Glock Talk banner

Black off duty St. Louis PD officer shot. Claims cause he's black.

2K views 45 replies 26 participants last post by  steveksux 
#1 ·
#2 ·
If only the car thieves would have been white criminals who decided to have a rolling shootout with Police... but nooooooooooooooooo.

O dark thirty? Well lit scene? Late comer rushing in? One shooter still out there? Off duty have weapon in hand, holstered, left on ground? Let the investigators investigate. Chips fall where they may.

Hope recovery is full and fast for victim.

No good deed goes unpunished (off duty rushing in to aid fellow officers) one supposes.

Lawyers... gotta open mouth and say something to focus fault and glean reward of compensation for pain and suffering and loss of potential monies earned (was it same lawyer who helped MB's momma/daddy negotiate settlement with Ferguson on their loss of potential monies earned from their unarmed saintlike son shot down before his criminal prime?)
Waiting for Stacey Newman to somehow blame this on Missouri constitutional carry law she's obsessed with.
Are you thinking Stacey Newman will link the two? (I had to look her up to catch your reference)
 
#7 ·
If only the car thieves would have been white criminals who decided to have a rolling shootout with Police... but nooooooooooooooooo.

O dark thirty? Well lit scene? Late comer rushing in? One shooter still out there? Off duty have weapon in hand, holstered, left on ground? Let the investigators investigate. Chips fall where they may.

Hope recovery is full and fast for victim.

No good deed goes unpunished (off duty rushing in to aid fellow officers) one supposes.

Lawyers... gotta open mouth and say something to focus fault and glean reward of compensation for pain and suffering and loss of potential monies earned (was it same lawyer who helped MB's momma/daddy negotiate settlement with Ferguson on their loss of potential monies earned from their unarmed saintlike son shot down before his criminal prime?)
Are you thinking Stacey Newman will link the two? (I had to look her up to catch your reference)
She somehow will. She's the most liberal and crazed person in the Missouri house. She's friends with Rosie too. In 2003 she somehow came up with money to pay for the bond to get that activist judge to put an injunction on the ice law passed. She hates the fact Missouri passed constitutional carry and that each year republicans laugh at her anti gun bills and slap her down. She's more liberal than Pelosi.
 
#3 ·
From what I have been told, off duty and plain clothed police officers run an enormous risk of not being identified as officers when things are heated, it happens whether they are white, black or any other color. Of course, it is not as easy to find those other articles, making it about race sells “news”. In other cases it would have been considered an inherent danger of the job; it can’t be as easily sensationalized.

If anyone is going to financially benefit because of the color of their skin, I have fewer issues if it be someone who was attempting to do a good deed at the time; just wish that wasn’t one of the reasons used.
 
#4 ·
Very unfortunate. But the dangers of off duty/plain clothes LEOs getting involved, especially when other officers are already present, are well known. We've all seen videos of how quickly something can go to hell in seconds.

If the off-duty LEO's skin colour was the reason he was shot, why didn't the first two officers (who ordered him to the ground) shoot him? IDK.
 
#5 ·
Waiting for Stacey Newman to somehow blame this on Missouri constitutional carry law she's obsessed with.
I don't know who Stacy Newman is, but you know that haters have the luxury of time. And hindsight. And the bulletproof protection of a keyboard. In real life, they have the luxury of using paper, pencil and a big eraser to think, re-think and re-rethink their plans through. And time. They have the luxury of time to make slow and deliberate decisions. And to fine tune (or revise) those decisions when necessary.

Basically they're useless when it comes to make life and death decision while under stress. I'm sure they'll tell you otherwise.
 
