TX - Cameron Redus, 23, UIW student, fatally shot by campus PD officer, 6 Dec 2013

[jjenny]

BBM

This is the biggest issue I have with this entire story, none of the details disclosed so far indicate that the officer was responding to a DEADLY FORCE. Again, I would hope that an officer who is described as having extensive experience and training, would not consider a college student wielding the officer's own baton, who was then disarmed by the same officer, to be a deadly force. I would hope the officer would be a little more hearty than that.

MOO

Where is the idea of "deadly force" coming from?
In civilians, that is not a standard for self-defense.
You can respond with deadly force to avoid bodily injury, for instance.

 

[LambChop]

Where is the idea of "deadly force" coming from?
In civilians, that is not a standard for self-defense.
You can respond with deadly force to avoid bodily injury, for instance.

Is it possible that the student may have tried to grab his gun as well as the baton? Just grabbing an officer's weapon would be considered an attack on the officer be it his baton or his gun. Why would the student grab it unless he planned to use it on the officer?

 

[Paragirl]

Where is the idea of "deadly force" coming from?
In civilians, that is not a standard for self-defense.
You can respond with deadly force to avoid bodily injury, for instance.

I was commenting on the bolded portions of the post I quoted by liljim re responding TO deadly force, not USING deadly force to protect oneself.

 

[Yoda]

MOO. Regarding shooting in self defense -pretend there isn't a police officer involved. Two guys are having a disagreement/ verbal argument. One is wearing a gun plainly visible. What person would physically attack a person with the gun? No one in their right mind would. Now this situation. The officer was arresting a citizen. Whether Redus believed the officer was right or wrong, Redus was still attacking a man with a gun. Why did he think he could resist arrest and attack the officer and not think the officer would pull his gun to protect himself. LE are not super heroes with super powers. They are regular men and women. Expected protocol: officer pulls you over, citizen cooperates.

Was Redus reaching for the gun? We don't know yet. Do I think the officer believes Redus would try for the gun? Yes.

Officer pulls you over and or arrests you for something you did not do, you still cooperate. Yes it su..cks, and it is wrong, but physically attacking an officer, a man/woman with a gun is never going to end well. JMO

 

[jjenny]

I think the answer for student's alleged behavior is explained here.

"One witness told police she and Redus had gone drinking and bar-hopping that night, Pruitt told the media."

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/new...shot-five-times-by-campus-officer-5049897.php

 

[Yoda]

RCD's parents seem very kind and level headed. JMO

"For now, she and her husband Mickey are withholding judgment about who was at fault for his death -- their 23-year-old son or Cpl. Christopher Carter, who shot him Friday.
"We wish that everybody else would do the same, would reserve judgment until facts are known," Mickey Redus told CNN's George Howell late Tuesday."


http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/11/justice/texas-campus-officer-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 

[Sonya610]

Is it possible that the student may have tried to grab his gun as well as the baton? Just grabbing an officer's weapon would be considered an attack on the officer be it his baton or his gun. Why would the student grab it unless he planned to use it on the officer?

Exactly my thoughts. The officer had a gun, if the student was attacking the officer and got the baton away then obviously he might try to take the officers gun away and that WOULD be deadly.

What is the officer supposed to do? Run away really fast? If he struggles with someone that could easily try to take his gun he will either risk getting shot OR he has to shoot the attacker.

Also saying "What are you gonna do, shoot me?" is right up there with "Hey, watch this" when it comes to famous last words. Saying that has lead to a whole lot of people getting shot either during domestic disputes or robberies etc...

 

[AnaTeresa]

Where is the idea of "deadly force" coming from?
In civilians, that is not a standard for self-defense.
You can respond with deadly force to avoid bodily injury, for instance.

Not exactly. You can respond with deadly force to avoid serious bodily injury, not any bodily injury. It has to be very serious - the type of bodily injury that could cause death. Deadly force would not be appropriate if someone shoved you, for example, even though that shove could cause bodily injury. the law focuses on appropriate force in response to the force used against you. You're not supposed to escalate the situation.

 

[Reader]

Is it possible that the student may have tried to grab his gun as well as the baton? Just grabbing an officer's weapon would be considered an attack on the officer be it his baton or his gun. Why would the student grab it unless he planned to use it on the officer?

Well, in all the accounts I've read so far nothing has said he tried to get the officer's gun, not from LE or even Carter.

i will just reply once more then let this drop, i agree with most of what you say/post, nothing i have said prior has been directed at you specifically.

when i say "extraneous details" i mean exactly that by the dictionary definition, im not talking about people speculating regarding how things played out and whether police protocol was followed.

what im saying is that i could change a few of the reported details in this case and the way people would be responding to it would do a complete 180.

Thank you for the clarification. On the BBM: why would you do that though? This case is confusing enough without changing the facts given out.

