There is another controversy involving a police shooting. Jermane Reid was shot and killed after the Jaguar in which he was riding was pulled over for running a stop sign by Bridgeton officers Braheme Days and Roger Worley in a Dec. 30 traffic stop. When one officer reported seeing a handgun in the glove compartment, things got tense and ultimately led to the fatal shooting of the unarmed Reid. [Warning: the video and text includes foul language]
Driver, Leroy Tutt, is seen showing his hands throughout the encounter.
The officers are heard screaming over and over “Don’t you fucking move!” and “Show me your hands!” at the driver and passenger. Days repeatedly warns Reid not to move, screaming “I’m going to shoot you . . . You’re going to be … dead. If you reach for something, you’re going to be … dead.” However, Reid is heard saying “I ain’t got no reason to reach for nothing, bro, I ain’t got no reason to reach for nothing.” He then says, “I’m getting out and getting on the ground.” Days tells him not to move, but decides to step out of the Jaguar with his hands raised to shoulder height. He is then shot.
Clearly he should have obeyed the officer but his hands appear to be in clear view and Reid made clear that he was going to get out. Both officers appear to have fired at least six times. It is not clear if it was Reid or Days who opened the door. Under Tennessee v. Garner, there would be no justification for the use of lethal force in such a circumstance.
Reid, 36, had a record, including 13 years in prison for shooting at New Jersey State Police troopers when he was a teenager. He was also arrested last year on charges including drug possession and obstruction. Notably, Days was one of the arresting officers in the later arrests. That record however does not factor into the shooting if his hands were visible and there was no threatening behavior. Disobeying an order to remain in the car is obviously not sufficient cause for the use of lethal force under the controlling standard.
I completely fail to understand the construction “follow commands or die” in a free society. The officer(s) discharged their weapons at a point where no mortal threat existed. The mortal threat was merely a potentiality. “There *could* be another gun.” “The guy *might* be getting out to attack.”
By today’s insane ‘standards’ it’s almost certainly a good shoot. However it’s an unethical use of force, at the very least, and I can’t imagine the courts being lenient with a private citizen who shot under the same circumstances. Don’t get me wrong, I sure as hell wouldn’t have done the same as the victim – but his being shot at that point is pretty absurd. Putting myself in the officer’s position, I can think of a large number of tactical options to ensure my safety without discharging my weapon at the time he does. If, in the moment, he’s unable to react tactically other than to shoot, perhaps he’s unsuited for a job requiring split second decisions regarding the use of force?
I never felt myself particularly brave when I was in LP. I wasn’t trained, except for my Krav experience (almost useless for the work I was doing!), had no backup, no armor, just a folding knife (the use of which would almost certainly entail being fired right before being jailed and having my life ruined), not even bloody handcuffs. And yet over and over, I made those same split second decisions. I could share stories of mortal dangers, both real and imagined, that I experienced in my career, but it’s embarrassing and certainly won’t lend any weight to my words in the face of those who claim “Monday morning quarterbacking” and the like; after all – only police ever experience such things?
I maintain that this is a question society needs to take up. How many broadly unnecessary deaths at the hands of police do we wish to endure? Are we holding police to the appropriate standards in order for us to be the free nation we pretend. If the police are ill equipped in some way to meet the standards we desire, do we continue to simply change the standard to meet their behavior; do we increase training? Perhaps we simply make it a capital crime to piss off a cop who is trying to arrest you. To my mind however, the status quo absolutely cannot be defended by anyone who believes in the US Constitution or general liberty.
Cops are trained to approach on the passenger side for several reasons. The first is safety. Cops are killed by gapers looking @ traffic stops and also by the increasing number of distracted drivers. The passenger side is safer in that regard. Secondly, the passenger side gives the cop a better perspective, a better angle, of the front seat, since it’s also safer to be away from the vehicle farther. When you’re doing any type of surveillance, the angle is key. I have had discussions w/ cops about this. Most acknowledge it’s smarter and safer to do the passenger side approach, but they were trained years back to do the driver side approach. It’s my understanding the passenger side approach has been taught in more recent decade[s].
Raff, I bet you know the states in which judges can be appointed.
LOL! It’s always amusing to hear some people who were never a cop speak for cops, as if they knew what they were talking about. Some people don’t know anymore about this subject than any other non police person here.
