There is a very disturbing videotape out today that left me stunned and frankly irate. While I have sometimes questioned the evidence of police abuse in some high-profile cases where there is a gun present or extenuating circumstances, I can see no such circumstances in the shooting of Charles Kinsey in North Miami. Kinsey is a dedicated caretaker at an assisted living facility who went outside to calm down a young autistic man. Neither was armed and, at the time of the shooting, Kinsey had his hands up as he tried to get the troubled young man to lay on his stomach. Police fired three rounds, hitting Kinsey.
Kinsey said that the autistic man simply had a toy truck in his hand that was mistaken as a gun. Someone called police to say that the man was threatening suicide. The man sat on the street playing with the white toy truck.
Kinsey is heard telling the young man “Lay down on your stomach,” but the autistic man responds “Shut up. Shut up, you idiot.” Kinsey remains professional and calm. He asks the police “Can I get up now? Can I get up?” He also tries to defuse the situation and tells the police that there is no threat: “All he has is a toy truck in his hand. A toy truck. I am a behavioral therapist at a group home. . . . That’s all it is [referring to the toy truck] That’s all it is. There is no need for guns.”
Police respond by shouting “Let me see your hands” and shouting at the autistic man to “Get on the ground. Get on the ground.”
As the autistic man makes noise, Kinsey says “Rinaldo, please be still. Sit down, Rinaldo. Lay on your stomach.”
Soon after the police fire three bullets and hit Kinsey near his right knee, exiting his upper thigh.
Police then put the injured Kinsey into handcuffs as well as the autistic man with the toy truck.
In this videotape, you hear a bystander in disbelief of why they shot the health care worker:
The responsible officer is on administrative leave pending an investigation. At a minimum, it would be helpful for the police to reveal the alleged justification for the shooting of Kinsey because none of this make any sense. Under Tennessee v. Garner, “deadly force…may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others.” Thus, the Supreme Court rejected the prior fleeing felon rule when the felon did not pose an immediate threat to society. Under Graham v. Connor, this is determined according to an “objective reasonableness” standard but a calculus that considers the split second decision-making in such circumstances. I see no such grounds in this videotape.
What do you think?
The description of the incident is shocking and disturbing. I think this officer, and the entire department, is going to be in a lot of trouble after this is investigated. Even if the shooting was accidental, that would mean there was a training issue, and he should have lowered his weapon immediately once the man identified himself as a behavior therapist and the suspect as holding a toy truck and autistic. Cops spend so many hours on the range to prevent mistakes such as the accidental discharge of a weapon, and the first is a long pull anyway. Subsequent shots are easier to accidentally discharge. And if he shot on purpose then he’s really in trouble. I don’t know how he would defend himself with the therapist right there saying it was a toy truck.
The department is in trouble because this behavior reflects a possible lack of training for the mentally ill. Autistic kids have a lot more support and tolerance from the community than autistic adults. And with the rise of Alzheimers, cops are going to encounter a lot more people annually unable to comply with direction.
Compare and contrast this incident with the one where the cop sat down with an autistic child, without making eye contact (which is uncomfortable) and calmed him. Complete difference in instinct or training.
I cannot watch the video, but in this case it appears we have a view of the incident from beginning, middle, and end. I hope you provide us an update on how this turns out, and I hope the therapist will be OK. Even though he was “only shot in the leg” that could mean his knee was shattered, or other long term soft tissue damage, as well as the mental trauma. God bless him for staying with his charge, and praying for his full recovery.
This phenomenon of cops frequently drawing their guns in situations that obviously don’t call for it seems to be a relatively recent development. It must have something to do with the training they get.
A minimum IQ of,say, 110 would weed out a lot of people who shouldn’t be cops. I’m suggesting 110 because that was the cutoff score for OCS when I was in the US Army. Numerous studies have shown that IQ is highly correlated with job performance.
Bulldog, I was at a City of San Diego meeting where the police chief was asking for additional funding to pay for the consequence of PTSD from the 40% in the Academy that are former military . No mention how to minimise the damage or help those with PTSD
Scot, the three shots maybe the setting for automatic fire
In the “old” days, the cop would have helped get the autistic man back into the home. It’s a blessing that, this time, the cop didn’t murder the unarmed guy or both of them.
I continue to wonder how many cops are military veterans who are responding to events as if they are in a war zone, rather than in a community. And how many of them have PTSD?
One news report I read said that Kinsey asked the officer “Why did you shoot me?” and the officer responded “I don’t know.” Objectively unreasonable, indubitably.
Painters paint. Surgeons cut. Folks with guns shoot.
Completely defies explanation. Makes me wonder how creative the Miami police will become to rationalize it.
If the video is a fair representation of what happened it is a disturbing abuse of power. It was not an accidental shooting. It was intentional. We know that because three rounds were fired. That takes three pulls of the trigger.
The video has been edited. The viewer does not know what transpired in the split second prior to the shooting or the actual shooting. That matters.
chickenshit
Sue everyone, not sure what standard shields an officer from liability, but the department, at least, should be liable for failure to have any justification for shooting.
Black men are endangered species unfortunately with 0 accountability.
Higher standards, much more demanding training of police officers in Miami, among other cities.
Thank god Kinsey is alive. I’ve been a defender of men in blue and feel each case should be looked at individually rather than lumping them all together as having one root cause. This is awful! This man did everything he could to show he meant no harm and was not an aggressor.
The power of a prone Black man and another playing with a toy not-a-gun. Or another panty-waist cop. smh.
They really need to do more psychological and IQ testing of applicants. The IQ test should be used to weed out the stupid, rather than the intelligent.
Hardly a good shooting.
The police have no, repeat NO training on how to handle a mentally disturbed person. But this cop ?????
One reads the papers hoping for a breath of the truth. In this case the police department should simply say, “One of our officers did not have the capacity to be a police officer. The department made a mistake when it made him a police officer. He has been removed from the force and we are determining how he could have slipped through. It is our intention to better screen applicants in order to obtain and train officers that can make reasonable judgement.”
The problem is that authority can never admit its faults and weaknesses. To do so would take away the fear factor, the ‘We never make mistakes’ factor, and authority would be that much less efficient.
The Black guy that was shot was doing just about as much as he could do to illustrate that he was not a threat. One has to wonder if that is a result of previous shoot first scenarios by the police. The first robot on Robocop comes to mind. Even if you do assume the position, “I don’t know.”
The tyranny rationale for the 2nd Amendment makes more and more sense every time this sort of shit happens. Well done, out-of-control cops and the people who protect them.
Sigh, or should I say Grrrr. Another day another shooting of an innocent man because is black. Will the po-lice be held accountable? Methinks not.
My guess is the officer did not have control of his weapon. in a similar case, SWAT blew the head off an Optometrist while serving a citation for gambling. The officer was not disciplined as he claimed his finger cramped on the trigger. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/26/AR2006012602136.html
Reports vary if it was a handgun or rifle and if it was fired into his chest or head. Family got $2 million.