RCD's parents seem very kind and level headed. JMO

"For now, she and her husband Mickey are withholding judgment about who was at fault for his death -- their 23-year-old son or Cpl. Christopher Carter, who shot him Friday.
"We wish that everybody else would do the same, would reserve judgment until facts are known," Mickey Redus told CNN's George Howell late Tuesday."


http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/11/justice/texas-campus-officer-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Well, that is different from what they were saying last night, that they don't believe what the officer says happened. But I will respect that and wait for more facts to come out. One of which is in that same article:

Guajardo believes deadly force was unnecessary and grilled Pruitt on the topic at a news conference. He questioned whether Redus was a real threat to Carter, who Pruitt conceded was much taller and heavier.

Since Carter is so much bigger than Cameron, even at the end (the baton is gone and he hasn't tried for the gun) when he comes forward with his arm raised, it seems to me the officer could have punched him in the head and stopped him. Yes, there may have been a threat, but not a deadly threat, and as someone said above the response should be proportionate. I still just don't agree that it was necessary to shoot and kill the boy. Maybe Carter just panicked.

I'm really not trying to be argumentative. It just disturbs me so much that this boy was killed over a traffic stop. Yes, he had been drinking and should not have resisted, but that should not mean a death sentence. I think of all the hostage situations we've covered where officers wait for days at time, being shot at, and still try their best to bring the suspect in alive.

 

[LambChop]

Problem is once an officer is physically attacked his main concern is the attacker getting to his gun and shooting him plus others. If this person made a move towards the officer in a threatening manner the officer had the right to shoot him to keep him from getting to his gun. He could have shot him when he grabbed his baton because legally the baton is a weapon. It's possible the officer did not intend to kill the student. No normal police officer wants to be put in that type of a position unless they have a personal history of violence.

Guess we will have to wait to see what the investigation turns up. jmo

 

[jjenny]

Not exactly. You can respond with deadly force to avoid serious bodily injury, not any bodily injury. It has to be very serious - the type of bodily injury that could cause death. Deadly force would not be appropriate if someone shoved you, for example, even though that shove could cause bodily injury. the law focuses on appropriate force in response to the force used against you. You're not supposed to escalate the situation.

I am sorry but this happened in TX. TX has one of the strongerst "stand your ground" laws in the whole country. In TX a person can use deadly force to protect property. There was recently a case in TX where a man killed an escort because she took his money but refused to have sex with him. And the jury found him not guilty. So where does in TX law it say that one can respond with deadly force only to avoid serious bodily injury? This cop could simply say he was afraid the student will take his baton again. That alone should keep him in the clear.

 

[AnaTeresa]

I am sorry but this happened in TX. TX has one of the strongerst "stand your ground" laws in the whole country. In TX a person can use deadly force to protect property. There was recently a case in TX where a man killed an escort because she took his money but refused to have sex with him. And the jury found him not guilty. So where does in TX law it say that one can respond with deadly force only to avoid serious bodily injury? This cop could simply say he was afraid the student will take his baton again. That alone should keep him in the clear.

According to Texas law, a person must act reasonably - that is, his belief must be reasonable that deadly force was necessary. The castle doctrine is a separate idea from personal self defense. Many states, not just Texas, hold that deadly force may be used to defend oneself in the home. However, the standard is different when one is outside the home (although some states have held that a car is similar to one's home for the purposes of deadly self defense).

I've linked to the Texas statute. Like many other stand your ground laws, it requires reasonable belief by the actor using deadly force, and various admonitions not to escalate the situation. Just because its Texas doesn't means that the state threw out the common law and underlying legal principles in crafting the statute. You cannot use deadly force against someone for mere bodily injury - it's not reasonable.

It's also important to note that in the Texas statute a civilian has a statutory defense in using force against an officer:

The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:

(1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest or search; and

(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's (or other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.

- See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/PE/2/9/C/9.31#sthash.BGFBkkF7.dpuf

 

[jjenny]

Again, you can use deadly force in TX even to protect property.

"Texas A&M Professor Mark Hoekstra, who studies the effectiveness of lethal-force provisions in self-defense law, says the protection-of-property element of the deadly force law is “pretty unique to Texas.” Within Texas, however, the case was not unique. In 2010, the law protected a Houston taco-truck owner who shot a man for stealing a tip jar containing $20.12. Also in Houston, a store clerk recently killed a man for shoplifting a twelve-pack of beer, and in 2008 a man from Laredo was acquitted for killing a 13-year-old boy who broke into his trailer looking for snacks and soda."

Read more: When You Can Kill in Texas | TIME.com http://nation.time.com/2013/06/13/when-you-can-kill-in-texas/#ixzz2nBA7Zg00

 

[AnaTeresa]

Again, you can use deadly force in TX even to protect property.

