There is a disturbing case out of New Mexico where police fired into a van full of children after the mother tried to drive away from officers. As shown on the video below, an officer stopped Oriana Ferrell on a routine traffic stop only to see her drive away. What followed was a chase, smashing windows of the van, and the shocking decision of an officer to fire into a vehicle with kids in the backseat.
First and foremost, it should be noted that Ferrell had violated a host of laws. She fled the scene, engaged in a high-speed chase, resisted arrest, and police say that they found two marijuana pipes in the car. However, it is the discharge of the weapon that shocked many of us.
Ferrell was originally pulled over for going 71 miles per hour in a 55 miles per hour zone. She argues with the officer who goes back to his car only to see Ferrell drive away. At this point, he is aware that there are five children in the car aged 6 to 18.
He then pulls her over again and yells at her to get out of the van. When she refuses, he tries to force her out. When her teenage son gets out to confront him, the officer pulls his taser and the teen goes back into the car.
He tells her that she will be charged and to get out as she argues with him. She inexplicably insists that she did nothing wrong and “didn’t run away.” She gets out of the car and the officer tells her to face the van to be cuffed. After she locks herself back into the van, the officer takes his baton and starts to break windows even though he knows that children are seated inside. The flying glass constitutes an obvious threat to the children and this is the first serious breach that I can see. I do not understand why they do not immobilize the van or why he decides to break the window next to the children rather than the driver.
As he is smashing the windows, she drives away. That is when another officer fires three shots directly into a van filled with children. It is a shocking use of force with no concern for the children inside the van. At this point, Ferrell is only accused of a minor traffic stop, leaving the scene, and resisting arrest. There has been no weapon or attack on the officer. Yet, this officer put three slugs through the back of a van filled with children.
Ferrell then leads the police on a 10-minute chase before turning herself in. The New Mexico State Police have not removed any of the officers from active duty.
Ferrell was charged with five counts of abuse of a child, aggravated fleeing an officer, resisting an officer, reckless driving and possession of drug paraphernalia. The abuse of a child is interesting given the fact that it was the officers that fired into a van full of children. Moreover, it is not clear what the basis is for the charge against her teenage son for battery of an officer.
As the video below shows, there was ample reason for an arrest, but the excessive force used by the police is very disturbing and warrants a full investigation. The officer firing the weapon could have killed three children with this unjustified use of force. The police had multiple cars and could easily stop a minivan without resulting to the use of potentially lethal force.
What do you think?
Kudos: Michael Blott
As ever, Elaine, your reading comprehension is impeccable.
nick,
The operative words are “past and present contributors.”
We “had several” cops w/ the operative word being “had.” I think you “had” a couple black folk years back too. I “had” hair a few decades back. This is a substantive and interesting case. It was on the CBS national news today. I simply want to have a good discussion on it, that’s all.
In that vain, raff, the video was obviously edited. Who do you think edited it, the cops or the TV station. And why do you think so.
nick,
No agendas here. Just a reasonable and respectable response to your assumption.
nick,
You mean people with an agenda such as yourself as well, of course.
But maybe not.
Telling you that you have made an assumption (and a bad one at that) isn’t personal. It’s factually and logically accurate. Saying you are wrong isn’t attacking your person. Calling you a jackass could be attacking your person although it might be simple insult as well. Saying you are wrong because you are a jackass would be an ad hominem argument. Saying you are wrong as a matter of fact and/or logic is simply saying you are wrong as a matter of fact and/or logic.
It’s a distinction you really need to master.
We have, in fact, had several members of law enforcement – local, state and Federal – as past and present contributors.
I hope officers like the trigger happy lunatic do not blog here.
If so, I think they and those supporting them here would be heavily outnumbered as well as subjected to orders of magnitude better reasoning.
Reason is not their strong suit (three cops loose it under great duress from a woman and her kids that are on an educational field trip) so Barney Fife starts spraying lead — in an alleged speeding ticket apocalypse?
Ten to 1 they are fundies like Rep. Gohmert, 5 to 1 they are Sikhs, 0 to 0 they got game.
Let’s just make sweeping statements stating police officers wouldn’t feel welcomed here, because it’s the opinion of one person. Elaine, we must not overstep the local authority here, we must accept superior knowledge.
