Los Angeles Deputy Shoots Partner, Blames Suspect; Both Kill Suspect in Retaliation

[drjones]

he was not face down, he was not cuffed, he was actively resisting, and the fact that he was shot in the back is not in and of itself a bad or wrong thing, it needs to be taken in context of the entire situation.

 

[Lyra500]

I thought Murad was shot by Ruiz?

Murad (guy on left) puts something, presumably the suspect's gun, in his wasteband. A few seconds later he is shot by Ruiz (guy on right). We can clearly see that Ruiz is holding his own weapon so there is no question about that.

Apologies.

I thought the guy that put something in his waistband was the one who shot his partner if that is Ruiz then that is who I mean.

If it was the other deputy who put the gun in his waistband, then there is no way that the arrested guy could have shot him or even attempted it and I don't know what justification Murad would have for shooting the guy three times (not that it is really justifiable in my view as they were sitting on the guy anyway)

 

[Trident]

O M G what a mess this is, video or not.

 

[kimlynn]

he was not face down, he was not cuffed, he was actively resisting, and the fact that he was shot in the back is not in and of itself a bad or wrong thing, it needs to be taken in context of the entire situation.

He was face down at least part of the time and he was shot at by Murad because Murad thought the "suspect" was shooting at him when in fact it was his partner that had fired the shot that hit him.
It's interesting to note that Murad didn't even fire until Ruiz fired a second shot at Aguilera.

 

[drjones]

He was face down at least part of the time and he was shot at by Murad because Murad thought the "suspect" was shooting at him when in fact it was his partner that had fired the shot that hit him.
It's interesting to note that Murad didn't even fire until Ruiz fired a second shot at Aguilera.

sorry, i thought it was clear i was referring to his position at the time he was shot.

 

[kimlynn]

sorry, i thought it was clear i was referring to his position at the time he was shot.

Yes and he was face down during the time Murad fired. IMO
He was upright (sitting position head down) when Ruiz fired and struck his partner
Crap don't make me watch again to confirm.

 

[drjones]

he is on his side and face looking up when he is shot by ruiz (presuming ruiz' shot hit him)(ruiz' second shot during the encounter, not the shot he fired that hit murad) after this we cannot see his face but he is clearly still on his side, approximately 2 seconds later he is shot by murad

 

[drjones]

I provided the links because you said you could not find a reference to the cycling and the head phones in any mainstream media although I would agree that they all seem to be re-quoting.

right, you can find many MSM articles using the comment, but not any source for its origin other than the one i found attributing it to speculation by his girlfriend

 

[kimlynn]

he is on his side and face looking up when he is shot by ruiz (presuming ruiz' shot hit him)(ruiz' ssecond shot during the encounter, not the shot he fired that hit murad) after this we cannot see his face but he is clearly still on his side, approximately 2 seconds later he is shot by murad

I'm not sure the position he was in during the second shot by Ruiz. He appears to be on his stomach during the shots fired by Murad. He is for sure down and prone on the ground during the shots fired by Murad.
On a side note...I'm really surprised that both officers fired within that close quarters of one another. Don't they know that bullets travel?

 

[drjones]

murad's justification for firing is that he has already been shot, his partner has said nothing so he reasonably presumes he has somehow been shot by the suspect who he knows had a weapon. but he does not immediately draw his weapon and start shooting right away, he checks to see if he still has his weapon holstered, he checks to see if he still has the weapon he removed from aguilar, and then he tries to continue to subdue aguilar.

a second shot is fired - murad now knows that either his partner has determined that deadly force is needed, or that aguilar is again firing at them. so he reasonably presumes that deadly force is necessary.

is it ugly? yes, it absolutely is. is it wrong on murad's part? i dont think so.