"Texas A&M Professor Mark Hoekstra, who studies the effectiveness of lethal-force provisions in self-defense law, says the protection-of-property element of the deadly force law is “pretty unique to Texas.” Within Texas, however, the case was not unique. In 2010, the law protected a Houston taco-truck owner who shot a man for stealing a tip jar containing $20.12. Also in Houston, a store clerk recently killed a man for shoplifting a twelve-pack of beer, and in 2008 a man from Laredo was acquitted for killing a 13-year-old boy who broke into his trailer looking for snacks and soda."

Read more: When You Can Kill in Texas | TIME.com http://nation.time.com/2013/06/13/when-you-can-kill-in-texas/#ixzz2nBA7Zg00

If you read my post again, I haven't said you can't. But again, that force must be reasonable.

ETA: The law can go either way. Yes, you can make an argument for protecting his baton; the same statute can be used to defend the victim stealing the baton to protect himself.

ETA(2): This all started because of your statement regarding self-defense and bodily injury. Again, the castle doctrine (defending property) and personal self-defense are two different things, with different statutory guidelines for its actions.

 

[colette]

Shooting an unarmed man 6 times seems over kill to me. Even if he had a baton, one or 2 shots should have taken care of that. 6 times makes me think the officer wanted him dead.

 

[Paragirl]

RCD's parents seem very kind and level headed. JMO

"For now, she and her husband Mickey are withholding judgment about who was at fault for his death -- their 23-year-old son or Cpl. Christopher Carter, who shot him Friday.
"We wish that everybody else would do the same, would reserve judgment until facts are known," Mickey Redus told CNN's George Howell late Tuesday."


http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/11/justice/texas-campus-officer-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Holy cow! I wonder why the family has done a complete 180? Maybe they have been privvy to new details not yet released to the public.

From article dated December 10, at the link below:

“Our family does not believe the officer's report,” the family wrote in a statement that was sent to the San Antonio Express-News and other media outlets Tuesday. “Cameron has never been an aggressive or confrontational person. ... For him to confront a police officer would be completely out of his character.”

“The investigating authorities quickly cleaned up the scene and even searched his apartment before we arrived in San Antonio,” the family noted in the statement.

The family also questioned Carter's decision that morning to follow Redus, whom he reportedly did not know.

“Even if Cameron was driving erratically, he presented no threat to the campus police officer or anyone else once he parked his truck,” they wrote. “We expect all official reports to confirm that Cameron's death was unnecessary and unjustified.”

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Family-of-slain-UIW-student-disputes-police-5050959.php

 

[liljim]

my guess is the campus cop , carter, knew he was out of his jurisdiction when he lied to dispatchers about his actual location before he followed Cameron into his apt parking lot -and the culprit will be an over zealous officer.

he was not out of his jurisdiction, it was a lawful stop that he is required to make or he would be derelict, so there was no reason to lie.

and he was not the person that gave the incorrect location anyway.

 

[liljim]

the officer's job record;

*he never received any disciplinary action but that doesnt rule out that he was "encouraged" to move on from positions or that there were issues, but we have no evidence of that yet. he was rehired by one place a second time for whatever that might be worth...

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/894553-christopher-j-carter-peace-officer-record.html

 

[wfgodot]

An earlier case in San Antonio of a school cop who shot to kill, from 2011:

Officer who shot student had history of not following orders. (SA Express-News)

 

[Paragirl]

What we know so far about the fatal shooting of UIW student Cameron Redus by campus police

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/police/2013/12/what-we-know-so-far-about-the-fatal-shooting-of-uiw-student-cameron-redus-by-campus-police/#18821101=0

Although there was “a very stark difference” between Carter’s size and the smaller student, Redus managed to take the baton away, pin the officer against a wall and hit him several times on the head and arm with the baton, Pruitt said. The rain and rocky landscaping might have made it hard for the officer to keep his footing, Pruitt said.

Carter refused medical treatment. But his injuries were consistent with being hit with a narrow object, Pruitt said.

“During the struggle, there were a lot of blows that he received,” the chief said.

As previously reported:

Over the course of Carter’s eight-year law career in Texas, he has held nine jobs at eight agencies, including two stints at the Bexar County Sheriff’s Office, files kept by the state agency for licensing peace officers show.

He rarely was at an agency more than a year and his shortest job was for seven months as a reserve officer for the San Antonio Municipal Court Marshals Division. So far, the two years and seven months he’s spent at UIW is the longest stretch of employment, the files show.

Statement from a past neighbour of Carter’s:

“He was mean,” said Hugo Bustillos, who now lives in the two-bedroom apartment near Fort Sam Houston where Carter, 38, used to live.

Bustillos, who lived above Carter’s apartment for about a year before moving into the lower-floor dwelling, said Carter also had run-ins with at least one other tenant over Carter’s dog before Carter moved away last year.

“He exaggerated a lot,” Bustillos said.

“He put a lot of false statements on us with our landlord,” Bustillos said. “He said we were smoking pot in front of our kids, but we were just smoking cigarettes.

“He also made trouble for someone else and got into an argument with” management.