quote:

Originally posted by John Steed:
I'm in the camp of waiting for the results of a proper investigation. But I have a general question that hopefully someone with LEO experience could shed light on.

Obviously, every situation is different and there is no way to tell what was going on just before the shooting. But is it unusual that the police would stay seated in their vehicle when stopped in a dark alley while investigating an alleged assault? And remain seated in the vehicle while someone (anyone) approaches them?

Seems like that is leaving yourself in a very vulnerable position. Standing on your feet just outside the vehicle would make a lot more sense to me. Keep the door(s) open if you think you may need to jump back in for some reason. I'm just asking for information here, not trying to second guess or flame anyone.

Completely fathomable:

"Unit XXX, respond to 123 Auzzie St. for a reported assault in an alley way behind the residence."

Unit XXX realizes the call has been holding for 10 minutes

"Dispatch, can you call the complainant back and ask if she still hears the assault?"


"Unit XXX, complainant states it's been about 20 minutes since she heard anything. She thinks they have gone, but will meet you behind her residence in the alley to show you where she heard the noise from"

Unit XXX drives the 7 or 8 minutes to the call, so now hitting 30 minutes from the time of the alleged incident, sees the caller standing there in the clothes she described to dispatch, in a ritzy neighborhood, and pulls up to speak with her. They don't have their body cameras on because this situation likely does not require them to be activated per policy. (Or they are like some dumbasses I work with, and keep their cameras completely powered off "until they need them" )


In a lot of jurisdictions, only the hottest of calls get immediate response. For example, my agency is small compared to many, serving about a million. We run completely out of officers several times a day. A couple of weeks ago our dispatcher sent a message city-wide trying to get someone to clear, saying there were 50 calls pending and zero units available. Calls like "Complainant states she hears a woman yelling/screaming in an alley behind her house" can hold for 10-20 minutes due to lack of availability, and would not be a priority emergency response.



I know it may come as a surprise to some, but we aren't militant Delta Force Recon SEALs all the time. We judge situations by what we see and hear. We can't treat every call (and person) like a SWAT call-out.

The Daily Mail is like a toy store, fun to visit sometime.

But...with stories like these it is amazing the interviews, pics, and data it is able to get.

Minneapolis cop who shot Justine Damond offers condolences

http://dailym.ai/2uv2tty

"…
A bride-to-be shot dead by police after calling 911 to report a rape died from a single gunshot wound to the abdomen.

Autopsy results reveal Justine Damond, who was wearing her pyjamas when she was shot by policeman Mohamed Noor, died as a result of a homicide. …"

Noor and partner were responding to a 911 call reporting a possible rape. A woman in pajamas is hardly likely to be the perp.

So it was just a single shot that killed her. Sounding more and more like an ND.

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:
The Daily Mail is like a toy store, fun to visit sometime.

But...with stories like these it is amazing the interviews, pics, and data it is able to get.

Minneapolis cop who shot Justine Damond offers condolences

http://dailym.ai/2uv2tty

Yeah. You need to read some of their stories with a skeptical eye. But when the three Americans foiled a Kalashnikov-wielding terrorist on a French train, the DailyMail had the best coverage, by far. Accurate, prompt updates, and relevant photos galore.

From the UK Daily Mail:

quote:

...Noor, 31, has since offered his 'condolences' in a statement saying he 'empathizes with the loss others are experiencing' but demanded everyone respect his privacy after he fatally shot the 40-year-old once though the abdomen....Officer Noor is a caring person with a family he loves...

....Meanwhile the cop who shot her, was already under investigation for 'violently' forcing a woman to hospital, court documents allege.

Noor, who joined the Minneapolis Police in March 2015, has reportedly had three complaints made against him in two years - including a lawsuit.

Two are from 2017 and one from 2016 is closed and according to Lou Raguse of Kare 11 is marked 'not to be made public'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...html#ixzz4nCHpmXn4nn

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:
"…
A bride-to-be shot dead by police after calling 911 to report a rape died from a single gunshot wound to the abdomen.

Autopsy results reveal Justine Damond, who was wearing her pyjamas when she was shot by policeman Mohamed Noor, died as a result of a homicide. …"

Noor and partner were responding to a 911 call reporting a possible rape. A woman in pajamas is hardly likely to be the perp.