 

[drjones]

I'm not sure the position he was in during the second shot by Ruiz. He appears to be on his stomach during the shots fired by Murad. He is for sure down and prone on the ground during the shots fired by Murad.
On a side note...I'm really surprised that both officers fired within that close quarters of one another. Don't they know that bullets travel?

im so confused, its a video that we can watch repeatedly, and slow down, and take screenshots of, and prove things from... when he is shot by ruiz he is on his side in every sense of the term. we lose sight of his face literally a tenth of a second before he is shot (or less) and he is looking up and actively resisting.

when he is shot by murad he is still on his side but we have not seen his face for a second or two, presuming he was hit by ruiz' shot he may have slumped down, but we do not know. all of which is irrelevant to the justification for murad firing.

 

[kimlynn]

murad's justification for firing is that he has already been shot, his partner has said nothing so he reasonably presumes he has somehow been shot by the suspect who he knows had a weapon. but he does not immediately draw his weapon and start shooting right away, he checks to see if he still has his weapon holstered, he checks to see if he still has the weapon he removed from aguilar and tries to continue to subdue aguilar.

a second shot is fired - murad now knows that either his partner has determined that deadly force is needed, or that aguilar is again firing at them. so he reasonably presumes that deadly force is necessary.

is it ugly? yes, it absolutely is. is it wrong on murad's part? i dont think so.

I agree that Murad fired only after Ruiz fired and that it could be looked at as self defense. It could also be that he fired in anger due to having been shot.
We will never know,but Ruiz needs to face charges. No doubt about that.

 

[kimlynn]

im so confused, its a video that we can watch repeatedly, and slow down, and take screenshots of, and prove things from... when he is shot by ruiz he is on his side in every sense of the term. we lose sight of his face literally a tenth of a second before he is shot (or less) and he is looking up and actively resisting.

when he is shot by murad he is still on his side but we have not seen his face for a second or two, presuming he was hit by ruiz' shot he may have slumped down, but we do not know. all of which is irrelevant to the justification for murad firing.

I will watch again later. From your link (post 11 ) the ME found gunshot wounds to back of neck,left upper back, and mid upper back.
So he was shot in the back and not facing the shooter.
Consistent with being on his stomach at the time or lying on his side.IMO

ETA watched video yet again and you're correct that the second shot by Ruiz was while NA was on his side. Also NA was on his side when shot by Murad
I think it could be said when Murad fired, NA was partially or almost turned over on his stomach.
Not sure why it matters but there it is.

 

[Sonya610]

On a side note...I'm really surprised that both officers fired within that close quarters of one another. Don't they know that bullets travel?

Depends on the type of ammo and the angle. Hollow points used for self-defense are designed to stop within 12" after hitting a human body (mainly so the energy is expended inside the target, it blows up inside the body like a balloon for a split second which causes more trauma).

Looked like pretty safe shots to me, they knew they were hitting the target and even if the bullet did manage to exit it would be hit the ground with whatever energy was left in it.

Here is a video that shows (in clear gel with the density of human flesh) what a hollow point does and why the officers didn't have to worry about their bullets hitting someone else.

Start watching at the 4 min mark:

[video=youtube;N8hbkXPdlks]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8hbkXPdlks[/video]

 

[ZooSleuth]

murad's justification for firing is that he has already been shot, his partner has said nothing so he reasonably presumes he has somehow been shot by the suspect who he knows had a weapon. but he does not immediately draw his weapon and start shooting right away, he checks to see if he still has his weapon holstered, he checks to see if he still has the weapon he removed from aguilar, and then he tries to continue to subdue aguilar.

a second shot is fired - murad now knows that either his partner has determined that deadly force is needed, or that aguilar is again firing at them. so he reasonably presumes that deadly force is necessary.

is it ugly? yes, it absolutely is. is it wrong on murad's part? i dont think so.

I'm pretty much in agreement with you here. Murard fired in reaction to his partner firing a shot (the 2nd shot in the incident), so I can't blame him for his actions.

Ruiz on the other hand should be in prison for this. The fact that he sat on the guy's lifeless body afterwards shows that he was making sure the guy died and couldn't tell his side of the story. When have you ever seen a cop do that after shooting somebody?!