#6 ·
As stated, the possibility of a blue-on-blue shooting is pretty high when off-duty or plainclothes officers are involved. We usually include off-duty/plainclothes targets in our threat assessment portion of firearms training, where officers have to make the shoot/don't shoot decision. We also include a uniformed officer target. The plainclothes guy is invariably riddled with holes, while the uniformed officer is nearly always unscathed. When we debrief the scenario and ask the officers what they saw that made them decide to fire on the plainclothes officer, the answer is always "the hands, and the gun the hands were holding." Since the article mentions race as a factor, I should note that the target we typically use is a white officer with a badge clipped to his belt. We drill into their heads that watching the hands only a small part of a proper threat assessment, but even on the range, under only the stress of a timed paper target, people get tunnel vision, so in a real life dynamic situation, its no surprise that plainclothes involvement is high risk.
 
#8 ·
if the cop is really claiming that he was shot because he is black, then he is a disgrace to the badge. even the stupidest rookie knows when off duty you do not jump in with gun in hand in plain clothes when other cops are around. there are plenty of white dope cops that have been shot because they failed to follow that simple rule.
 
#12 ·
His attorney has, assuming the article is correct.

An attorney cannot go against client’s wishes. In some cases, they won’t even take your case unless you agree play by "their" rules. Nearly 30 years ago I did not pursue a legitimate case because the attorneys I visited would not accept the case without adding some things that weren’t true. At the time, I didn’t have the money to pursue it by paying an attorney, my only recourse was to seek one that take it on a contingent bases.

A “friendly fire” incident in which an off-duty St. Louis policeman was shot while coming to the aid of fellow officers has taken on racial overtones after an incendiary claim by the injured officer’s attorney: The officer was viewed as a threat because he was black.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baba Louie
#9 ·
The story points out that there was no indication of why the officer who fired considered himself in danger. The problem is this...if there is no evidence upon which you can base a conclusion, there is no evidence upon which you can base a conclusion. That the black officer or his attorney conclude that racism was the cause means that racism is the default unless you can prove otherwise. That is, in fact, a racist assumption. It is called confirmation bias. They want to see racism, so they do.

I do not know why the officer fired. Pretending I know when there is no evidence would only be perpetuating an error in logic.

I hope it was not racially influenced. Based on these facts, there is no way to know.

David
 
#10 ·
For the record, I didn't read where the off duty Officer made the claim, only his attorney.
...incendiary claim by the injured officer’s attorney: The officer was viewed as a threat because he was black.
Washington Post. Lead off sentence... an attention grabber for sure.

Agenda or News? 2 for the price of 1? (Monty Burns voice-over... Excellent) Gotta get those clicks for advertising money. I clicked twice now... just to re-read.
 
#13 ·
For the record, I didn't read where the off duty Officer made the claim, only his attorney.Washington Post. Lead off sentence... an attention grabber for sure.

Agenda or News? 2 for the price of 1? (Monty Burns voice-over... Excellent) Gotta get those clicks for advertising money. I clicked twice now... just to re-read.
An attorney cannot make such claims against his/her client wishes. If they do, they are fired and should be forced to provide a public apology for lying and misrepresenting the wishes of his client.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baba Louie
#20 ·
I guarantee the off duty guy is in violation of policy on how to handle such a thing going by what the article said.

this is how I know.

http://www.slmpd.org/calea.shtml
 
#22 ·
An off-duty officer who lives nearby heard the commotion, grabbed his service pistol and headed to the scene to assist his fellow officers. He arrived as the other officers were carrying out the arrest.
Rushing uninvited into a situation?
As he left his home, he just grabbed his service pistol?
No holster, no belt, no radio, no vest, no badge, no raid jacket, not even his hat?

I'll bet it was a black gun that shot him.
 
#23 ·
Unless I hear the voice of the shooting officer say "die black man die!" Pew pew. I don't see evidence of a hate crime just friendly fire. Always a risk in multi-shooter engagement.
* I hope the officer makes a full recovery and continues to serve.
 
#26 ·
Based on what the article said, they had enough officers on scene and didn't need the off-duty being involved. The only time to get involved off duty is if someone will die or suffer a serious injury if you don't take immediate action.

