Ga. shooting suspect 'thought cop was criminal' - cop resonded off duty to shot fired full uniform - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Ga. shooting suspect 'thought cop was criminal' - cop resonded off duty to shot fired full uniform (Page 2 of 10)

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:17:00 AM EDT

[#1]

Given the information in the story I would not convict.

It was however a bad day all around.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:17:07 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:

Quoted:
A bit off topic and maybe out in leftfield but, can they drop the charges against the shooter and attach those charges to the actual robbers who caused this entire clusterfuck to happen?

More than likely they already charged them with the shootings.

I see, thanks for the info.

So, maybe letting this guy off, in this UNUSUAL situation might not send the wrong message afterall?

ETA: I mean, it is the actual robbers who are responsible for all of this IMHO.

Yeah I think the thing that is getting him is he at first submitted to the taking into custody, then he fought back and shot the cop.

Everyone else in the area seemed to know the guy was a cop.

But what other reason could he have had to shoot the cop other than he eventually thought the cop was a fake?

I know it is nuts to us but the guy was in a panic and made the wrong interpretation.

The guy had no criminal record and was being robbed, so I say maybe in this UNUSUAL situation they let him go and make that very well understood in news stories, etc.

The only standard they should use is the "reasonable person" standard. Would a reasonable person in that situation have made the same conclusion. A photo of the cop in his clothes that day would go a long way to answering that.

ETA - Maybe he needed a better lawyer.

yes. I could see how one could, myself included.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:18:38 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:

The only standard they should use is the "reasonable person" standard. Would a reasonable person in that situation have made the same conclusion. A photo of the cop in his clothes that day would go a long way to answering that.

ETA - Maybe he needed a better lawyer.

A photo of the cop standing there in his uniform doesn't answer what a reasonable person would have assessed during a shooting event. No more than a picture of a guy standing holding an Xbox controller shows what the SWAT team percieved when they shot someone holding one.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:19:01 AM EDT

[#4]

That's what happens when officers don't have standards and get all tatted up like the thugs they arrest.

patiently waiting rustedace's response

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:19:12 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The store owner's story is completely plausible.

Odd vehicle, Tattoo's on arms, strange circumstances of supposed officer's arrival.

Were I on the jury I would say reasonable doubt was met, unless there is some serious flaws in his testimony.

This.

Despite this being 2012 and "inked Americans" becoming more and more common, the common public perception is that people in public safety positions should not have visible tattoos.

I can't wear shorts to my FD job because of a leg tat.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:20:51 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
So an unmarked tinted window Tahoe is an unusual vehicle?

Not so sure about that.

It's not an unusual vehicle in itself. However, I am willing to bet that the number of tinted windowed tahoes carrying off duty cops in uniform is substantially less than the number of tinted windowed tahoes driven by non-cops.

Just a thought. If I call in a robbery, and the truck showing up isn't marked, lighted, and uniformed cop gets out............yeah...i'd be suspicious as fuck too. Especially if the guy got out and looked like a banger who bought a uniform.

Guys, when you remove symbols of who you are in order to mask who you are, don't be surprised when people don't know who you are.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:21:01 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:

The only standard they should use is the "reasonable person" standard. Would a reasonable person in that situation have made the same conclusion. A photo of the cop in his clothes that day would go a long way to answering that.

ETA - Maybe he needed a better lawyer.

I doubt it, the confusion began as soon as he hopped out of his personal vehicle and started chasing Thomas immediately after the robbery. Then the tattoos.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:21:22 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
The only standard they should use is the "reasonable person" standard. Would a reasonable person in that situation have made the same conclusion. A photo of the cop in his clothes that day would go a long way to answering that.

ETA - Maybe he needed a better lawyer.

I'm pretty sure the uniform he wore that day will be part of the evidene presented.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:21:44 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
So an unmarked tinted window Tahoe is an unusual vehicle?

Not so sure about that.

Tinted Tahoes scream cop car, even more so if has the black steel wheels. And he had tattoos, so what? Damn near half the cops in South Florida have tattoos.

Thomas could've avoided all this if he just shot the robbers and held them for police. Running across a street with a gun is not a good idea. Roach also needs a new duty gun if it actually malfunctioned after one shot. I'm guessing it's an M&P with a mag safety and the mag release was pressed during the struggle and the reporter misunderstood what happened.

