There is an interesting case out of Orlando that raises questions about the use of felony murder charges by prosecutors whenever there is a fatality in the commission of a crime. Kody Roach was charged with felony murder even though he never fired a shot and the victim, Maria Fernada Godinez, 22, was actually killed by a police officer.
According to reports, three officers were dispatched to the Vixen Bar after a bouncer reported to a 911 operator that “I have a gun-wielding maniac. He set it on the bar top and he wielded it many times. I had to throw him out.” While the bouncer was unarmed, he was able to remove Roach from the bar but when the first two officers arrived, Officer Eduardo Sanguino and a fellow bicycle officer, Jeff Angel, they said that Roach was at the bar’s locked door.
News reports state that “surveillance video obtained by Vixen Bar shows Roach dropping his gun after he was kicked out of the bar for carrying a gun.” However, that does not appear to be the account of the officers.
They say that Roach walked to the street “pointing his right hand at the officers,” and ignored commands to get on the ground. Instead, he began to walk back toward the bar. Angel fired his Taser but said that the taser had little effect due to Roach’s loose clothing. They say that Roach went for his waistband with his right hand, and according to the affidavit in the case:
“In order to prevent an armed individual from causing harm to any members of the public or to any of the surrounding officers, Ofc. Sanguino discharges his firearm nine times striking Roach at least five times.”
They say that when he fell, Roach dropped a .40 caliber Ruger handgun from his right hand — a stolen gun that was later found the gun to be unloaded. Only Sanguino appears to have fired any shots.
It was then that the officers learned that one of their bullets had passed through a hole and hit Fernanda Godinez.
The use of the felony murder charge has long been controversial in such cases, particularly because some have questioned why an unarmed bouncer could remove Rouch but three officers had to fire multiple shots to subdue him. We have previously discussed the sharp statistical difference between officer shootings in this country as opposed to other countries.
Roach however has not been charged in the stolen-gun case — a charge stemming from the disappearance of a weapon from a friend’s apartment after an argument. Notably, Roach has a criminal history dating back to 2009 that includes charges of battery on a law-enforcement officer, grand theft, violating probation and driving with a suspended license.
The Florida felony murder statute (like virtually all such statutes) does not require that the perpetrator pull the trigger or even know of or support the ultimate act. He is only required to have been engaged in a felony during which a life was taken. However, the law was designed with murders in mind that were caused by co-conspirators like a partner shooting a convenience store clerk. Here it was the police who killed the woman and Rouch had an unloaded weapon. Ideally, such cases are handled by prosecutorial discretion but prosecutors today radically inflate charges to force defendants to take tough plea agreements or face life in prison.
The officers clearly have a right to defend themselves and they may indeed be cleared of any wrongdoing. However, there remains the question of whether the death of this young lady should be charged as murder against Rouch. He is by no means blameless of course but the case raises the question of the reasonable limits (or any limits) in the charging of felony murder in such cases.
What do you think?
Kudos: Michael Blott
‘Cops’ crew member killed in Omaha police shooting
http://www.8newsnow.com/story/26385788/cops-crew-member-killed-in-omaha-police-shooting
Jack, Do you know the story behind that photo. Very respectful of you to keep it wrapped unless someone clicks.
Haz, The commenter @ 7:34 is someone I and many others ignore. Just sayn’.
Charge & convict the cop with murder. Period.
Yeah, Limey, let’s hang him, then give him a fair trial and a nice burial.
heres something many seem to be missing and/ or ignoring thats the fact that cops these days lie 9 times out of 10 about the threat and the fear. are any of you sure the guy reached toward his waist? how about this scenario maybe the guy if he reached towards his waist being drunk was trying to reach in a pocket for his phone?!!! as for the 1/2 second decision rule yeah we’ve seen that work so great so many times re amadou diallo, sean bell, and many others who were also unarmed. its that 1/2 second decision that has cost too many innocents their lives. and if it were your family member who was now dead would you still be here defending that 1/2 decision process? i get what you all are saying but you forget or ignore the fact that no one FORCED them to join the academy they do so with the full knowledge of what the job entails sadly it seems they no longer care about that the people just about how much crime they can commit for the bad ones and for the good ones they are fighting for survival from both ends the criminals of society and the rogue brothers/sisters in blue.
“cops these days lie 9 times out of 10 about the threat and the fear. ”
What is your source for this data?
You’re welcome, Karen.
David, I almost forgot to address the video you supplied. — Did you notice that the cop who fired the shots was the cop that came out from behind and yelled “gun”? The guy in front thought the bad guy was putting his weapon on the ground. The cop in the back saw that the bad guys was pulling out a pistol with his right hand. –That’s how fast things go bad.