 

[kareylou]

And the deceased had a loaded gun & resisted arrest repeatedly. Sure, I feel bad that he died but why resist? Tox report showed the deceased had MJ & meth in his system.

To be honest, you couldn't pay me to be LE nowadays.

Agreed, it is a riskier job than ever, but unless we repeal the Second Amendment, we cannot allow law enforcement officers to go chasing and shooting people just for carrying a gun, loaded or not. They could not tell whether his weapon was loaded, I don't think, and they surely didn't have access to the tox screen while he was on his bicycle. So at the time he was killed, he was a citizen exercising his constitutional rights. Exercising a constitutional right should not put someone in danger of being shot by authorities. That is not what our country is about. There has got to be a better way to fight crime than to allow our police to shoot people who are posing absolutely no threat to others because they "aren't the type of people who should be carrying guns, even though it is legal" or because "they look like someone who probably just committed a crime or is about to". And certainly not because they did not obey orders, if they were not committing a violent crime. The police are not allowed to stop people at random and issue orders, and kill them if they do not comply. That is a police state.

I say this as a middle-aged white woman who has only once had a negative encounter with the police, and that was when I was with a black man with dreads and tattoos (he was a professor). I have only been helped, kindly warned, etc. It would be easy for me to continue to say that I don't have a problem with the police because I don't resist arrest, I don't commit crimes, I don't wear gang symbols, etc., but I can no longer ignore these alarming videos. I know a series of unspeakable wrongs when I see it, and that is exactly what I am seeing.
I think the people who take these videos and disseminate them are heroes. They are in danger too, and the safest thing to do would be to run away. I am sorry to admit that I would never believe such things were really occurring if I didn't see them. I am heartbroken.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Do you have a link for that? How do you know what make of gun it was?

The Independent article I linked to states that there is a suggestion that one of the police planted the gun.

This is from the NY Daily News article:

Yes.....it is the link in post 11 by poster drjones. Open the link, go to page 8 and read under "Forensic Evidence".

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Agreed, it is a riskier job than ever, but unless we repeal the Second Amendment, we cannot allow law enforcement officers to go chasing and shooting people just for carrying a gun, loaded or not. They could not tell whether his weapon was loaded, I don't think, and they surely didn't have access to the tox screen while he was on his bicycle. So at the time he was killed, he was a citizen exercising his constitutional rights. Exercising a constitutional right should not put someone in danger of being shot by authorities. That is not what our country is about. There has got to be a better way to fight crime than to allow our police to shoot people who are posing absolutely no threat to others because they "aren't the type of people who should be carrying guns, even though it is legal" or because "they look like someone who probably just committed a crime or is about to". And certainly not because they did not obey orders, if they were not committing a violent crime. The police are not allowed to stop people at random and issue orders, and kill them if they do not comply. That is a police state.

I say this as a middle-aged white woman who has only once had a negative encounter with the police, and that was when I was with a black man with dreads and tattoos (he was a professor). I have only been helped, kindly warned, etc. It would be easy for me to continue to say that I don't have a problem with the police because I don't resist arrest, I don't commit crimes, I don't wear gang symbols, etc., but I can no longer ignore these alarming videos. I know a series of unspeakable wrongs when I see it, and that is exactly what I am seeing.
I think the people who take these videos and disseminate them are heroes. They are in danger too, and the safest thing to do would be to run away. I am sorry to admit that I would never believe such things were really occurring if I didn't see them. I am heartbroken.

Respectfully, we are of completely different mind sets here--& that's cool.

 

[Sonya610]

So at the time he was killed, he was a citizen exercising his constitutional rights. Exercising a constitutional right should not put someone in danger of being shot by authorities.

This happened in California, the people there really don't have 2nd amendment rights especially when it comes to concealed carry.

 

[bluesneakers]

This happened in California, the people there really don't have 2nd amendment rights especially when it comes to concealed carry.

It happens everywhere.