Good job on Melvin intervening. Vets always know when it's time to kick some ass.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:22:54 AM EDT

[#10]

Just to be clear, Tattoo's being visible automatically means not a Police Officer?

What about these fellows?

Just saying..

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:23:51 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So an unmarked tinted window Tahoe is an unusual vehicle?

Not so sure about that.

It's not an unusual vehicle in itself. However, I am willing to bet that the number of tinted windowed tahoes carrying off duty cops in uniform is substantially less than the number of tinted windowed tahoes driven by non-cops.

Just a thought. If I call in a robbery, and the truck showing up isn't marked, lighted, and uniformed cop gets out............yeah...i'd be suspicious as fuck too. Especially if the guy got out and looked like a banger who bought a uniform.

Guys, when you remove symbols of who you are in order to mask who you are, don't be surprised when people don't know who you are.

It will be interesting but lots of LEA's use Tahoes/Expeditions/Explorers.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:24:05 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Just to be clear, Tattoo's being visible automatically means not a Police Officer?

What about these fellows?

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000WfROEtEuZns/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoos-GOR-75288-91-10.jpg

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000J3A0YoRKsCI/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoos-GOR-75288-82676-11.jpg

Just saying..

If you were being chased by the Irish mafia and this was the lone cop that showed up immediately after, it would make you think twice

.

I hate to be the one to say it, but the fact that the cop was a tatted up black guy didn't help the situation either.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:24:32 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
That's what happens when officers don't have standards and get all tatted up like the thugs they arrest.

patiently waiting rustedace's response

Yeah we shouldn't hire all those military vets because they have tat's.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:25:14 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Just to be clear, Tattoo's being visible automatically means not a Police Officer?

What about these fellows?
http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000WfROEtEuZns/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoos-GOR-75288-91-10.jpg
http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000J3A0YoRKsCI/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoos-GOR-75288-82676-11.jpg
http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000q75o8glG3Fw/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoo-GOR-67007-09.jpg

Just saying..

Fake cops.

Seriously though, I feel bad for the cop and victim of the robbery in this one.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:25:36 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So an unmarked tinted window Tahoe is an unusual vehicle?

Not so sure about that.

Tinted Tahoes scream cop car, even more so if has the black steel wheels. And he had tattoos, so what? Damn near half the cops in South Florida have tattoos.

Thomas could've avoided all this if he just shot the robbers and held them for police. Running across a street with a gun is not a good idea. Roach also needs a new duty gun if it actually malfunctioned after one shot. I'm guessing it's an M&P with a mag safety and the mag release was pressed during the struggle and the reporter misunderstood what happened.

Good job on Melvin intervening. Vets always know when it's time to kick some ass.

Wouldn't it just be better all around if there was a departmental policy that forbade using unmarked cars when responding to crimes in progress? Honestly, this trend towards unmarked, or harder to notice police cars is starting to really become worrisome.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:26:40 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So an unmarked tinted window Tahoe is an unusual vehicle?

Not so sure about that.

Tinted Tahoes scream cop car, even more so if has the black steel wheels. And he had tattoos, so what? Damn near half the cops in South Florida have tattoos.

Thomas could've avoided all this if he just shot the robbers and held them for police. Running across a street with a gun is not a good idea. Roach also needs a new duty gun if it actually malfunctioned after one shot. I'm guessing it's an M&P with a mag safety and the mag release was pressed during the struggle and the reporter misunderstood what happened.

Good job on Melvin intervening. Vets always know when it's time to kick some ass.

Wouldn't it just be better all around if there was a departmental policy that forbade using unmarked cars when responding to crimes in progress? Honestly, this trend towards unmarked, or harder to notice police cars is starting to really become worrisome.

No IMHO.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:28:03 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So an unmarked tinted window Tahoe is an unusual vehicle?

Not so sure about that.

Tinted Tahoes scream cop car, even more so if has the black steel wheels. And he had tattoos, so what? Damn near half the cops in South Florida have tattoos.

Thomas could've avoided all this if he just shot the robbers and held them for police. Running across a street with a gun is not a good idea. Roach also needs a new duty gun if it actually malfunctioned after one shot. I'm guessing it's an M&P with a mag safety and the mag release was pressed during the struggle and the reporter misunderstood what happened.

Good job on Melvin intervening. Vets always know when it's time to kick some ass.