Nick,
I am sad that you are losing your timing, sir.
Nick,
Sir, I also like it when you do your scoring. Sir, you never seem to lose. You are like Belichek and Brady, Sir. Not knowing if there are any guns or additional guns is not a legal reason to shoot an unarmed man with his hands up, sir. ASSUMING that there are other guns is fine, sir, but you don’t shoot first and look later. That is police training and BASIC common sense for any officer sir. You are 0-100 in all categories, sir.
“Isn’t it rich..isn’t it queer..losing my timing this late in my career, send in the clowns,..No, wait, they’re heeeere.” Stephen Sondheim
“The cop had the only known gun.” Are you kidding me? You ASSUME there are other weapons until it is PROVEN there are not. That is police training. and BASIC common sense. You are 0-2 in both categories.
Reason for the stop: black man driving a jaguar (remember Jonny Gammage?)
Why did cop go to passenger side for a traffic stop? When I’ve been stopped, with or without a passenger, the cop came to the driver side.
I’ve been traveling. Before I left home I put license and registration and insurance card in special pocket in my purse where I would not have to search for them. They would have been on my dash by the time the cop got to the car. I think I’ll keep them there, I know we have lying cops at home too.
bettykath – it is standard to cover the passenger as well (Bonnie and Clyde come to mind). In this case I do not see a valid defense for the cops.
Nick,
Sir, I always enjoy your capitalized remarks. Sir,The cop had the only known gun, what if the gun was registered to the driver or a passenger and they had a conceal carry permit? Sir, We don’t know either way. Sir, The idea that there may be ANOTHER GUN IS NOT AN EXCUSE TO SHOOT A MAN 7 TIMES WHEN HE HAS HIS HANDS UP! Cops do have to follow the law, or at least they used to have to follow it. Under your theory, sir, the cops should always be drawing their guns and shooting because there may be another gun. Have a nice day, sir.
“Would a white person driving the Jag, with a gun in the glove box be alive or dead today?”
Rafflaw,
Yes. Next question:
How many traffic stops have been conducted within the last 24 hours (involving weapons in the car) that did not result in anyone getting shot? How many of those involved a non-white individual?
One of the cops was black, so there’s that. And I’ll rent you a Jag and give you my Glock, I know you don’t have a gun. You can drive around running stop signs and let us know the result.
A normal level of fear is expected. A hysterical overreaction is not. Talk about vapid.
Gee Raff, do you think THERE MIGHT BE ANOTHER GUN?? WTF??
Another unnecessary death. If the cops had the gun in their possession, there is no need to shoot this traffic stop perp. Would a white person driving the Jag, with a gun in the glove box be alive or dead today?
Lot’s of vapid and stupid questions. Here’s something we know for certain. The cop shooter is dead because he didn’t follow orders. There are many A-HOLE cops who like to show you just who is in charge. This cop was not one evidenced by his demeanor when it was initially just a traffic stop. I taught my kids and students their Constitutional rights regarding searching their vehicle. But I STRESSED, you assert your rights w/ smiles and “Yes, sir and No, sir.” You can buck up and get shot, or comply and live. The stupid, testosterone filled ones get shot. My main man in the car should have stayed in the car, as ordered. I’m very happy the cop is alive. It’s too bad the cop shooter is dead. But, it’s on him. No one has noted this cop was calm and respectful until he saw A GUN. That, Monday Morning QB’s, is a whole other ball game. Particularly when it’s inches from a COP SHOOTER. The fools suggesting this cop was frightened, well only a FOOL would not be frightened.
Kind of like this guy:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-state-assembly-speaker-sheldon-silver-faces-arrest-1421909938
dryack – amen.
I believe just like in the thread involving the Santa Rosa attorney, bad cops and bad attorneys stain an otherwise honorable professions. The challenge is to weed them out at the local level so that they cannot inflict their incompetence at the state or federal level. The People have proven themselves to be very poor gardeners.
Why was there the immediate aggressionand near hysteria when a gun was found in the glove compartment? Why didn’t they get the two guys out of the car with hands up immediatly? Is this how white males in a good neighborhood would be treated when a gun is found on them or in the glove compartment?What if the gun is legally owned?