An autopsy finding of homicide means little other than it was an unnatural death. It does not mean it is a crime...yet. As for the the body cameras being off I didn't turn mine on until I get out of my car. At least that was my habit. All of the cameras we had were junk and we had great difficulty keeping them up and running and the batteries were for shit.

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:
From the UK Daily Mail:

quote:

...Noor, 31, has since offered his 'condolences' in a statement saying he 'empathizes with the loss others are experiencing' but demanded everyone respect his privacy after he fatally shot the 40-year-old once though the abdomen....Officer Noor is a caring person with a family he loves...

....Meanwhile the cop who shot her, was already under investigation for 'violently' forcing a woman to hospital, court documents allege.

Noor, who joined the Minneapolis Police in March 2015, has reportedly had three complaints made against him in two years - including a lawsuit.

Two are from 2017 and one from 2016 is closed and according to Lou Raguse of Kare 11 is marked 'not to be made public'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...html#ixzz4nCHpmXn4nn

3 complaints, if that's accurate (if they didn't get ahold of an IA report that just shows 3 "investigations" and are calling them complaints) is not a red flag at 2 years. It's probably more common than not. One lawsuit, even, is not a big deal. I won't say it's common, but I bet most of the LEOs here have at that pleasure at least once, some I'm sure more than once. And I believe that if they settled, sealing it is common.

I wondered from the start if the "multiple gunshots" was an accurate statement. We're still not sure, but I'm guessing with yous guys...looks like an ND.

I'm interested in what made him have his gun out to begin with. There are certainly factors that can make that prudent. I've sat in my car with a gun in my hand on multiple occasions. I'm interested to hear why he was.

Yeah, another reason why I live in the sticks and don't generally call the police.

And I wouldn't meet them outside, at night, under any but the most dire circumstances - they can figure it out and if they need my information, they can call me on the phone. I'll be inside protecting my family.

From the Daily Mail article:

"What we know...

Harrity, the squad car driver, was speaking to Damon who was stood outside the car window when Noor leaned across him and opened fire.

Noor shot multiple times, hitting Damon once in the abdomen. She died at 11.51pm from the gunshot wound, the autopsy revealed.

Harrity was reportedly 'stunned' by his partner's actions."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...n.html#ixzz4nCXV5dKh

If multiple shots were fired (and one was fatal), seems much less likely to have been an ND. Additionally, the LEO was "stunned" by Noor's actions (I'll bet he was), but this comment lends support to no perceived threat from Damond to Noor's partner.

Still speculation however, as not enough facts have been released to date.

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:
I just wonder if there is a training officer somewhere thinking to himself while he shakes his head, "I fucking told them so"...

I'm guessing that, of all the guesses, this one's probably a good one.

quote:

Originally posted by Sig209:

quote:

Originally posted by MikeGLI:
I hope this officer wasn't using his WML as a flashlight and ND'd. I guess that would be ruled out by the "multiple shots" report.

I had wondered about the WML aspect myself. (I am not a fan of them).

I am, but, recognizing the inherent danger, I never use my WML as a flashlight. In fact I only very occasionally activate it to make sure it's still working.

The other concern I have, vis-a-vis the WML, is having a temporary brain fart and pulling the trigger when I meant to activate the WML. That is why I never activate the WML idly, "just because it's there."

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
I think I'd be concerned about a partner that has a unholstered firearm pointed at me in the drivers seat cocked and finger on the trigger regardless of threat.

Boy, you got that right! That was the first thing that struck me about this story: "He shot her through the drivers' side door?!?!"

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:
Data insufficient. Data please

First they have to make sure they have every little last scrap of information, with no variances in the several accounts. This will undoubtedly require multiple interviews of everybody.

Then they have to figure out how to shed the least damaging light on it, without appearing to be doing so. Not (only) for the sake of PC, but, for the sake of mitigating the city's exposure.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
So it was just a single shot that killed her. Sounding more and more like an ND.

That would be my guess. (Thus the "training officer" comment, above.)

What a sad, sad event

From Officer Noors formal statement, per the DailyMail

quote:

Officer Noor extends his condolences to the family and anyone else who has been touched by this event. He takes their loss seriously and keeps them in his daily thoughts and prayers . . .