Wouldn't it just be better all around if there was a departmental policy that forbade using unmarked cars when responding to crimes in progress? Honestly, this trend towards unmarked, or harder to notice police cars is starting to really become worrisome.

It wasn't an umarked police car. It was a car.

who had just left work in his Chevy Tahoe

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:28:58 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Wouldn't it just be better all around if there was a departmental policy that forbade using unmarked cars when responding to crimes in progress? Honestly, this trend towards unmarked, or harder to notice police cars is starting to really become worrisome.

So a detective in an unmarked crown vic/impala/expedition/tahoe shouldn't respond to a robbery in progress call when he is right there vs a marked unit two minutes out?

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:30:02 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Wouldn't it just be better all around if there was a departmental policy that forbade using unmarked cars when responding to crimes in progress? Honestly, this trend towards unmarked, or harder to notice police cars is starting to really become worrisome.

So a detective in an unmarked crown vic/impala/expedition/tahoe shouldn't respond to a robbery in progress call when he is right there vs a marked unit two minutes out?

Could you imagine society's reaction to that!!??

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:30:21 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
A bit off topic and maybe out in leftfield but, can they drop the charges against the shooter and attach those charges to the actual robbers who caused this entire clusterfuck to happen?

More than likely they already charged them with the shootings.

I see, thanks for the info.

So, maybe letting this guy off, in this UNUSUAL situation might not send the wrong message afterall?

ETA: I mean, it is the actual robbers who are responsible for all of this IMHO.

Yeah I think the thing that is getting him is he at first submitted to the taking into custody, then he fought back and shot the cop.

Everyone else in the area seemed to know the guy was a cop.

Everyone else in the area didn't just survive a gunfight. Also, since none of us were there, we can't know if there were circumstances or actions by the cop to solidify the guy's concerns. I'm not sure I would allow myself to be cuffed by someone whose credentials I found suspect to begin with.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:33:28 AM EDT

[#21]

Store owner was obviously racist.

Seriously though, I wouldn't convict this guy.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:33:29 AM EDT

[#22]

but, i thought it was an uncontrolable normal human reaction to drop everything and present your ID when contacted by
someone in a police uniform?

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:35:23 AM EDT

[#23]

I wouldn't vote to convict on this one based on the information available.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:35:58 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Just to be clear, Tattoo's being visible automatically means not a Police Officer?

What about these fellows?
http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000WfROEtEuZns/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoos-GOR-75288-91-10.jpg
http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000J3A0YoRKsCI/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoos-GOR-75288-82676-11.jpg
http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000q75o8glG3Fw/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoo-GOR-67007-09.jpg

Just saying..

Exactly. Guy in uniform without tattoos = police officer. Guy not in uniform with tattoos like that = criminal. Guy in uniform with tattoos like that = I have no idea whether this guys a police officer or not.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:36:04 AM EDT

[#25]

The trial may yield other information, but with the information provided this gets filed under shit happens. The guy had limited intel and all of it screamed his life was in danger.

Even if he was "Guilty", he'd be one of the 10 set free so an innocent man doesn't go to jail.

Furthermore, the cop had limited intel and didn't know what the fuck was going on and once he placed himself in the situation, all of it screamed his life was in danger also.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:37:57 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Just to be clear, Tattoo's being visible automatically means not a Police Officer?

What about these fellows?

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000WfROEtEuZns/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoos-GOR-75288-91-10.jpg

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000J3A0YoRKsCI/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoos-GOR-75288-82676-11.jpg

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000q75o8glG3Fw/s/650/650/NYPD-Tattoo-GOR-67007-09.jpg

Just saying..

Exactly. Guy in uniform without tattoos = police officer. Guy not in uniform with tattoos like that = criminal. Guy in uniform with tattoos like that who just jumped out of his personal vehicle while parked at a red light immediately after the crime = I have no idea whether this guys a police officer or not.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:38:50 AM EDT

[#27]

Reasonable doubt.

Show up in a nice marked squad from a relevant jurisdiction and we'll talk.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:39:16 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
but, i thought it was an uncontrolable normal human reaction to drop everything and present your ID when contacted by
someone in a police uniform?

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:40:03 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That's what happens when officers don't have standards and get all tatted up like the thugs they arrest.

patiently waiting rustedace's response

Yeah we shouldn't hire all those military vets because they have tat's.