Why not complain about the 3 shots fired? In that case only 3 shots were fired and the guy is dead. In the case we’re talking about, 9 shots were fired, 5 of them hit, and the guy is alive. So, do you want 3 shots or 9 shots?
Jack wrote: “So, do you want 3 shots or 9 shots?”
I don’t want any shots. My previous point was that police need to be trained to treat the mentally ill and intoxicated somewhat differently. Also, I don’t think a 30% hit rate on people, and 55% hit rate on dogs is acceptable. I don’t think it is acceptable that over 1,000 citizens a year are killed by cops. I think that number can be reduced.
Their normal excuse is, “well, I told him to put down the gun and he did not comply.” That’s even their excuse when they stop a deaf man walking down the street and shoot him dead when he doesn’t comply with his verbal command (did you ever see that case?). I don’t know if you have ever been arrested or ordered by the police to either raise hands, get down on the ground, up against the car, etc., but it sometimes can be rather confusing what they are screaming at you to do. It especially is confusing if the cop is saying to put the gun down, and that person has no gun. Cops have all the power, but they often are motivated by fear because they are bombarded in their training that they are going to get killed if they don’t shoot at the slightest provocation.
I certainly agree their job is difficult and very dangerous. In this particular case, it is likely that the police officer who shot Roach was following standard police procedures. The problem is that if he was, then those procedures probably led to an unnecessary death of this poor young girl in the bar.
Roach is a bad man. He deserves to be charged with a number of crimes in this situation. But I do not think he deserves to be charged with killing this girl. The police are the ones who created the situation for the girl to be killed, either by the poor marksmanship of the officer or by the police policies that instruct the officer to unload a wild volley of bullets on an intoxicated man who might be going for a gun in his waistband.
Oh my God. Why did I open that picture?
Jack:
Thanks for explaining the protocol. That makes sense, if she was shot through the wall.
Jack:
Thanks for the video. That’s exactly what I’m concerned about. There are some quick draws out there. I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect cops to allow someone to actually draw on them.
If you click on the box where the image would be above, it will open up the image. (Warning, it is not for the faint of heart. But it’s a cop..so what do some care. It’s what he signed up for. Right?)
David,
Do you really think you understand the situation well enough to challenge the use of force continuum current followed?
“It is very disturbing to me that the officer fired nine shots, missing almost half the time, and not killing his target even when he hit him five times!”
At this point I guess I should ask; How much firearms experience do you have? Having a concealed weapons permit doesn’t require much training. In fact, Florida will issue a CCW to a veteran who has 1/2 day of training. Ask John Oliver how much firearms training he received in Navy Boot Camp. You’ll find it wasn’t much.
I see you’re a bullet counter. When you consider that, on average, only 1 in 3 bullets hit the target, and that only 1 in 3 bullets hits in a place that would effectively stop the threat; How many bullets should have been fired to stop the threat? (Of course a number of factors can effect the result, but it would seem that , on average, 9 bullets would be reasonable.)
I’m not going to get into drunk, or mentally challenged. None of those are relevant factors once a gun comes into play.
Here’s what happens when a police officer thinks he can disarm a guy with a knife. Maybe it will give you an idea of why You bring a gun to knife fight. It definitely should help to explain why you don’t try kung fu on a guy with a gun.
Never, ever underestimate your opponent.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2ioj3gx3vakxwnu/trying%20to%20disarm1.jpg
Karen S.
“…where was the woman who was shot?”
She was a patron inside the bar. The incident took place outside of the bar.
“Inside, and struck through the wall?”
Yes. That is my understanding.
“Basic gun safety hammers into you that you are responsible for the background of your target.”
You are. This is especially true when target practicing. However, sometimes the police don’t have the luxury of clearing the backdrop first. Sometimes it becomes a kill or be killed situation. When that happens, you do your best and hope that if anyone gets hurt, it’s the bad guy.
“are cops trained to shoot as soon as someone reaches in the direction of a gun?”
Every situation is different. See the video above. For the most part, the officer can fire if he is in reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily harm to himself or others.
“or do they take the risk and try to talk him down?”
That’s going to depend a lot on distance, available cover, and other things. The use of force continuum is based on over a century of law enforcement. There are a lot of dead cops who tried to be the nice guy when they should have taken the shot. There are also a lot of dead innocent bystanders as the result of a police officer who tried to be the nice guy.
Jack – don’t forget the unarmed guy in NYC who reached for his wallet and was killed by a hail of bullets from several cops. One of them yelled “Gun” and the guy was dead. There was no gun. Just bad lighting.
