TLDR: Cop roles up (late to the party, lots of units and SWATBois on scene) to wanted subject with sword and hostage. Bad guy and sword outside the vehicle.

Instead of using his vehicle to block bad guy car (as directed) officer steps out, steps up, drops the bad guy with one round, then gives him two more on the ground for good measure.

From his car door opening to the 3rd round took about 10 seconds. Dude woke up with no “F”s to give evidently.


Now I am just about as pro-police as they come and have no problem with lawfully applied lethal force as necessary BUT I think this guy may have jumped the gun a bit…


https://www.wsmv.com/2026/08/2...ct-tbi-investigates/


Blurred but shows the shooting:

https://fb.watch/JlICl0hWvz/?fs=e

The very wide angle lenses of body cameras make it difficult to judge distances, but two shots after someone is on the ground is … unlikely to turn out well for the officer.
And with other officers already being on scene, I can only wonder what he was thinking.

He was just hurrying up to be able to get home in time for dinner, “What are you guys standing around doing nothing for?”

While I am not for anyone's death, the first officers were there for over an hour, the victim was probably scared out of her mind since the onset and had no idea if she would live or not and there was no end insight. Giving the criminal more time could have been death to the poor lady who was kidnapped. We are becoming a nation who is willing to bow down to evil because of social acceptance of what other similar/evil based minds think.

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
TN cop “decommissioned” pending investigation

I can't tell from the article, but this may just be unconventional terminology used by either that Chief or TN agencies in general.

After any shooting, it's standard procedure basically nationwide for an officer to be relived of duty and put on administrative leave, with their LE duties temporarily suspended while on leave, and an outside agency brought in to investigate the shooting.

So when they say "decommissioned and relieved of all police authority", while that sounds ominous and not the normal way of stating it (at least around here), that may just be a fancy way of them saying he's on the usual admin leave until TBI's shooting investigation is complete.

That's kinda up near jljones' neck of the woods, although he's in a neighboring state, so perhaps he can chime in with whether this is standard Nashville PD or TN terminology or something bigger.

We don’t, as usual, know more than a tiny bit of the information available to the officers on scene.

It is not, however, unusual for a decision to be made to shoot a hostage-taker even when he poses no threat to the officer shooting, as appears here. That is often after a prolonged incident when negotiations are deemed to have broken down or are deemed to be futile. That would also usually be in conjunction with concerns about the hostage(s). What is the level of risk to them? Is it possible one has been injured and needs urgent medical care? Has the HT been getting out and back into the vehicle, leading to the possibility that a disabling shot might not be possible or could endanger the hostage? In addition to what we can see, what has the HT been saying or demonstrating? An officer might legitimately think, “No, you’re not getting back in the car with the hostage where you can carry out your threats.”

To reiterate my own comment, the fact that the officer fired additional shots after the HT was on the ground and had evidently dropped his weapon would be most problematic. The hesitation between the second and third shots would tend to weaken the, “I just wanted to end the threat and followed him down,” defense.

That sounds like a real Harry Calahan move.

Metropolitan Nashville Police Department
Media Release

Excerpts:

“SWAT member Joshua Baney“

“Officers first learned of Sexton being armed with a sword when they were dispatched to the Shell market at 2112 Charlotte Avenue at 8 a.m. today as the result of a dispute over payment for coffee between Sexton and the clerk. The clerk said Sexton drove away, but returned a short time later carrying a full-size sword as he got out of the vehicle. The clerk locked the doors before Sexton could enter. The clerk reported Sexton yelled, “Come outside now, I’ll kill you.” A felony aggravated assault warrant was issued against Sexton.

An hour later, a female relative of Sexton’s called 911 saying that the family felt Sexton was a danger to others and was armed with a sword. She cited recently posted Instagram videos in which he displayed the sword. A police helicopter spotted Sexton’s Hyundai sedan at a carwash on Dickerson Pike and then monitored his driving from the air as he headed onto Bell Grimes Lane and then turned onto Cheshire Drive. Sexton came to a stop on Cheshire Drive with ground units behind him. He got out of the car carrying the sword, while a woman remained in the vehicle, and began yelling at officers. Patrol officers talked with Sexton off and on for more than hour attempting to persuade him to surrender. The female acquaintance in the car told officers she was being held against her will.