The .mil has had restrictions on tat's visible in uniform for more than 10 years.

As far as the vehicle goes, if it had lights and sirens, It would have been believable, any thug with a Tahoe can put dark tint on it. No lights, doesn't mean it isn't but damn sure doesn't make it more like one.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:40:10 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
The store owner's story is completely plausible.

Odd vehicle, Tattoo's on arms, strange circumstances of supposed officer's arrival.

Were I on the jury I would say reasonable doubt was met, unless there is some serious flaws in his testimony.

This is how I feel as well.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:40:24 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:

The store owner's story is completely plausible.

Odd vehicle, Tattoo's on arms, strange circumstances of supposed officer's arrival.

Were I on the jury I would say reasonable doubt was met, unless there is some serious flaws in his testimony.

ayup

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:41:11 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Wouldn't it just be better all around if there was a departmental policy that forbade using unmarked cars when responding to crimes in progress? Honestly, this trend towards unmarked, or harder to notice police cars is starting to really become worrisome.

So a detective in an unmarked crown vic/impala/expedition/tahoe shouldn't respond to a robbery in progress call when he is right there vs a marked unit two minutes out?

Don't most unmarked cars have lights and sirens?

I am always hearing about robberies by guys dressed up as police.

I am glad the officer wasn't killed. Based on what I have read, I would lean towards not guilty.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:41:19 AM EDT

[#33]

Let's face facts here fellas. If a tatted up black guy in a police uniform pulls up in my driveway in his own vehicle and comes knocking on my door, I probably wouldn't give him the time of day, and would probably call 911 if he didn't leave. Sucks, but that's the real world.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:42:05 AM EDT

[#34]

Unfortunate shoot... shooter gets a go home from me

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:44:15 AM EDT

[#35]

I think in this case that the offender should have been charged with something like reckless conduct. He clearly did not intend to injure someone who he thought was innocent. He made a judgement error in a highly dynamic and tense situation and it should be viewed as such. I think he should still be held accountable, but only to the error in judgement not to some felonious person on person crime such as agg assault or some such. That is bullshit. His penalty should be mild is anything, he is not the bad guy here. It would be interesting to hear how the cop feels about the situation. I'd likely forgive him and press the DA to severely reduce the charges to a misd of some sort if not dismiss them.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:45:52 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

You really ought to put more of the story into the OP. There's a lot missing.

Roach again shouted for Thomas to get down on the ground, and while Thomas this time got on his stomach, he said he kept squirming to watch Roach approach, still not sure he was a lawman. He had noted Roach got out of a Tahoe with tinted windows, not a squad car.

Suddenly he felt Roach's knee in his back, and when the officer grabbed his wrist to handcuff him, Thomas saw tattoos on the officer's forearms.

"I'm like, this is not an officer. And that is when the struggle ensued," Thomas said.

Who fired first is a matter of contention, but Roach's pistol malfunctioned after one shot and ejected the clip. Thomas emptied his final three shots into Roach, who was able to hit Thomas with his pistol and wrestle him back to the ground.

"I was just fighting for my life, and I was just struggling to get his gun," Roach said. "An officer's worst nightmare is to draw a weapon and it doesn't fire."

The larger Thomas soon was atop Roach, who was trying to turn the muzzle of Thomas' gun away from his face.

"I said, 'Don't move or I will kill you,' " Thomas said.

Donald Melvin, a 64-year-old Decatur contractor, and his wife watched the struggle from their car across the street. He feared that Roach was about to be killed and thought of his own son, a DeKalb County police officer.

A Vietnam War veteran, Melvin stepped on the gas and drove his Pathfinder's bumper into Thomas' back. But not even that could stop the struggle. Melvin said he next tried to pull Thomas off the officer.

"He started telling me [Roach] is not a police officer, and I told him he was a police officer ... don't you see that shirt?" Melvin said.

Hey, we could make this a tattoo thread. It's Friday, after all.

Forget the tats- the cop had a fo-tay.

Obvious thug.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:46:13 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

So an unmarked tinted window Tahoe is an unusual vehicle?

Not so sure about that.