Fast and Furious *sound of crickets*
Benghazi *sound of crickets*
Cop shoots gun *proggs go apocalyptic*
Here’s a video of a guy drawing and firing, Once the guy starts to draw, tell me what words you’re going to say to him. How long did it take you to say those words? Will you be repeating them in heaven or in hell? 🙂
http://youtu.be/5oDoS2qH8Ag
Felony murder seems completely inappropriate in this case.
Here’s what I don’t understand – where was the woman who was shot? Standing there in clear view of the officers? Inside, and struck through the wall? Did she unluckily step out right as the shooting started? There’s some information missing that also bears on the culpability of the officers. Typically, officers would clear bystanders right when they arrive.
Basic gun safety hammers into you that you are responsible for the background of your target.
I am sure they are going to investigate how she was in harm’s way in the first place.
I get that these officers who showed up couldn’t have known that the guy seemed amenable to the bouncer. Can the law enforcement on this site answer this question – are cops trained to shoot as soon as someone reaches in the direction of a gun, or do they take the risk and try to talk him down? Someone can draw and fire pretty quickly, if they’ve been trained, so I’m actually unsure if offers are trained to fire if someone even appears to begin to draw.
Question:
Since the bar was able to toss him out without anyone getting shot at or killed… Why did the police need to?
I still don’t think some people here are getting it!
Even if the woman was standing right behind the bad guy, in plain view of the officer, he can take the shot, and if the woman is hit, he is still not criminally negligent. At no time does the officer abandon his right to self-defense. The police officer just has to take reasonable precautions and take reasonable steps to safeguard innocent persons.
That’s not to say that the woman’s family, if she was killed (or the woman herself, if she didn’t die) could not sue the city, county, state, but that would be a civil action.
Jack, I don’t understand your emphasis on 1/2 second. I don’t think this situation was like that. I mentioned church street and the nightclub environment because for people who have been there, they can understand that this man was drunk and could have been handled probably pretty easily with a grab and shakedown approach. The guy bangs on the door, then goes order a slice of pizza, apparently oblivious to the obnoxious nature he communicates to those around him. Police should be familiar with how to deal with an intoxicated man like this, just like the bartender was.
What this situation reminds me of is the story of the homeless man James Boyd in Albuquerque that we discussed on this blog back in April.
http://jonathanturley.org/2014/04/02/new-mexico-police-under-fire-after-video-shows-officers-shooting-homeless-man-in-the-back/
In that case, the police did not make accommodations for dealing with a mentally ill man. The whole thing was caught on video, and in my opinion, the police were overly aggressive and escalated the situation. Notably, the police released the video thinking it would exonerate them in the eyes of the public. It did not have that effect on me.
In this case, I think the police should adjust to the fact that the man was intoxicated. We don’t have video of the event, so perhaps they did act appropriately, but from what I read, I am very skeptical of that. It is very disturbing to me that the officer fired nine shots, missing almost half the time, and not killing his target even when he hit him five times! They were close enough to attempt to taser the guy. Something just does not smell right about this to me.
By the way, I am a gun owner in Florida, and I have a Concealed Weapons Permit.
You can make fun of the kung fu comment and joke about me watching too many movies, but I am serious. Martial arts is a very effective tool, and it makes a man confident of his abilities to disarm another man without killing him. The police mentality seems to be a standard, just make sure you kill the guy before he kills you. As a result, sometimes innocent people get killed, like the guy shot for retrieving his cane.
Following is a video that shows cops shooting a man the right way in the 1/2 second decision that you describe. I have no problem with this situation. Three shots, guy down, no stray bullets:
http://youtu.be/rM4kyiHSY2w
I can’t wait until the cops start shooting people instead of handing out traffic tickets, should save a lot of man hours in traffic ticket paperwork.
He was brandishing the weapon at the time of the shooting it sounds like that’s what happened. The bar ejected him for carrying and should have stopped him from entering in the first place. The officer needs to think before he shoots at a building so retraining is in order, the prosecutor won’t be able to make this case stick without Mens Rea.
When my Navy ship was to arrive in the Philippines in the early 80’s we were briefed about laws and customs. I recall hearing about a strange law (I don’t know if it was true) that all the passengers on a bus that crashes could be held liable for any harm to the driver. The reasoning was, had the passengers not needed the ride then the bus driver would never have been involved in the crash.
It seems like many of these cases of alleged abuse by law enforcement amount to that same principle; had the Officer(s) not been called to the scene then the abuse could not have been possible.