Glock Forum - GlockTalk banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Rational
Joined
·
14,582 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just wondering if you think the second shot was necessary. The suspect died of his wounds.


Posted in February of this year.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,249 Posts
The other officer getting out of his vehicle, didn't even draw his gun, and was (clearly startled) by the second shot. :headscratch:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,226 Posts
"Riding the reset" or just hyper-adrenalized? Reason for first shot isn't real obvious, but the second looked like it could've been unintentional? I've done stuff like that at the pistol range. Let one off a tad early while focusing on target and taking up trigger. Not overtly negligent, just rapid sequential events going on and one gets a little ahead of the other.
Sorry the guy's dead. Sorry the officer had to do what he did. Good shot actually. Got him right before he got covered.
Looked like he was carrying a piece of pipe or something when the cop got out at first.
 

·
Unfair Facist
Joined
·
26,890 Posts
As others have noted you really can't tell much from the video.

What did appear to me was that after the first shot the guy is laying on his back facing the officer who fired. Then he appears to be on his knees facing away from the officer with his arms held inward in the front of his body. Then the officer fires the other shot.

Questions to be answered,

Why does he get off his back and get on his knees facing away from the approaching officer that fired the shots?

Why are his arms held inward in front of his body?

Maybe the audio holds some clues I couldn't hear it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bruce M and pgg00

·
Millenium #3936
Joined
·
6,400 Posts
I don't understand why the last shot was taken




and that's the problems with a narrow and one dimensional body cam. Why don't we simply begin with what the officer has said about his own actions? That's a good place to start.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,986 Posts
I can't see what he saw.
I see a guy about 10-12ft away w/ a long metal pole (that he has already threatened the officer with once)... The first shot makes perfect sense to me.

The second one.. I suspect that was an ND.. did that hit him?

Moral of the story, don't threaten and swing large metal poles at cops.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bus007

·
Director of civil unrest
Joined
·
9,930 Posts
As the officer was exiting the cruiser, you can hear the perp. hitting the cruiser at least once with the pipe. Although not a lethal blow to the officer, it was definitely an indication of what he had in mind. He appeared to be moving away as he was shot? It doesn't look as though he had room to actually swing at the officer while between the cars either. Not something that anyone could ascertain "in the moment" the way I see it. As some have said, I wasn't there, I didn't have to deal with this whacko so I'll hold judgement on this one. Not good any way you slice it.
 

·
Rational
Joined
·
14,582 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
To answer some people's questions: yes, he was swinging a large metal pipe, and he did strike the cruiser with it (I believe he shattered a window, but I cannot be certain of that).

The video info is as follows:

Louisville lawyers are going to bat for the family of a western Kentucky man fatally shot by police. The incident happened in Fulton and was caught on the officer body's camera video.

The footage was captured in January 16 2017. Police say 43-year-old Charles Christopher McClure was swinging a metal pole at parked cars and breaking windows. His lawyers acknowledge there was also a knife taped to the pole, and that McClure had some mental health issues. They say he was so upset, because he hadn't been able to see his kids.

When Fulton Police were called, McClure started to take his frustrations out on the chief's SUV. He called for backup, then lawyer's say Officer James "Buck" Buckingham showed up and seconds later fired two shots. McClure died at the hospital.

Louisville lawyers say his life didn't have to end that way and that officers acted with unnecessary force. The attorneys also claim there was a cover up afterward to make it seem like Buckingham should have fired his gun. For those reasons, McClure's family has sued the officer, the city of Fulton and Kentucky State Police investigators. "I think the brunt of the lawsuit really stems from the fact that after Chris is on the ground, 'Buck' comes up to him, and from point blank range, without any justification, no reason whatsoever, fires an execution shot," said attorney Larry Forman.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,775 Posts
Would like to see the other officers body cam as well. An argument could be made that the perp rolled over towards the pole with knife taped to it and the officer thought he was trying to get at it.

I honestly don’t have an issue with the guy getting shot. Better him dying than some poor schmuck walking to his car and getting his head split open.

Don’t want to get shot?? Don’t go around acting like a retard. Don’t want your mentally challenged family member to get shot. Take effing care if them. Not hard.
 

·
Unfair Facist
Joined
·
26,890 Posts
Sounds like a good shooting,

He armed himself, and it is not simply a case of picking up a nearby pipe while angry. He made himself a even deadliier weapon by securing a knife to the pole.

To any reasonable person he armed himself for deadly purpose.

He forgot the Cardinal rule, don't bring a pipe/knife to a gunfight.

But hey, he has been cured of his mental illness and homicidal tendencies,

Good job officer.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,686 Posts
The wrong question was asked in the OP.

"Necessary" force is the garbage that PERF wants to inflict on us. The Constitutional standard is "reasonable" force. It doesn't matter if that second shot was needed to solve the problem. It matters if an officer, trained and experienced as seen, knowing what was known, would have thought that it was a reasonable application of force.

This isn't just Sam being a pedant. It's a fundamental difference in how the problem is examined and solved. All the posters saying, "I dunno" are essentially echoing that point, saying that they don't know what was known or seen, and can't make a reasonable judgement absent that.

And notice how the liars for hire are trying to steer the judgement (and the payout!) away from the Constitutional standard of objective reasonableness and into emotion and need.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top