Hell most of the thug lifers in the ATL drive tinted out full sized sport utilities, just saying

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:47:21 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:

I think in this case that the offender should have been charged with something like reckless conduct. He clearly did not intend to injure someone who he thought was innocent. He made a judgement error in a highly dynamic and tense situation and it should be viewed as such. I think he should still be held accountable, but only to the error in judgement not to some felonious person on person crime such as agg assault or some such. That is bullshit. His penalty should be mild is anything, he is not the bad guy here. It would be interesting to hear how the cop feels about the situation. I'd likely forgive him and press the DA to severely reduce the charges to a misd of some sort if not dismiss them.

The cop has stated that he's wants the book thrown at the guy (25 years).

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:48:03 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Wouldn't it just be better all around if there was a departmental policy that forbade using unmarked cars when responding to crimes in progress? Honestly, this trend towards unmarked, or harder to notice police cars is starting to really become worrisome.

So a detective in an unmarked crown vic/impala/expedition/tahoe shouldn't respond to a robbery in progress call when he is right there vs a marked unit two minutes out?

Don't most unmarked cars have lights and sirens?

I am always hearing about robberies by guys dressed up as police.

I am glad the officer wasn't killed. Based on what I have read, I would lean towards not guilty.

We don't use lights and sirens when approaching an active robbery scene.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:49:01 AM EDT

[#40]

Bad situation for both involved. Sounds like the guy was caught in the fog of war. He shouldn't be convicted for that. How many cops are convicted for shooting another cop in the fog of war? Not too many I would imagine. It's an unfortunate incident. Maybe just a slap on the wrist for this guy.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:54:59 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
I think it's just as important to note that the cop mistook the store worker for a robber in the first place. Understandable, but so is what the store owner thought. The cop should have clearly identified himself and probably even waited for marked backup.

I would not convict.

And if the storeowner was one of the robbery suspects and killed a bystander while the uniformed officer waited for back-up arfcom GD would be saying the officer should be charged with dereliction of duty................

Cops job is to secure the situation and then sort out the details of who's who - law allows cops to point guns at people and handcuff them even if the person isn't the actual suspect.

Brian

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:57:13 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I think it's just as important to note that the cop mistook the store worker for a robber in the first place. Understandable, but so is what the store owner thought. The cop should have clearly identified himself and probably even waited for marked backup.

I would not convict.

And if the storeowner was one of the robbery suspects and killed a bystander while the uniformed officer waited for back-up arfcom GD would be saying the officer should be charged with dereliction of duty................

Cops job is to secure the situation and then sort out the details of who's who - law allows cops to point guns at people and handcuff them even if the person isn't the actual suspect.

Brian

If frogs have wings they wouldn't have a sore ass.

Officer DID misidentify robbers, store owner DID doubt the identity of the officer. Both are reasonable mistakes, only one of them is facing jail though.

Posted: 2/10/2012 6:57:48 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
I think in this case that the offender should have been charged with something like reckless conduct. He clearly did not intend to injure someone who he thought was innocent. He made a judgement error in a highly dynamic and tense situation and it should be viewed as such. I think he should still be held accountable, but only to the error in judgement not to some felonious person on person crime such as agg assault or some such. That is bullshit. His penalty should be mild is anything, he is not the bad guy here. It would be interesting to hear how the cop feels about the situation. I'd likely forgive him and press the DA to severely reduce the charges to a misd of some sort if not dismiss them.

IF the story stays the same as it is now -

I would sentence him to a dynamic force class that teaches how to deal with target discrimination.

Paid for by the officer's PD.

Posted: 2/10/2012 7:02:02 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Reasonable doubt.

Show up in a nice marked squad from a relevant jurisdiction and we'll talk.

So if the uniformed officer in his POV had arrested one of the legit robbery suspects the arrest/charges should be voided because it wasn't a "nice marked squad from a relevant jurisdiction"............

Brian

Posted: 2/10/2012 7:04:00 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Don't most unmarked cars have lights and sirens?

I am always hearing about robberies by guys dressed up as police.
I am glad the officer wasn't killed. Based on what I have read, I would lean towards not guilty.

What's the source for the part in red? Arfcom GD? Robberies/home invasions by suspects dressed/acting like police do occur but I don't think it's as prevalent as GD likes to think.

Brian

Posted: 2/10/2012 7:04:08 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Reasonable doubt.

Show up in a nice marked squad from a relevant jurisdiction and we'll talk.

So if the uniformed officer in his POV had arrested one of the legit robbery suspects the arrest/charges should be voided because it wasn't a "nice marked squad from a relevant jurisdiction"............

Brian

Yes.