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

[katydid23]

I find this astounding. Officers should open fire on any suspicious car that begins to drive away when approached? We are discussing Denver, not Baghdad.

No one said they should open fire on any suspicious car. However this one was heading towards an officer that was between a fence and the fleeing stolen car.

 

[Fred Hall]

There is no "legal limit" for someone under 21. It's illegal. Period. That said, police had no way of knowing her age nor did it matter. The car was stolen, the group refused the order to get out and she was attempting to flee. Two officers came to the same conclusion that she needed to be stopped before she endangered other motorists with the vehicle.


JMO

Again, I am astounded. Merely attempting to flee is not by itself justification to shoot. Her rap sheet indicates that she was a dangerous driver, but like you say with her age, the police had no way of knowing that at the time. And does the suspicion that a driver might drive recklessly at some point in the future warrant opening fire on a moving car?

 

[hockeymom4]

"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."

"In Denver, the Police Department and independent monitor Nicholas Mitchell separately are looking at how national standards compare to Denver's policy, which allows officers to fire at moving cars if they have no other reasonable way to prevent death or serious injury."

http://www.policeone.com/officer-sh...r-police-policy-on-shooting-into-moving-cars/

Police Chief
“Our officers are directed that we do not shoot into moving vehicles unless their life or someone else’s life is immediate danger,” he said.

http://kdvr.com/2015/01/29/denver-p...of-teen-shooting-into-moving-vehicles-policy/

 

[katydid23]

Have always found this teen's statement intriguing vs DP version of events. A lot of 'they' - as in more than one officer.
They came from the back.
They shot the window.
When they walked up, they shot at her window and they shot her.

So how did the officer get pinned at the front of the car when they shot through the drivers window? What does pinned mean?

if you will notice, there are TWO LE vehicles present at the crime scene. One was behind the stolen car, and one was in front. The officer from the vehicle in front, was standing between the stolen car and the fence and a brick wall. "Pinned' means he had no place safe to go. Pinned= TRAPPED.

THEY is often used when the speaker does not know gender and/or number.

 

[katydid23]

Again, I am astounded. Merely attempting to flee is not by itself justification to shoot. Her rap sheet indicates that she was a dangerous driver, but like you say with her age, the police had no way of knowing that at the time. And does the suspicion that a driver might drive recklessly at some point in the future warrant opening fire on a moving car?

She was not shot because she was attempting to flee. She was shot because she was driving towards an officer that had no safe exit. He was TRAPPED between the moving vehicle and a fence.

 

[katydid23]

So far we don't know that Denver Police are trained to shoot at moving targets - no links. What we do know is, early in the thread there is a link to Denver Police having a policy against shooting at moving vehicles. That should be kept in mind when discussing justification. Jmo.

EVERY Law enforcement officer is trained to shoot at moving targets. EVERY SINGLE ONE. What would be the point of not doing so? Do armed robbers stand in one place when in a shoot out?

My son has to take a standard firearms test to stay working and it involves running an obstacle course, while shooting at a moving dummy with a target drawn on it. And he has to hit certain areas successfully to pass. I have no links, just my personal experience and common sense. :wink:

 

[CoolJ]

She was not shot because she was attempting to flee. She was shot because she was driving towards an officer that had no safe exit. He was TRAPPED between the moving vehicle and a fence.

All due respect katy, but we don't know that yet.

 

[Woodland]

So, the officer that was pinned did not shoot at Jessica - he was a third officer? It was 2 other officers that came from behind that fired their weapons?

Does trapped = hurt?

 

[katydid23]

I think there may have been a different public response initially if it had been stated that the officer's injury was minor and that he was ambulatory. I think that most laymen would have heard "fracture" and thought "plaster cast".

WHY would there be a different public response? If she was driving at him doers it matter if she hit him hard or not? Maybe he jumped out of the way in time or turned just the right way to avoid being killed. Why would it matter if he had a horrible break or just a fracture?

 

[katydid23]

So, the officer that was pinned did not shoot at Jessica - he was a third officer? It was 2 other officers that came from behind that fired their weapons?

Does trapped = hurt?

No, I don't think there were 3. Do you? And who said he never shot at her? Trapped does not have to mean hurt.

 

[katydid23]

All due respect katy, but we don't know that yet.

You don't believe the teen witness from inside the car that said so?