Your article is a little inaccurate, misleading, and leaving detail out on purpose, indicating a bit of bias on your part.
“When her teenage son gets out to confront him, the officer pulls his taser and the teen goes back into the car.”
You left out the part where the son got out a second time and ran around the back of the van and started attacking the officer. It wasn’t until he took his tazer out to get the teen off that the kid ran back into the van.
“After she locks herself back into the van, the officer takes his baton and starts to break windows even though he knows that children are seated inside”
The officer wasn’t after her at this point, he was after her son who just assaulted him. If I’m an officer and a suspect assaults me, then runs back into the vehicle, I do not know if he’s going for a gun and I am getting him out as quickly as possible. I’m not saying this is the officers reasons, but this is how I interpret it.
“At this point, Ferrell is only accused of a minor traffic stop, leaving the scene, and resisting arrest. There has been no weapon or attack on the officer. ”
Again incorrect, her son just assaulted the officer.
“Yet, this officer put three slugs through the back of a van filled with children.”
You failed to mention this officer just arrived and might not have know there were younger children in the back. All he knows is he co-worker was just assaulted.
I’m not defending the officers, trying to stop a minivan by shooting at it is no doubt excess and they were very ignorant for using that level of force. But if you’re going to put an article online discussing it, please give all the facts so people can make up their own minds.
Let’s not get personal. This has been a civil forum since Mr. Turley spoke. Let’s not let people w/ an agenda change ruin that. Please. This is an interesting topic.
Elaine, Please.
Some people try so very hard to make themselves important. Better perspective, more experience, common sense, insider knowledge, all self proclaimed, all subject to the discretion of the reader as to the veracity of the speaker.
nick,
How do you know the professions of the people who comment here? There may be a number of people who frequent this blog who work/have worked in law enforcement.
“The fact that we had one cop, and he is not here any longer, kind of speaks for itself.”
It doesn’t speak for itself. You’re making quite an assumption.
Can someone tell me when New Mexico was admitted into the Union as a state.
raff, I am merely giving the SOP. I have obtained police videos, 911 audio tapes, and NEVER were they edited in the maybe 25 or so times I did so. I know reporters on the police beat and they get unedited audio and video footage. My comment was in response to a comment that ASSUMED the police edited the video. The person used flawed reasoning. While my comment is not dispositive, it is based on experience and COMMON SENSE.
The fact that we had one cop, and he is not here any longer, kind of speaks for itself. Virtually all the cop posts here are negative. That is undeniable. They’re often red meat. It’s a hostile environment for cops in this venue. So, while you say cops are welcomed here, the dearth of them here let’s just say, call that into question. Maybe they feel as welcomed as an atheist is to a Billy Graham revival. I sometimes join the crowd on some of these cop posts, I sometimes side w/ cops, however not often, because the posts here are usually pretty blatant exhibitions of cops behaving badly and even criminally.
Absent the superb insights from Darren, I’m trying to give some perspective. That’s all. The firing of the weapon, even though I think it was @ the tires[logical], was wrong. I’ve said the primary officer was ineffective. Breaking the window was wrong. All that said, this women put her children and others @ risk but her unlawful, reckless behavior. I think she sensed weakness in this rural cop. She came from Memphis where cops don’t say, “OK.” There’s much going on, it’s complicated. There are no heroes.
rafflaw,
“…Leo’s are as welcome here as any other professions.”
I agree–especially considering that one of our guest bloggers has worked in that profession.
nick,
I have seen zero evidence that the tv stations edited the video and I would like to add that Leo’s are as welcome here as any other professions.
I should become a police chief:
nick spinelli 1, November 18, 2013 at 4:45 pm
… I surmise we don’t have any cops here because they don’t feel welcomed.
======================
That is correct.
Kops like those jack booted jack asses would take up a lot of my time as I castigated them for their lack of honesty, humanity, good sense, and utter incompetence.
The D.A. in this case, if he does not drop the charges, is like the D.A. in the Paranoid Prosecution case where the judge himself went to the CIA to look at their files because they refused to present them.
Then the judge dismissed charges:
(Paranoid Prosecution, video).