I hope that every agency includes off-duty scenario training and policy review as part of their repertoire. To not do so is professional negligence.
 
#27 ·
Perhaps there is one bright light shining in this tunnel (not the train approaching I hope) and that is that the present administration DOJ is not the past administration's DOJ.

It might turn out that being shot in the arm (don't know where in which arm but...) could force the Officer to retire if in fact the wound was such that he cannot do his present job to his full capacity. In which case, IMO, he does deserve compensatory monies, training, whatever he needs to live a full life. At least that's how I would see it if in fact the shot destroyed his hand/wrist, shoulder or elbow joint, etc.

#Blue Lives Matter, skin tone does not, in this case and all cases as I see it. Both of the Officer's parents raised them and did it well enough their sons chose to sacrifice and serve in a hard, split second decision making profession entailing life or death at times. 1* as it were.

Now his lawyers parents... no... I won't go there. I know a few good attorneys. They'll say or do whatever they need to say or do to help their clients. Like firearms, fire extinguishers and LEOs, I'd rather have one and not need him/her than the other way around...

(an aside... I really hope former Officer Darren Wilson is now doing well in something he loves doing)
 
#29 ·
I'm more than willing to help an officer when I'm off duty if he's getting his butt handed to him, injured etc.

I'm not willing to go running into an active shooting scene where there are numerous cops already onscene with undoubtedly numerous more enroute, with no vest or uniform, no radio to let them know I'm coming (cause we expect off duty guys to come help out...) and carrying a gun in my hand, at night. But I'm also not super cop either.

I feel little for the dumb off duty cop who got shot, who now appears through his lawyer (why would he need a lawyer?) to be pimping the race card. Be ready for allegations of active KKK members in that department, just salivating for the opportunity to shoot one of their own black officers.

I feel for the cop who shot him. Suspiciously missing from the story is the race of the bad guys from the stolen vehicle, one of whom was still outstanding (black male, armed with a handgun maybe??)
 
#31 ·
He probably has a lawyer because even though he was helping he knows he screwed up, I worked UC and would not think of running on a scene unless another officer or person was in grave danger. He was off duty If he was not wearing a throw over vest with ID and a holster on his belt he had no business being on that scene as a cop with gun drawn.
I don't know all the cops on my agency and we are probably 1/2 the size of his.
 
#32 ·
He probably has a lawyer because even though he was helping he knows he screwed up, I worked UC and would not think of running on a scene unless another officer or person was in grave danger. He was off duty If he was not wearing a throw over vest with ID and a holster on his belt he had no business being on that scene as a cop with gun drawn.
I don't know all the cops on my agency and we are probably 1/2 the size of his.
When I was in patrol I probably only knew 150 cops by sight (academy classmates, division members, and random ones I knew from working calls on the division border) out of about 1800 sworn.

From the other article I read it seems the first officers proned him out, recognized him, had them come to them, another officer arrives on scene and sees him with a gun and shoots.
 
#36 ·
When I was in patrol I probably only knew 150 cops by sight (academy classmates, division members, and random ones I knew from working calls on the division border) out of about 1800 sworn.

From the other article I read it seems the first officers proned him out, recognized him, had them come to them, another officer arrives on scene and sees him with a gun and shoots.
yes that is bad command and control all the way around
 
#33 ·
Some of the retirees of NYPD or their neighbouring PD's could prob add to this. Back in the seventies NYPD had a bad track record for blue on blue shootings. As I was told the top brass pleaded with all outside agencies which included Fed, State an any other LE that conducted business in NYC not to get involved unless absolutely life threatening. NYPD ofr's coming upon or involved in a shooting were to look an take out anyone that didn't have a S&W model 10 in their hands. It was their thinking that any other gun shown was held by a bad guy. Problem was that several agencies had transitioned to semi's in that era an it led to a few unintended deaths.
 
#35 ·
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top