 

[Woodland]

if you will notice, there are TWO LE vehicles present at the crime scene. One was behind the stolen car, and one was in front. The officer from the vehicle in front, was standing between the stolen car and the fence and a brick wall. "Pinned' means he had no place safe to go. Pinned= TRAPPED.

THEY is often used when the speaker does not know gender and/or number.

If an officer drove up in front of the car and got out, then this officer did not approach from behind. One version from a teen in the car is, the officers approached from behind and shot through the window.

How can the two be correct? How do you know the officer that was pinned got out of the vehicle that eventually approached from the front?

 

[Fred Hall]

She was not shot because she was attempting to flee. She was shot because she was driving towards an officer that had no safe exit. He was TRAPPED between the moving vehicle and a fence.

This is precisely the condition that would justify opening fire. However, in defending the shooting many posters neglect to make this key claim concerning the direction the car was traveling when the driver was shot. Some posts simply state that the driver had a rap sheet and failed to get out of the car when ordered to do so, with the implication that these facts by themselves warrant shooting.

 

[Woodland]

Please post that link as I have one that says the exact opposite.

Post #38, page 2 of this thread. Denver Post article - last few paragraphs outline the policy.

The officers should get out of the way - however there is the usual exception of imminent threat. We don't know yet what, if any, imminent threat existed.

 

[Fred Hall]

WHY would there be a different public response? If she was driving at him doers it matter if she hit him hard or not? Maybe he jumped out of the way in time or turned just the right way to avoid being killed. Why would it matter if he had a horrible break or just a fracture?

You're right, it doesn't matter whether the officer was injured severely, mildly, or not at all. What matters is whether the car turned towards him before or after its driver was shot.

 

[al66pine]

from Fred Hall post ~623
"Apparently there exists amateur footage of the immediate aftermath of the shooting. I wonder if it will be released to the public when the investigation is complete? It will of course show the injured officer on the ground, clutching his broken leg :loser: " bbm

I don't particularly wonder what the footage shows, because I believe it is not legally relevant to the question of whether these shootings by these LEOs that day were justified.

People - and there are at least a couple here - who continue discussing LEO's injury/death or lack thereof as if it an important, crucial, critical, vital element in deciding whether LEO shooting was justified.

Can someone -
please quote & link CO statute re self defense and/or Denver PD policy stating that
LEO's injury or death is a factor in determining whether an LEO's use of firearm was justified?

Upthread, I've posted & linked CO law & Denver PD policy about shooting moving vehicles, in which I can find no reference to LEO's injuries or death as relevant to question of justification
in LEO use of force. What am I missing? Where are those references that I've not found?

Please? Anyone? Thx in adv.

 

[katydid23]

If an officer drove up in front of the car and got out, then this officer did not approach from behind. One version from a teen in the car is, the officers approached from behind and shot through the window.

How can the two be correct? How do you know the officer that was pinned got out of the vehicle that eventually approached from the front?

I don't see any problem with what I posted. One LE vehicle is clearly in front of the stolen car and the other is behind it. So at least one officer came from behind, and came up to the side of the car, and the other came front the front. What is inconsistent about that?

The teen witness never said that ALL of the officers came from behind. And we can see with our own eyes that one of the LE vehicles is blocking the front of the car.

 

[katydid23]

Post #38, page 2 of this thread. Denver Post article - last few paragraphs outline the policy.

The officers should get out of the way - however there is the usual exception of imminent threat. We don't know yet what, if any, imminent threat existed.

So you don't believe the teen witness that was sitting inside the car. The one that said the cop was pinned between the fence and their car?

 

[katydid23]

You're right, it doesn't matter whether the officer was injured severely, mildly, or not at all. What matters is whether the car turned towards him before or after its driver was shot.

After she was shot she could not have turned the car in the opposite direction. She was clearly driving towards the officer when she began to flee.

 

[CoolJ]

You don't believe the teen witness from inside the car that said so?

The witness said JH was attempting to flee didn't she? I will have a look again at the quote....


ETA

This is actually directly taken from a previous post of yours katy:
Just change around the bolded parts for a different emphasis

BBM

"She says police first shot at the car’s window, injuring Hernandez, and forcing her to lose control of the car and strike the officer. She says the officer was pinned between the car and a fence."

so according to the teen witness, the cops came up, then SHE TRIED TO DRIVE AWAY, then they shot at her from the side window---and she lost control, and went into the pinned officer.. I believe this part here are your words?


From this witness statement an argument can easily be made that the only reason the LEO was injured was because his fellow officers shot at the car which made the car LOSE CONTROL and run into him.