SWAT officers were called to the scene. Several had arrived and were beginning to develop a plan of action to bring Sexton into custody. Baney, a 12-year MNPD veteran, was initially directed to assist in blocking Sexton’s vehicle with his police truck. He started to do that, got out, took up a position at the rear of a patrol vehicle, and fired on Sexton three times as he held the sword.“

Deadly force. Not deadly, deadlier, and deadliest or excessive deadly force. What’s the time between the first and last shots? A second? I swear it’s been discussed on this forum that unless the central nervous system is hit, a person can continue to be a threat if shot center mass.

Seems to me the only real question here was whether or not the use of deadly force was reasonable here. It would be if I were on the jury. All I see is an officer making calm, deliberate shots to end the threat.

“Nothing wrong with shooting as long as the right people get shot.”

As a former FOP-affiliate counsel I wouldn't jump into conclusions based on the narrative of nonsensical reporting.

Think.
“Baney, a 12-year MNPD veteran, was initially directed to assist in blocking Sexton’s vehicle with his police truck,” MNPD said. “He started to do that, got out, took up a position at the rear of a patrol vehicle, and fired on Sexton three times as he held the sword.”

Directed to assist in blocking---started to do that---position(ed) at the rear of a patrol vehicle. Makes sense? It wouldn't be the first time that these "reporters" misquoted to achieve their desired result. I know because "they" did it to me twice.

Granted, I haven't watched the FB post. But as it stands now, I wouldn't have any qualms in representing that officer.

Legally, the situation has to be analyzed pursuant to Officer Baney's point of reference/view/perspective.

quote:

Directed to assist in blocking---started to do that---position(ed) at the rear of a patrol vehicle. Makes sense? It wouldn't be the first time that these "reporters" misquoted to achieve their desired result. I know because "they" did it to me twice.

That was actually a direct quote from the police department’s media release.

Quoting the MNPD.

Sure, because they would never ever misquote that...

Wouldn't it make more sense blocking from the OTHER side? Nobody there.

No really, I linked the department’s media release in my post above yours. Those are the department’s words.

The video shows the officer parking his car behind another patrol vehicle, getting and taking up a position behind the patrol vehicle he had parked behind.

"They" misquote whatever fits "their" purpose/narrative, trapper189.

That "MNPD said" thing is their lingo. Compare to "a spokesman for the Department Charles Brown said to Lucy".

EDIT: No one was blocking the other side. In front of the subject's vehicle.

WTF? Who are they? Where in the world is the misquote?

The quote you are taking exception with is word for word from the police department. It is not a misquote.

A police department does not make statements. Spokepersons do. Police departments don't talk.

These are the people to whom the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department Media Release is attributed to:

Don Aaron
Public Affairs Director
615-862-7306
Kristin Mumford and Brooke Reese
Public Affairs Officers
615-862-7306

Presumably, they work for the department and someone in authority in the department approved those words. Those words are the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department’s words. They are not the media which you’ve claimed misquoted the quote you took exception with. The media quoted it accurately.

And that "quote" makes sense to you?

We'll see what happens.

It does make sense to me because I watched the video. It’s exactly what the video shows. Having watched the video, I even understand why the officer did not pull around and block the front of the hostage taker’s vehicle.

Back on track-

MNPD training division puts out a good product. They are pretty progressive in what they teach and place a value on hard skills. MNPD SWAT has a good rep and very professional. I’ve trained down at their range a couple of times.

Based upon that alone I need to see more actual evidence before I call it a bad shoot. Yes, PATROL officers had been there for an hour. It is completely reasonable that SWAT officers show up and have the confidence to end it.

The “decommissioning” term is another way of saying “on administrative leave” and not unique to MNPD. The decommissioning usually lasts a couple of weeks. It would depend on whether agency policy allows you to return to work prior to going to grand jury.