I am not sure the shooters prayers will ease the family's pain nor mitigate his complicity in the matter.

Multiple shots being fired would seem to rule out ND. And his partner being "stunned" would seem to rule out a threatening situation. Also, it seems at least one of the complaints/lawsuits against the shooter was his earlier physical mistreatment of a woman who called 911.

I am sure more information will soon be disclosed, which info will definitely be manipulated. I don't know how misleading that info will be. And I imagine there will be a lawsuit which will reveal even more about the incident.

Still speculating, but to me, as more info comes out, it seems a better and better fit of the adage, if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck . . . . .

From the above article:

quote:

Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman told the Star Tribune on Monday the police officers' body cameras should have been operating when they responded to Ms Damond's call.
'I do understand this, they were driving down an alley, the victim approached the car. That's not necessarily a time you must [be taping], but frankly I think it's a time you should ,' he said.

Emphasis mine.


Agencies have set themselves (and their officers) up to fail with these GD body cameras. In some agencies, (as we see here) the requirement for activation is subjective, and in many agencies, officers are ordered to turn them off as soon as they think a call is past any confrontational stage. The reason? $$$$ Data costs money to store. Taser is making a KILLING from charging departments to store millions and millions of videos.


As I said earlier, my agency realized this potential stick of dynamite (I expect after a few 'oopsies'), and we now turn our cameras on as soon as we are dispatched to EVERY call. If we fail, that's on us. But no grey area.


One unintentional consequence of body cameras is that if video/audio doesn't exist, it makes the agency and officers look bad. But reality is sometimes it isn't the officers' fault. Shitty policy, unexpected situation, equipment failure, etc. In the last 3 shifts I have realized that my camera didn't activate with my blue lights on 3 different occasions. Mind you, this was after two daily tests at the start of each shift, and multiple other activations during those days.

Two of them it was early enough to manually activate it, the other time it was after the traffic stop was completed when I realized it hadn't turned on. Had I gotten into a shooting, you would all (and the rest of the USA) be typing about how I didn't have my camera on, even though policy said I should have, and my blue lights should have activated it. So I must have been being shady.

Is there an insurance company that police depts use , for just these kinds of questionable (bad)
shootings?

Maybe they pay them $250,000 per quarter anum, and then pay out $4,000,000.00
when sticky fingers McGee unloads on a civie .

My guess is that municipal governments are self-insured. I. e., taxpayer-insured.

For the first time in history, the Washington Post is now worried about the officer and not the person who was shot. Worried about....You guessed it...the mythical 'Muslim backlash'!!

After Minneapolis officer in police shooting is named, Somali community braces for backlash

Yes a valid concern, because Americans are well known for dragging the bodies of Somali's through the streets and...

As gw said, homicide is the compelled early finding when death is not natural. It's the only first finding you can have and from there you categorize it as murder or manslaughter. And from there you break it down in degrees.

Don't read anything into a homicide finding.

According to my old Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, homicide is the “[k]illing of a human being under any circumstances, by the act, agency, or omission of another.” It further points out that homicide may be lawful (killing in war or by judicial sentence), unlawful (e.g., murder, manslaughter), justifiable, or excusable (e.g., self-defense).

This issue almost always arises whenever a killing is classified as homicide, but that’s all it means.

As for the other “manners” of death besides natural (disease, etc.) and homicide, most jurisdictions recognize suicide (killing of oneself), accidental (… well, by accident), and undetermined. The dictionary also makes it clear that things can become somewhat blurred: If I shoot at a deer and kill another hunter whom I didn’t see, that’s homicide, but also an accident. I’m not familiar with all the detailed rules coroners go by, but presumably that sort of thing is addressed somehow.

As usual, very light on factual information and heavy on speculation.

From what has been released, this could very well be a disastrous bad shoot. But without any facts, I can't comment because I don't know.

As opposed to every idiot posting on twitter, and the idiots who treat twitter as a news source, I won't attempt to draw any conclusion until facts come out.

But, in my EXTENSIVE experience.... much of the initial information is wrong at best or at worst blatantly false to drive a person's narrative.

I will return to discuss it after we have factual info.