorrect.

 

[Tawny]

I find it intriguing that the other officer "failed to activate" his body cam. JMO!

 

[Woodland]

Now it's difficult, if not impossible, to know with absolute certainty, if the second body cam was activated or not.

I'm a 'fool me once ...' kind of person.

 

[Tawny]

Now it's difficult, if not impossible, to know with absolute certainty, if the second body cam was activated or not.

I'm a 'fool me once ...' kind of person.

 

[bluesneakers]

He was walking away and didn't have a gun.

I don't know what else to say.

 

[bluesneakers]

OT: I still call him Dean.

 

[Tawny]

OT: I still call him Dean.

*gasp* That's CAS!

 

[drjones]

He was walking away and didn't have a gun.

I don't know what else to say.

From the linked article discussed above;

"Childress was also told that he would be shot if he walked closer to the officers, which he did."


The fact that he did not have a gun has been covered many times, it has nothing to do with whether or not the police were justified in shooting.